VILLAFLOR vs SUMMERS - W/N the physical examination was a violation of the petitioner’s con-

stitutional rights against self-incrimination.

FACTS:
HELD:
- In a criminal case pending before the CFI of Manila, Emeteria Villaflor
and Florentino Souingco are charged with the crime of adultery. On - NO. Fully conscious that we are resolving a most extreme case in a
this case coming on for trial before the Hon. Pedro Concepcion, Judge sense, which on first impression is a shock to one's sensibilities, we
of First Instance, upon the petitioner of the assistant fiscal for the City must nevertheless enforce the constitutional provision in this jurisdic-
of Manila, the court ordered the defendant Emeteria Villaflor, to submit tion in accord with the policy and reason thereof, undeterred by merely
her body to the examination of one or two competent doctors to deter- sentimental influences. Once again we lay down the rule that the
mine if she was pregnant or not. The accused refused to obey the constitutional guaranty, that no person shall be compelled in any
order on the ground that such examination of her person was a viola- criminal case to be a witness against himself, is limited to a pro-
tion of the constitutional provision relating to self-incrimination. There- hibition against compulsory testimonial self-incrimination. The
upon she was found in contempt of court and was ordered to be com- corollary to the proposition is that, an ocular inspection of the
mitted to Bilibid Prison until she should permit the medical examina- body of the accused is permissible. The proviso is that torture of
tion required by the court. force shall be avoided. Whether facts fall within or without the rule with
its corollary and proviso must, of course, be decided as cases arise.
- The sole legal issue from the admitted facts is whether the compelling
of a woman to permit her body to be examined by physicians to deter- - It is a reasonable presumption that in an examination by reputable and
mine if she is pregnant, violates that portion of the Philippine Bill of disinterested physicians due care will be taken not to use violence and
Rights and that portion of our Code of Criminal Procedure which find not to embarass the patient any more than is absolutely necessary.
their origin in the Constitution of the United States and practically all Indeed, no objection to the physical examination being made by the
state constitutions and in the common law rules of evidence, providing family doctor of the accused or by doctor of the same sex can be seen.
that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness
against himself. - The writ of habeas corpus prayed for is hereby denied. The costs shall
be taxed against the petitioner. So ordered.
- Counsel for petitioner argues that such bodily exhibition is an infringe-
ment of the constitutional provision; the representative of the city fiscal US v. ORERA (1967)
contends that it is not an infringement of the constitutional provision.
FACTS:

ISSUE:
 1) Damian Orera (alias Kim Cuan) was convicted by the Court of First  it follows that the ticket in question, being an authorized document evi-
Instance of the city of Manila, of having falsified a Chinese theater ticket dencing an agreement for the rent of a place in a theater to enable the
which entitled the bearer thereof to admission to a performance held in possessor to witness a theatrical performance, is a private document.
the theater of Eng Ning theatrical company, by counterfeiting and sim-
ulating the signature and rubric of Eng Ning on the said ticket, and NOT EVIDENCE RELATED:
stamping, writing and placing on the said ticket the same figures, let-
The error has been in the penalty imposed, an error which necessarily must be
ters, dragons, ornaments, and signatures, as placed by Eng Ning and
remedied by this court in the present appeal, in order that the judgment may be
the above-mentioned Chinese theatrical company.
in conformity with the law. Said penalty, according to the provisions of article
2) Orera appealed. 304 of the Penal Code, should be that of presidio correccion in its minimum and
medium degrees, and a fine, plus the corresponding indemnification for the
ISSUE: damage caused, which in the present case was P1 the price of the true ticket.

Whether the TC erred in qualifying the ticket as a document in order to be liable We, therefore, sentence Damian Orera (alias Kim Cuan) to one year, eleven
for the crime of falsification. NO! The court below did not err in qualifying months, and twenty-one days of presidio correccional, and to pay a fine of 625
such ticket as a document in order to prosecute and punish the crime of pesetas, as imposed in the judgment, With the accessory penalty provided for
falsification, the subject-matter of the complaint. in article 58, the indemnification of P1 to the offended party, or, in default
thereof, to subsidiary imprisonment, and the payment of the costs of both in-
RATIO:
stances. So ordered.
