QUIZ IN LAW ON EVIDENCE 3

1.
a) The requirements for admissibility in evidence of entries in official records as an
exception to the hearsay rule are the following:
(1) The entry was made by a public officer or by another person specially enjoined by
law to do so;
(2) It was made by the public officer in the performance of his duties, or by such other
person in the performance of a duty specially enjoined by law; and
(3) The public officer or other person had sufficient knowledge of the facts by him,
which must have been acquired by the public officer or other person personally or
through official information.

b) The reasons for such admissibility are necessity and trustworthiness. Necessity consists
in the convenience and difficulty of requiring the official’s attendance as a witness, so
that the public business will not be deranged. Trustworthiness, on the other hand,
consists in the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duties.

c) People v. Manuel Corpuz

2.
a) The reasons for admissibility of commercial lists are also necessity and trustworthiness.
Necessity because of the usual inaccessibility of the person responsible for the
compilation of matters contained in it. Trustworthiness, on the other hand, because the
authors thereof have no motive to deceive and they know that unless they prepared it
with care and accuracy, their work will have no commercial or professional value.

b) The requisites for admissibility of commercial lists as an exception to the hearsay rule
are the following:
(1) It is a statement of matters of interest to persons engaged in an occupation;
(2) Such statement is contained in a list, register, periodical or other published
compilation;
(3) Said compilation is published for the use of persons engaged in that occupation; and
(4) It is generally used and relied upon by persons in the same occupation.

3.
a) The reasons for admissibility of learned treatises are necessity and trustworthiness.
Necessity because the ordinary expert witness has no knowledge derived from his
personal observation, he just reproduces conclusions of others which he accepts.
Trustworthiness, on the other hand, because the learned writers have no motive to
misrepresent.

b) The requisites for admissibility of learned treatises are the following:

(1) The court can take judicial notice of it; and
 (2) An expert witness testifies that the writer of the statement in the treatise, periodical
or pamphlet is recognized in his profession or calling as expert in the subject.

c) A learned treatise is introduced in evidence by the testimony of an expert witness in the

subject.

4.
a) The requisites for admissibility of testimony or deposition at a former proceeding are
the following:
(1) The testimony or the depositor of a witness is deceased or unable to testify;
(2) The testimony was given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or administrative;
(3) It involves the same parties;
(4) It relates to the same matter; and
(5) The adverse party having had the opportunity to cross-examine.

b) Such testimony is presented as evidence upon compliance with the requisites and after
showing that the witness is unavailable, either in the form of a written transcript or an
oral report of the testimony or deposition.

5.
Residual exception, under the revised Rules, is a statement not specifically covered by
any of the exceptions provided therein, having equivalent circumstantial guarantees of
trustworthiness. It is admissible if the court determines that: (1) the statement is offered as
evidence of a material fact; (b) the statement is more probative on the point for which it is
offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts;
and (c) the general purpose of these rules and the interests of justice will be best served by
admission of the statement into evidence.

A statement, however, may not be admitted under this exception, unless the proponent
makes known to the adverse party, sufficiently in advance of the hearing, or by the pre-trial
stage in the case of a trial of the main case, to provide the adverse party with a fair opportunity
to prepare to meet it, the proponent’s intention to offer the statement and the particulars of it,
including the name and address of the declarant.

6.
a) As a general rule, the opinion of a witness is not admissible, except in the cases provided
under the rules.

b) Opinion evidence is admissible in the following cases under the Rules:

(1) the opinion of an expert witness may be received in evidence;
(2) the opinion of an ordinary witness regarding the identity of a person about whom he
or she has adequate knowledge, a handwriting with which he or she has sufficient
familiarity, and the mental sanity of a person with whom he or she is sufficiently
acquainted; and
 (3) an ordinary witness may also testify on his or her impressions of the emotion,
behavior, condition or appearance of a person.

c) An expert witness is one who belongs to the profession or calling to which the subject
matter of the inquiry relates and who possesses special knowledge on questions on
which he proposes to express an opinion. He or she is a witness who possesses special
knowledge, skill, experience or training regarding a fact in issue in a case.

d) Jurisprudence dictates that expert opinions are not ordinarily conclusive in the sense
that they must be accepted as true on the subject for their testimony, but are generally
regarded as purely advisory. The courts may place whatever weight they choose upon
such testimony and may reject it, if they find that it is inconsistent with the facts in the
case or otherwise unreasonable.

e) Can an expert witness be asked hypothetical questions

f) There is no precise requirement as to the mode in which skill or experience shall have
been acquired. Scientific study and training are not always essential to the competency
of a witness as an expert. Knowledge acquired by doing is no less valuable than that
acquired by study.

g) The requisites for admissibility of expert opinion are:

(1) The testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data;
(2) The testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
(3) The witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.

h) “Qualifying the expert witness” means the act of proving that the witness is an expert.
This is done by making him testify, through preliminary questions, as to his training,
education and expertise.
7.
a) Character evidence is any testimony or document submitted for the purpose of proving
that a person acted in a particular way or on a particular occasion based on the
character or disposition of that person.

b) The character or reputation of a party is regarded as legally irrelevant in determining a

controversy, so that evidence relating thereto is not admissible, except in the
circumstances provided under the Rules.

In criminal cases, the character of the offended party may be proved if it tends to
establish in any reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the offense
charged. When the accused presents proof of his good moral character this strengthens
the presumption of innocence, and where the good character and reputation are
established, an inference arises that the accused did not commit the crime charged. This
 view proceeds from the theory that a person of good character and high reputation is
not likely to have committed the act charged against him.

In civil cases, on the other hand, evidence of the moral character of a party is
admissible only when pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case.

c) Character is defined to be the possession by a person of certain qualities of mind and

morals, distinguishing him from others. Reputation, on the other hand, is the opinion
generally entertained of a person derived from the common report of the people who
are acquainted with him.

Character is what a man is; whereas reputation is what he is supposed to be in what

people say he is.

Character depends on the attributes a man possesses. Reputation, on the other hand,
depends on attributes which others believe one to possess.

Character signifies reality, while reputation signifies merely what is accepted to be

reality at present.

d) No, the accused cannot prove the bad moral character of the minor victim who had
been known to have had many boyfriends.

While in ordinary rape cases, the woman’s character as to her chastity is

admissible to show whether she consented to the man’s act, the rule is different in the
case of a minor victim in a rape case. Sec. 30 of the Rules on the Examination of Child
Witness provides that evidence that is offered to prove the sexual predisposition of the
alleged victim or that the alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior is not
admissible in evidence.