Section 34 of Rule 132 of our Rules on Evidence provides that the court cannot consider any evidence that has not been formally offered. This rule, however, admits of an exception. Jurisprudence enumerated the requirements so that evidence, not previously offered, can be admitted, namely: first, the evidence must have been duly identified by testimony duly recorded and, second, the evidence must have been incorporated in the records of the case.
Facts:
Facts:
Petitioner Federico Sabay was charged with two counts of Slight Physical Injuries committed against Godofredo and Jervie Lopez. The MTC found him guilty. The RTC and CA affirmed the decision.
Petitioner appealed to the SC arguing that the MTC erred in admitting the Certification to File Action into evidence as the prosecution did not formally offer it. He emphasized that in Fideldia v. Sps. Mulato, the Court held that a formal offer is necessary because judges are required to base their findings solely upon evidence offered by the parties.
Petitioner appealed to the SC arguing that the MTC erred in admitting the Certification to File Action into evidence as the prosecution did not formally offer it. He emphasized that in Fideldia v. Sps. Mulato, the Court held that a formal offer is necessary because judges are required to base their findings solely upon evidence offered by the parties.
Issue:
May the Certification to File an Action which was not formally offered be admitted in evidence?
Held:
Section 34 of Rule 132 of our Rules on Evidence provides that the court cannot consider any evidence that has not been formally offered. This rule, however, admits of an exception. The Court, in the appropriate cases, has relaxed the formal-offer rule and allowed evidence not formally offered to be admitted. Jurisprudence enumerated the requirements so that evidence, not previously offered, can be admitted, namely: first, the evidence must have been duly identified by testimony duly recorded and, second, the evidence must have been incorporated in the records of the case.
In the present case, the requisites for the relaxation of the formal-offer rule are present. As it is correctly observed, Godofredo identified the Certification to File an Action during his cross-examination. Although the Certification was not formally offered in evidence, it was marked as Exhibit “1” and attached to the records of the case. (Federico Sabay vs. People, G.R. No. 192150, October 01, 2014)
In the present case, the requisites for the relaxation of the formal-offer rule are present. As it is correctly observed, Godofredo identified the Certification to File an Action during his cross-examination. Although the Certification was not formally offered in evidence, it was marked as Exhibit “1” and attached to the records of the case. (Federico Sabay vs. People, G.R. No. 192150, October 01, 2014)
0 Comments
Post a Comment