That, in effect, as argued by the appellant, he could not be convicted of the
falsification of six tickets, as declared and held in the judgment appealed from,
inasmuch as the complaint was restricted to one ticket only.

 Because if:

o according to the authority cited by the appellant, a DOCU- Estate of Rogelio Ong v. Minor Diaz (G.R. No. 171713, 17
MENT is "a deed, instrument or other duly authorized paper by December 2007)
which something is proved, evidenced or set forth,"

o and a PRIVATE DOCUMENT is, according to another authority FACTS:

cited by the same appellant, "every deed or instrument exe- A complaint for compulsory recognition with prayer for support
cuted by a private person, without the intervention of a public pending litigation was filed by minor Joanne Diaz, represented
notary or of other person legally authorized, by which docu- by her mother and guardian Jinky Diaz, against Rogelio Ong
ment some disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced or before the RTC of Tarlac. Jinky was married to Japanese Na-
set forth," tional Hasegawa Katsuo on 19 February 1993. In November
1993, Jinky and Rogelio got acquainted, which slowly turned
into love. From January 1994 to September 1998, Jinky and
Rogelio cohabited with each other and on 25 February 1998, ISSUE: WON the CA erred when it remanded the case for DNA
Joanne was born. Rogelio shouldered all the hospital bills, the analysis despite the fact that it was no longer feasible due to
baptismal expenses and provided for all Joanne's needs. How- Rogelio’s death.
ever, in September 1998, Rogelio abandoned the two, stopped
giving support for the child as, and no longer acknowledged HELD: NO, the decision of the CA was affirmed.
her as his, thus leading to the filing of said complaint. With the advancement in the field of genetics and the availabil-
ity of new technology, it is now possible to determine with cer-
The RTC, in 1999, rendered judgement in favor of respondent tainty whether Rogelio is the biological father of Joanne,
Joanne. Upon Rogelio’s motion for new trial, the RTC held that through DNA testing. DNA is the fundamental building block of
since Jinky was married at the time of Joanne's birth, the latter a person’s entire genetic make-up. DNA is found in all human
is presumed by law to be the legitimate child of the spouses cells and is the same in every cell of the same person. Genetic
Katsuo. Such presumption of legitimacy could only be im- identity is unique. DNA analysis is a procedure in which DNA
pugned if there's physical impossibility for the husband to have extracted from a biological sample obtained from an individual
sexual intercourse with the wife within the first 120 to 300 days is examined. The DNA is processed to generate a pattern, or a
of the birth of the child because of; (a) physical incapacity of DNA profile, for the individual from whom the sample is taken.
the husband to have sexual intercourse with his wife; (b) they This DNA profile is unique for each person, except for identical
were living separately in such a way that made sexual inter- twins. The term "biological sample" means any organic mate-
course was not possible; or (c) serious illness of the husband rial originating from a person’s body, even if found in inanimate
which prevented sexual intercourse (Art. 166, FC). Both evi- objects, that is susceptible to DNA testing. This includes blood,
dence of the parties that the husband was outside the country saliva, and other body fluids, tissues, hairs and bones. Thus,
and no evidence that he ever arrived in the country in the year even if Rogelio already died, any of the biological samples as
1997 preceding the birth of Joanne. Furthermore, Rogelio even enumerated above as may be available, may be used for DNA
admitted having been the one who shouldered the hospital testing. In this case, petitioner has not shown the impossibility
bills, which was an admission that he was the real father. of obtaining an appropriate biological sample that can be uti-
Hence, the RTC found Joanne to be the illegitimate child of lized for the conduct of DNA testing.
Rogelio and ordered the latter to support Joanne until she
reached the age of majority. Rogelio filed a motion for recon- Philippine American General Insurance Co Inc vs. Sweet Lines
sideration, but such was denied. Later, the CA granted his ap- Inc.
peal and the case was remanded to the court for the issuance Petitioners’ failure to specifically deny the existence, much less the genuineness and due execu-
of an order directing the parties to undergo DNA analysis to tion, of the instruments in question amounts to an admission. Judicial admissions, verbal or written,
determine the paternity of Joanne. Unfortunately, during the made by the parties in the pleadings or in the course of the trial or other proceedings in the same
case are conclusive, no evidence being required to prove the same, and cannot be contradicted
pendency of said appeal, Rogelio died. unless shown to have been made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made.
