Authentication and proof of

documents
Classes of documents
1. Public
2. Private
Public documents
According to the rules, public documents are:
- The written official acts, or records of the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and
public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign country;
- Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last wills and testaments;
Joson vs. Baltazar, A.C No. 574, February 14, 1991 - Notarization of a private document
converts it into a public document and renders it admissible without further proof of authenticity
Sales vs. CA; G.R. No. L-40145; July 29, 1992 - A notarial acknowledgement attaches full faith
and credit to the document concerned. It vests upon the document the presumption of regularity
unless it is impugned by strong, complete and conclusive proof.
- Documents that are considered public documents under treaties and conventions which are in
force between the Philippines and the country of source; and –
- Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to be entered therein.
Private documents
Private documents are those that does not fall under a b c and d of
section 19.
Authentication
Instances when a private document does not need to be authenticated
1. When document is not offered as authentic
2. Admitted
3. Genuineness and due execution of an actionable document has not been specifically denied
under oath.
4. Ancient documents –
a. More than 30 years old
b. Is produced from a custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine
Heirs of D. Lasca vs. CA; G.R. No. 79597-98; May 20, 1991

c. Unblemished by any alterations or circumstance of suspicion

How to authenticate a private document?
1. By anyone who saw the document executed or written
2. By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the
maker; or
a) By a witness who has seen the person write
b) by one who is familiar with the handwriting of the person
- witness was a municipal secretary and personnel officer who, in the
course of his employment, has seen appointment records and old
resolutions bearing the abbreviated and long signatures of accused and as
such, has acquired knowledge of the general character of the handwriting
of the accused. (Layno vs. People; G.R. No. 93842; Sept. 7, 1992)
 c) By comparison made by a witness or the court with a genuine
handwriting of the person

Before a standard handwriting is compared to the disputed

handwriting, the former’s genuineness should first be established by:
1. The admission of the person sought to be charged with the disputed
writing
2. A witness who saw the standard written
3. A witness in whose presence the standard was acknowledged by the
person who made it.
4. Evidence showing that the writer of the standard recognized it or
adopted it in his transactions.
Public documents as evidence
Sec. 23. Public documents as evidence - Documents consisting of
entries in public records made in the performance of a duty by a public
officer are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. All other
public documents are evidence, even against a third person, of the fact
which gave rise to their execution and of the date of the latter.
Proof of official record
- Official publication or by a copy attested by the officer having the legal
custody of the record
Sec. 25. What attestation of copy must state. — Whenever a copy of a
document or record is attested for the purpose of evidence, the
attestation must state, in substance, that the copy is a correct copy of
the original, or a specific part thereof, as the case may be. The
attestation must be under the official seal of the attesting officer, if
there be any, or if he or she be the clerk of a court having a seal, under
the seal of such court.

- Correlate with Rule 130 section 3

• Sec. 26. Irremovability of public record. — Any public record, an
official copy of which is admissible in evidence, must not be removed
from the office in which it is kept, except upon order of a court where
the inspection of the record is essential to the just determination of a
pending case.
• Sec. 27. Public record of a private document. — An authorized public
record of a private document may be proved by the original record, or
by a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian of the record, with
an appropriate certificate that such officer has the custody.
• Sec. 28. Proof of lack of record. —A written statement signed by an
officer having the custody of an official record or by his or her deputy
that, after diligent search, no record or entry of a specified tenor is
found to exist in the records of his or her office, accompanied by a
certificate as above provided, is admissible as evidence that the
records of his or her office contain no such record or entry.
• Sec. 29. How judicial record impeached. — Any judicial record may be
impeached by evidence of:
a. want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer;
b. collusion between the parties; or
c. fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings.
- compare with Rule 3o on effect of foreign judgments
• Sec. 30. Proof of notarial documents. — Every instrument duly
acknowledged or proved and certified as provided by law, may be
presented in evidence without further proof, the certificate of
acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the execution of the
instrument or document involved.
• Sec. 31. Alteration in document, how to explain. — The party producing a
document as genuine which has been altered and appears to have been
altered after its execution, in a part material to the question in dispute, must
account for the alteration. He or she may show that the alteration was made
by another, without his or her concurrence, or was made with the consent of
the parties affected by it, or was otherwise properly or innocently made, or
that the alteration did not change the meaning or language of the instrument.
If he or she fails to do that, the document shall not be admissible in evidence
What are the possible explanations:
1. That the alteration was made by another without his concurrence
2. That the alteration was made with the consent of the parties affected by it.
3. That the alteration was properly or innocently made
4. That the alteration did not change the meaning or language of the
instrument.
• Sec. 33. Documentary evidence in an unofficial language. —
Documents written in an unofficial language shall not be admitted as
evidence, unless accompanied with a translation into English or
Filipino. To avoid interruption of proceedings, parties or their
attorneys are directed to have such translation prepared before trial.
Offer and objection
- The court will not consider an evidence which has not been formally
offered.
Exception: Even if not formally offered, the court may consider an
evidence if 1) the evidence is identified by testimony duly recorded,
and 2) the evidence must be incorporated in the records. (Ramos vs.
Dizon; G.R. No. 137247; Aug. 7, 2006)
Offer of the testimony of a witness in evidence must be made at the
time the witness is called to testify
Failure to object at the earlieat opportunity is considered as waiver
(Catuira vs. CA, G.R. No. 105813, September 12, 1994)
• The offer of documentary and object evidence shall be made after the
presentation of a party's testimonial evidence.
Stages in the presentation of documentary evidence
1. Identification of the document
2. Marking
3. Authentication
4. Formal offer
Objection
Sec. 36. Objection. — Objection to offer of evidence must be made
orally immediately after the offer is made.
Objection to the testimony of a witness for lack of a formal offer must
be made as soon as the witness begins to testify. Objection to a
question propounded in the course of the oral examination of a witness
must be made as soon as the grounds therefor become reasonably
apparent.
The grounds for the objections must be specified.
Why should we object?

