Weight and Sufficiency of Evidence

8/3/2019 Weight and Sufficiency of Evidence

1/7

WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OFEVIDENCE

I. INTRODUCTION

Weight of Evidence: - The balance of evidence and in whose favor it tilts. This refers tothe indication of the greater evidence between the parties . This depends on the judicialevaluation within the guidelines provided by the rules and by jurisprudence.

Sufficiency of Evidence- refers to the adequacy of evidence. Such evidence incharacter, weight, or amount, as will legally justify the judicial action demanded orprayed by the parties.

This refers to the question as to whether the evidence amounts or meets the requiredquantum needed to arrive at a decision in a civil, criminal, or administrative case; or toprove matters of defense or mitigation or to overcome a prima facie case or apresumption

II. HIERARCHY OF EVIDENTIARY VALUES

a). Proof beyond reasonable doubt

b). Clear and convincing proof

c). Preponderance of Evidence

d). Substantial evidence

2. a). Conclusive- overwhelming or incontrovertible


2/7

b). Prima Facie- that which suffices until rebutted

c). Probable Cause- as that required for filing of an Information in Court or for theissuance of a warrant of arrest

III. QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE REQUIRED

A. Criminal cases: Proof of Guilt Must be Beyond

reasonable doubt.

1. That degree of proof, which, excluding the possibility of error, produces moralcertainty. If the inculpatory facts are capable of two or more explanations, one of whichis consistent with the innocence of the accused and the other consistent with his guilt,then the evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty and is not sufficient tosupport a conviction.

B. Civil Cases: Preponderance of Evidence. This means that he weight, credit and valueof the aggregate evidenced of one is superior to the other

.

IV. RULES IN THE EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE

1. Courts shall consider and take into consideration : (a) all facts which were presentedduring the trial whether testimonial, object, or documentary (b) all facts which werestipulated or judicially admitted (c) those judicially noticed and (d) all facts which are

presumed

2. No extraneous matters shall be considered even if the Court knows them as existingin his personal capacity


3/7

3. In determining the weight and sufficiency of a partys evidence, the court shallconsider :

A.) All the facts and circumstances of the case.

B). The testimonial characteristics of a witness such as:

i). The manner of testifying by a witness which includes his conduct and behavior onthe witness stand, the emphasis, gestures, and inflection of his voice in answeringquestions. This is the reason why the rules require the witness to personally testify in

open court.

ii). The intelligence of the witness. This refers o this position to perceive by the sue ofhis organs of sense, his opportunity for accurate observation and faithful recollection ofthe facts to which he is testifying.

This intelligence must be coupled with integrity, a general reputation for truth,honesty and integrity. This is because a witness to be believed must be truthful in hisnarration of correct facts.

iii). The means and opportunity of knowing the facts which includes his presence and

observation of the facts.

iv). The nature of the facts to which the witness is testifying such as: whether he did theact as a participant, whether he saw the occurrence of an accident as he was apassenger; the identity of a person who is an old acquaintance; thus as to thecircumstances of the birth a person, the mother would be the best witness on this pointmother.

v). The absence or presence of interest or basis for bias or prejudice.

vi). Personal Credibility of the witness, referring to his general reputation for truth,

honesty or integrity as for example: (i) the case of an young girl who makes a complaintfor rape ; as for instance the accused claiming self defense who is well built, broadshouldered a boxer and expert in martial arts claiming the victim of assault by anordinary person

viii). The probability or improbability of the testimony


4/7

C. The number of witnesses. However witnesses are to been weighed not numberedbecause quantitative superiority does not necessarily mean legal preponderance. Thusan accused may be convicted based solely on the testimony of one witness.

But where the evidence for both parties is principally testimonial where the version

of each exhibit equal tendency to be true and accurate, and the witnesses have notbetrayed themselves by major contradictions or other indications of falsehood, thereexists every reason to measure preponderance by numerical advantage. .

4. The Court has the power to stop the further presentation of evidence on the samepoint as when the additional evidence is only corroborative or the point has alreadybeen established, or when it results to unnecessary delay

5. As to the testimony of a witness:

A). the court must consider everything stated by the witness during the direct, cross, re-direct and re-cross examinations

B). the testimony of a witness maybe believed in part and disbelieved in other parts,

depending on the corroborative evidence and the probabilities and improbabilities of thecase. It is accepted as a matter of common sense that if certain parts of the testimonyare true, his testimony can not be disregarded entirely.

Contrast this with the so called Falsus in unos, falsus in omnibus

6. The Preference of Evidence must be observed in case of conflict:

A). Physical or Object evidence is evidence of the highest order and prevails overcontrary testimonial evidence

B). Documentary over testimonial evidence


5/7

C). Positive over negative evidence. E.G. positive identification over alibi; an assertionof the occurrence of a thing over a plain denial. Denials, if unsubstantiated by clear andconvincing evidence, are deemed negative and self-serving evidence unworthy of

credence. ( Wa-acon vs. People, 510 SCRA 429)

D). Direct over circumstantial

E). Testimony in open court over sworn statements or affidavits

F). The Admitted Facts Rule- evidence of whatever description must yield to the extentthat it conflicts with admitted or clearly established facts. Thus courts give superiorcredit to witnesses whose testimonies on material points are in accord with facts alreadyestablished ( Frondarina vs. Malazarte 510 SCRA 223)

7. Rule in criminal cases

A. For conviction

i). For conviction: the prosecution must adduce proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubti.e. moral certainty not absolute certainty

ii). Every doubt is to be resolved in favor of the accused

iii) Accusation is not synonymous with guilt

iv Accused need not present evidence if the evidence against him is weak because

conviction must be on the strength of the evidence of the prosecution and not on theweakness of the evidence of the accused

B. Affirmative Defenses be shown by clear, positive and convincing evidence


6/7

C. Two Witness Rule in Treason

D. If conviction is based on circumstantial evidence. The requirements under section 4

must be present

i). There must be more than one circumstance

ii). The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven

iii). The combination of all such circumstances produces conviction beyondreasonable doubt

E. If based on Extra Judicial Confession, same must be corroborated by evidence ofcorpus delicti

IV. CREDIBLE EVIDENCE: Evidence to be believedrequires:

A.) That it be credible in itself i.e. such as the common experience and observation ofmankind can approve as probable under the circumstances. Testimony must be natural,reasonable and probable as to make it easy to believe

B). Must come from a credible source- a credible witness is one who testifies in acategorical, straightforward spontaneous and frank manner and remains consistent oncross examination

V. APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE BY TRIAL COURTby trial court generally accorded respect by appellatecourts as the former have first hand contact with theevidence and were able to observe the witness as theytestified.


7/7

In matters concerning the credibility of witnesses, appellate courts will generally notdisturb the findings of trial courts unless they neglected, ignored or misappreciatedmaterial and substantial facts, which could materially affect the results of the case.

VI. EVIDENCE ON MOTION When a motion is basedon facts not appearing of record the court may hearthe matter on affidavits or depositions presented bythe respective parties, but the court may direct thatthe matter be wholly or partially on oral testimony or

depositions.

A. This refers to collateral issues or motions based on facts not appearing on recordsuch as (i) proof of service by publication (ii) relief from order of default (iii) Taking ofdepositions (iv) motion for new trial (v) relief from judgment (vi) issuance of writ ofpreliminary injunction

Documents

Weight and Sufficiency of Evidence