Moreover, when the due execution and genuineness of an instrument are deemed admitted be-
cause of the adverse party’s failure to make a specific verified denial thereof, the instrument need
not be presented formally in evidence for it may be considered an admitted fact.
Same; Same; Same; Negative Pregnant; Negative pregnant is a denial pregnant with the admission
of the substantial facts in the pleading responded to which are not squarely denied.—Even granting
Petitioners filed the instant petition for review on certiorari, faulting respondent
that petitioners’ averment in their reply amounts to a denial, it has the procedural earmarks of what
in the law on pleadings is called a negative pregnant, that is, a denial pregnant with the admission appellate court with the following errors: (1) in upholding, without proof, the ex-
of the substantial facts in the pleading responded to which are not squarely denied. It is in effect an istence of the so-called prescriptive period; (2) granting arguendo that the said
admission of the averment it is directed to. Thus, while petitioners objected to the validity of such prescriptive period does exist, in not finding the same to be null and void; and
agreement for being contrary to public policy, the existence of the bills of lading and said stipulations
(3) assuming arguendo that the said prescriptive period is valid and legal, in
were nevertheless impliedly admitted by them.
failing to conclude that petitioners substantially complied therewith.
Same; Same; Same; Formal offer of evidence; The non-inclusion of the controverted bills of lading
in the formal offer of evidence cannot be considered a fatal procedural lapse as would bar respond-
ent carrier from raising the defense of prescription.—We find merit in respondent court’s comments
that petitioners failed to touch on the matter of the non- presentation of the bills of lading in their
brief and earlier on in the appellate proceedings in this case, hence it is too late in the day to now
Issue: Whether or not the Bill of lading was needed to be presented as as evi-
allow the litigation to be overturned on that score, for to do so would mean an over-indulgence in dence. – NO more, because PHILAMGEN in its pleading, made mention of cer-
technicalities. Hence, for the reasons already advanced, the non-inclusion of the controverted bills tain paragraphs that shortened the prescriptive period of filing a claim, thereby
of lading in the formal offer of evidence cannot, under the facts of this particular case, be considered admitting the existence of the bill of lading or document by failing to specifically
a fatal procedural lapse as would bar respondent carrier from raising the defense of prescription.
Petitioners’ feigned ignorance of the provisions of the bills of lading, particularly on the time limita-
deny it. Furthermore the SC upheld the contract stipulation that lessened the
tions for filing a claim and for commencing a suit in court, as their excuse for non-compliance there- prescriptive period as valid and binding, the purpose of giving notice to the
with does not deserve serious attention. Shipper, or period of filing a notice, is to afford the shipper to afford itself the
chance to investigate and check if the claim is not fraudulent, in the case, The
Doctrine: When you admit the existence of a document in your pleading, shipment arrived at port ON MAY 15, 1977, the notice or suit was filed on
which in effect, you failed to specifically deny the existence of such doc- APRIL 28, 1978, more than a year later, hence the action has prescribed
ument, the said document is no longer needed to be presented as evi- since the bill of lading says that notice of loss, damage must be made
dence, since you admitted its existence in your pleading. within 30 days.

Facts: Upon payment of the loss covered by the policy, the insurer’s entitlement to
subrogation pro tanto, being of the highest equity, equips it with a cause of
1.) A maritime suit was commenced on May 12, 1978 by Philippine Amer- action against a third party in case of contractual breach.Further, the insurer’s
ican General Insurance Co or PHILAMGEN against Sweet Lines Inc or subrogatory right to sue for recovery under the bill of lading in case of loss of
SLI, and Davao Veterans Arrastre and Port Services or DVAPSI seek- or damage to the cargo is jurisprudentially upheld. However, if an insurer, in the
ing recovery of some 1,080 lost or dagamed shipment of Low Density exercise of its subrogatory right,
Polythylene.