1. To prevent incompetent evidence from being considered by the court

2. To protect a witness during cross
3. To preserve error for review in the event that the objection is
overruled.
Sec. 38. Ruling. — The ruling of the court must be given immediately
after the objection is made, unless the court desires to take a
reasonable time to inform itself on the question presented; but the
ruling shall always be made during the trial and at such time as will give
the party against whom it is made an opportunity to meet the situation
presented by the ruling.
The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection need not be stated.
However, if the objection is based on two or more grounds, a ruling
sustaining the objection on one or some of them must specify the
ground or grounds relied upon.
Sec. 39. Striking out ofanswer. — Should a witness answer the question
before the adverse party had the opportunity to voice fully its objection
to the same, or where a question is not objectionable, but the answer
is not responsive, or where a witness testifies without a question being
posed or testifies beyond limits set by the court, or when the witness
does a narration instead of answering the question, and such objection
is found to be meritorious, the court shall sustain the objection and
order such answer. testimony or narration to be stricken off the record.
On proper motion, the court may also order the striking out of answers
which are incompetent, irrelevant, or otherwise improper.
Sec. 40. Tender of excluded evidence. — If documents or things offered
in evidence are excluded by the court, the offeror may have the same
attached to or made part of the record. If the evidence excluded is oral,
the offeror may state for the record the name and other personal
circumstances of the witness and the substance of the proposed
testimony.
WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF
EVIDENCE
Standards of proof
1. Proof beyond reasonable doubt
2. Clear and convincing evidence
3. Preponderance of evidence
4. Substantial evidence
• Sec. 2. Proof beyond reasonable doubt. — In a criminal case, the
accused is entitled to an acquittal, unless his or her guilt is shown
beyond reasonable doubt. Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not
mean such a degree of proof as, excluding possibility of error,
produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is required, or that
degree of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind.
Distinguish presumption of innocence from reasonable doubt
1. Presumption of innocence is a conclusion drawn by the law in favor
of an accused. Reasonable doubt is a condition of the mind produced
by proof resulting from evidence presented in the case
2. Presumption of innocence is regarded as evidence introduced by the
law to be considered by the court. Reasonable doubt is the result of
insufficient proof.
Extrajudicial confession
- Must be accompanied by evidence of corpus delicti
Circumstantial evidence
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if:
a. There is more than one circumstance;
b. The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
c. The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a
conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
Inferences cannot be based on other inferences
• Sec. 6. Substantial evidence. — In cases filed before administrative or
quasi-judicial bodies, a fact may be deemed established if it is
supported by substantial evidence, or that amount of relevant
evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify
a conclusion.

• Simply means that there is something to support the decision.

• Power of the court to stop further evidence. — The court may stop
the introduction of further testimony upon any particular point when
the evidence upon it is already so full that more witnesses to the
same point cannot be reasonably expected to be additionally
persuasive. This power shall be exercised with caution.
• Evidence on motion. — When a motion is based on facts not
appearing of record, the court may hear the matter on affidavits or
depositions presented by the respective parties, but the court may
direct that the matter be heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or
depositions.