2.) An amount close to 7000 bags in 175 pallets were shipped ( comprising may
of 2 shipments, 6,400, which only 5,413 were in good condition or not proceed against the erring carrier and for all intents and purposes stands in the
lost, and 600 bags to which only 507 were in good condition or not place and in substitution of the consignee, a fortiori such insurer is presumed
missing.) A compromise agreement was settled in the Trial Court who to know and is just as bound by the contractual terms under the bill of lading as
ordered Defendant Sweet lines to pay P34,902, Defendant Sweet the insured. petitioners contend that it was error for the Court of Appeals
Lines and Davao Veterans Arrastre Operator to pay jointly and sever- to reverse the appealed decision on the supposed ground of prescription
ally the sum of P 49,747 with interest until fully paid. when Southern Lines Inc failed to adduce any evidence in support thereof
3.) The Court of Appeals reversed the decision on the ground of prescrip- and that the bills of lading said to contain the shortened periods for filing
tion, in effect dismissing the case. This prescription arrised when the a claim and for instituting a court action against the carrier were never
bill of lading of the shipment stated that a claim or notice must be filed offered in evidence.
within 3-60 days of the incident, loss, damage or destruction
In denying petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, the Court of Appeals resolved liability. Such requirement is not an empty formalism. The fundamental reason
that although the bills of lading were not offered in evidence, the litigation obvi- or purpose of such a stipulation is not to relieve the carrier from just liability, but
ously revolves on such bills of lading which are practically the documents or reasonably to inform it that the shipment has been damaged and that it is
contracts sued upon, hence, they are inevitably involved and their provisions charged with liability therefor, and to give it an opportunity to examine the nature
cannot be disregarded in the determination of the relative rights of the parties and extent of the injury. This protects the carrier by affording it an opportunity
thereto. to make an investigation of a claim while the matter is fresh and easily investi-
gated so as to safeguard itself from false and fraudulent claims. Stipulations in
In the present case and under the aforestated assumption that the time limit bills of lading or other contracts of shipment which require notice of claim for
involved is a prescriptive period, respondent carrier duly raised prescription as loss of or damage to goods shipped in order to impose liability on the carrier
an affirmative defense in its answer setting forth paragraph 5 of the pertinent operate to prevent the enforcement of the contract when not complied with, that
bills of lading which comprised the stipulation thereon by parties In their reply is, notice is a condition precedent and the carrier is not liable if notice is not
thereto, herein petitioners, by their own assertions that— given in accordance with the stipulation, as the failure to comply with such a
“2. In connection with Pars. 14 and 15 of defendant Sweet Lines, Inc.’s Answer, stipulation in a
plaintiffs state that such agreements are what the Supreme Court considers as contract of carriage with respect to notice of loss or claim for damage bars re-
contracts of adhesion (see Sweet Lines, Inc. vs. Hon. Bernardo Teves, et al., covery for the loss or damage suffered
G.R. No. L-37750, May 19, 1978) and, consequently, the provisions therein
which are contrary to law and public policy cannot be availed of by answering
defendant as valid defenses.” In the case at bar, there is neither any showing of compliance by petitioners
thereby failed to controvert the existence of the bills of lading and the afore- with the requirement for the filing of a notice of claim within the prescribed pe-
quoted provisions therein, hence they impliedly admitted the same when they riod nor any allegation to that effect. It may then be said that while petitioners
merely assailed the validity of subject stipulations. may possibly have a cause of action, for failure to comply with the above con-
dition precedent they lost whatever right of action they may have in their favor
Petitioners’ failure to specifically deny the existence, much less the genuine- or, taken in another sense, that remedial right or right to relief had prescribed.
ness and due execution, of the instruments in question amounts to an admis-
sion. Judicial admissions, verbal or written, made by the parties in the pleadings Neither did nor could the trial court, much less the Court of Appeals, precisely
or in the course of the trial or other proceedings in the same case are conclu- establish the stage in the course of the shipment when the goods were lost,
sive, no evidence being required to prove the same, and cannot be contradicted destroyed or damaged. What can only be inferred from the factual findings of
unless shown to have been made through palpable mistake or that no such the trial court is that by the time the cargo was discharged to DVAPSI, loss or
admission was made. Moreover, when the due execution and genuineness of damage had already occurred and that the same could not have possibly oc-
an instrument are deemed admitted because of the adverse party’s failure to curred while the same was in the custody of DVAPSI, as demonstrated by the
make a specific verified denial thereof, the instrument need not be presented observations of the trial court quoted at the start of this opinion.
formally in evidence for it may be considered an admitted fact. It is in effect an
admission of the averment it is directed to. Thus, while petitioners objected to ACCORDINGLY, on the foregoing premises, the instant petition is DENIED and
the validity of such agreement (the lessening of the prescriptive period to file a the dismissal of the complaint in the court a quo as decreed by respondent
claim or to file a notice) for being contrary to public policy, the existence of the Court of Appeals in its challenged judgment is hereby AFFIRMED. SO OR-
bills of lading and said stipulations were nevertheless impliedly admitted by DERED.
them.
People vs. Umanito (G.R. No. 172607, 26 October 2009)
where the contract of shipment contains a reasonable requirement of giving
notice of loss of or injury to the goods, the giving of such notice is a condition
precedent to the action for loss or injury or the right to enforce the carrier’s FACTS:
On appeal is the decision of the CA affirming the judgement of Under Sec. 4 of the New Rules in Evidence, the appropriate
the RTC finding appellant Rufino Umanito guilty beyond rea- court may, at any time, either motu proprio or on application of
sonable doubt of the crime of rape. He was charged for rape any person who has a legal interest in the matter in litigation,
on 9 January 1990, but was only arrested 5 years after or in order a DNA testing. Such order shall issue after due hearing and notice
1995. Apparently, on the night of 15 July 1989, as private com- to the parties upon a showing of the following:(a) A biological sample exists
plainant AAA was on her way to her grandmother’s, she was that is relevant to the case;(b) The biological sample: (i) was not previously
subjected to the type of DNA testing now requested; or (ii) was previously
accosted by a young male, which later turned out to be Uman- subjected to DNA testing, but the results may require confirmation for good
ito. 6 months after, AAA’s mother, BBB, notice her stomach reasons;(c) The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid technique;(d) The
bulging and it was only then that AAA divulged the alleged rape DNA testing has the scientific potential to produce new information that is
and the details of what'd happened. Umanito denied the same relevant to the proper resolution of the case; and (e) The existence of other
and alleged that he was home the whole day when the alleged factors, if any, which the court may consider as potentially affecting the ac-
curacy or integrity of the DNA testing.
rape occurred. Notwithstanding appellant’s alibi, the RTC
found that he was indeed guilty beyond reasonable doubt of After the DNA analysis has been obtained, it shall be incum-
such rape. Despite appeal, the CA affirmed the RTC’s decision. bent upon the parties who wish to avail of the same to offer the
results in accordance with the rules of evidence. The RTC will
ISSUE: WON the prosecution had successfully met the level then assess the same as evidence, all the while considering
of proof needed to find appellant guilty guilty of the crime of the chain of custody (how samples are collected, handled, and the pos-
rape. sibility of contamination of the samples), the DNA testing methodol-
ogy (the procedure in analyzing samples, the advantages & disadvantages
HELD: NO, the instant case is remanded to the RTC for the of the procedure, and compliance with the scientifically valid standards of
reception of DNA evidence. conducting the tests), the forensic DNA laboratory (WON it’s accred-
Amidst the slew of testimonial assertions and counter-asser- ited and if not, the lab’s relevant experience and credibility should be estab-
tions, a happenstance may provide the definitive key to the ab- lished), and the reliability of the testing result (Sec. 7 of the
solution of the appellant. Because AAA bore a child as a result Rules).
of the purported rape, with the advancement in genetics and
the availability of new technology, it can now be determined Under Sec. 8, the court shall consider the following in evaluat-
with reasonable certainty WON appellant is the child's father. ing whether the DNA testing methodology is reliable: (a) The
If he’s not, then he may be acquitted. DNA print or identification falsifiability of the principles or methods used, that is, whether
is now recognized as a uniquely effective means to link a sus- the theory or technique can be and has been tested; (b) The
pect to a crime, or to absolve one erroneously accused, where subjection to peer review and publication of the principles or
biological evidence is available. methods; (c) The general acceptance of the principles or meth-
ods by the relevant scientific community; (d) The existence and
Procedure maintenance of standards and controls to ensure the correct-
ness of data gathered; (e) The existence of an appropriate ref- Amidst the slew of testimonial assertions and counter-asser-
erence population database; and (f) The general degree of tions, a happenstance may provide the definitive key to the ab-
confidence attributed to mathematical calculations used in solution of the appellant. Because AAA bore a child as a result
comparing DNA profiles and the significance and limitation of of the purported rape, with the advancement in genetics and
statistical calculations used in comparing DNA profiles. the availability of new technology, it can now be determined
with reasonable certainty WON appellant is the child's father.
Lastly, the court is enjoined to observe the requirements of If he’s not, then he may be acquitted. DNA print or identification
confidentiality and the preservation of the evidence. is now recognized as a uniquely effective means to link a sus-
pect to a crime, or to absolve one erroneously accused, where
People vs. Umanito (G.R. No. 172607, 26 October 2009) biological evidence is available.

FACTS: Procedure
On appeal is the decision of the CA affirming the judgement of Under Sec. 4 of the New Rules in Evidence, the appropriate
the RTC finding appellant Rufino Umanito guilty beyond rea- court may, at any time, either motu proprio or on application of
sonable doubt of the crime of rape. He was charged for rape any person who has a legal interest in the matter in litigation,
on 9 January 1990, but was only arrested 5 years after or in order a DNA testing. Such order shall issue after due hearing and notice
1995. Apparently, on the night of 15 July 1989, as private com- to the parties upon a showing of the following:(a) A biological sample exists
plainant AAA was on her way to her grandmother’s, she was that is relevant to the case;(b) The biological sample: (i) was not previously
subjected to the type of DNA testing now requested; or (ii) was previously
accosted by a young male, which later turned out to be Uman- subjected to DNA testing, but the results may require confirmation for good
ito. 6 months after, AAA’s mother, BBB, notice her stomach reasons;(c) The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid technique;(d) The
bulging and it was only then that AAA divulged the alleged rape DNA testing has the scientific potential to produce new information that is
and the details of what'd happened. Umanito denied the same relevant to the proper resolution of the case; and (e) The existence of other
and alleged that he was home the whole day when the alleged factors, if any, which the court may consider as potentially affecting the ac-
curacy or integrity of the DNA testing.
rape occurred. Notwithstanding appellant’s alibi, the RTC
found that he was indeed guilty beyond reasonable doubt of After the DNA analysis has been obtained, it shall be incum-
such rape. Despite appeal, the CA affirmed the RTC’s decision. bent upon the parties who wish to avail of the same to offer the
results in accordance with the rules of evidence. The RTC will
ISSUE: WON the prosecution had successfully met the level then assess the same as evidence, all the while considering
of proof needed to find appellant guilty guilty of the crime of the chain of custody (how samples are collected, handled, and the pos-
rape. sibility of contamination of the samples), the DNA testing methodol-
ogy (the procedure in analyzing samples, the advantages & disadvantages
HELD: NO, the instant case is remanded to the RTC for the of the procedure, and compliance with the scientifically valid standards of
reception of DNA evidence. conducting the tests), the forensic DNA laboratory (WON it’s accred-
ited and if not, the lab’s relevant experience and credibility should be estab- and alleged that he was home the whole day when the alleged
lished), and the reliability of the testing result (Sec. 7 of the rape occurred. Notwithstanding appellant’s alibi, the RTC
Rules). found that he was indeed guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
such rape. Despite appeal, the CA affirmed the RTC’s decision.
Under Sec. 8, the court shall consider the following in evaluat-
ing whether the DNA testing methodology is reliable: (a) The ISSUE: WON the prosecution had successfully met the level
falsifiability of the principles or methods used, that is, whether of proof needed to find appellant guilty guilty of the crime of
the theory or technique can be and has been tested; (b) The rape.
subjection to peer review and publication of the principles or
methods; (c) The general acceptance of the principles or meth- HELD: NO, the instant case is remanded to the RTC for the
ods by the relevant scientific community; (d) The existence and reception of DNA evidence.
maintenance of standards and controls to ensure the correct- Amidst the slew of testimonial assertions and counter-asser-
ness of data gathered; (e) The existence of an appropriate ref- tions, a happenstance may provide the definitive key to the ab-
erence population database; and (f) The general degree of solution of the appellant. Because AAA bore a child as a result
confidence attributed to mathematical calculations used in of the purported rape, with the advancement in genetics and
comparing DNA profiles and the significance and limitation of the availability of new technology, it can now be determined
statistical calculations used in comparing DNA profiles. with reasonable certainty WON appellant is the child's father.
If he’s not, then he may be acquitted. DNA print or identification
Lastly, the court is enjoined to observe the requirements of is now recognized as a uniquely effective means to link a sus-
confidentiality and the preservation of the evidence. pect to a crime, or to absolve one erroneously accused, where
biological evidence is available.

People vs. Umanito (G.R. No. 172607, 26 October 2009) Procedure

Under Sec. 4 of the New Rules in Evidence, the appropriate
FACTS: court may, at any time, either motu proprio or on application of
On appeal is the decision of the CA affirming the judgement of any person who has a legal interest in the matter in litigation,
the RTC finding appellant Rufino Umanito guilty beyond rea- order a DNA testing. Such order shall issue after due hearing and notice
sonable doubt of the crime of rape. He was charged for rape to the parties upon a showing of the following:(a) A biological sample exists
on 9 January 1990, but was only arrested 5 years after or in that is relevant to the case;(b) The biological sample: (i) was not previously
1995. Apparently, on the night of 15 July 1989, as private com- subjected to the type of DNA testing now requested; or (ii) was previously
subjected to DNA testing, but the results may require confirmation for good
plainant AAA was on her way to her grandmother’s, she was reasons;(c) The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid technique;(d) The
accosted by a young male, which later turned out to be Uman- DNA testing has the scientific potential to produce new information that is
ito. 6 months after, AAA’s mother, BBB, notice her stomach relevant to the proper resolution of the case; and (e) The existence of other
bulging and it was only then that AAA divulged the alleged rape factors, if any, which the court may consider as potentially affecting the ac-
and the details of what'd happened. Umanito denied the same curacy or integrity of the DNA testing.
 FACTS:
After the DNA analysis has been obtained, it shall be incum-
 Deutsche Bank (Bank) filed a complaint for Sum of Money and Dam-
bent upon the parties who wish to avail of the same to offer the
ages against respondents with RTC Makati. Bank alleged that the re-
results in accordance with the rules of evidence. The RTC will spondents dealt in U$; P F/X Forwards with and through the Bank. The
then assess the same as evidence, all the while considering Bank was given a Cut-Loss Order to close their F/X Forward positions
the chain of custody (how samples are collected, handled, and the pos- once the exchange rate hit P26.45:$1.00.
sibility of contamination of the samples), the DNA testing methodol-
ogy (the procedure in analyzing samples, the advantages & disadvantages  On July 11, 1997, the peso suddenly depreciated against the US dollar,
of the procedure, and compliance with the scientifically valid standards of and due to the highly volatile and illiquid conditions of the foreign ex-
conducting the tests), the forensic DNA laboratory (WON it’s accred- change market at the time, the Bank was only able to implement the
ited and if not, the lab’s relevant experience and credibility should be estab- Cut-Loss Order on July 15, 1997 at the average closing rate
of P30.43:$1.00. Consequently, the respondents incurred a total loss
lished), and the reliability of the testing result (Sec. 7 of the
of P45,812,240.00. In accordance with the security arrangement be-
Rules). tween the parties, the Bank applied the respondents’ deposits in the
Hold-Out Accounts to pay for the loss. There remained an unpaid
Under Sec. 8, the court shall consider the following in evaluat- amount of P11,251,032.47. Despite demands, the respondents failed
ing whether the DNA testing methodology is reliable: (a) The to pay the said amount and even denied having made any investments
falsifiability of the principles or methods used, that is, whether in US$:P F/X Forwards with and through the plaintiff.
the theory or technique can be and has been tested; (b) The
 The respondents contend that the contract upon which claims are
subjection to peer review and publication of the principles or based are enforceable under Statute of Frauds and Art. 1317 and
methods; (c) The general acceptance of the principles or meth- 1403 (1) of the NCC, since the Bank has no authority to enter into
ods by the relevant scientific community; (d) The existence and US$:Peso F/X Forward Transactions; neither does the Bank have the
maintenance of standards and controls to ensure the correct- authority to deal in US$ F/X Forward transactions in behalf of the de-
ness of data gathered; (e) The existence of an appropriate ref- fendants, particularly those which are the subject of this suit.
erence population database; and (f) The general degree of  The Bank adduced documentary evidence marked as Exhibits “A” to
confidence attributed to mathematical calculations used in “KKKKKKK”.
comparing DNA profiles and the significance and limitation of  The respondents filed their Objections/Comments to the Bank’s Formal
statistical calculations used in comparing DNA profiles. Offer of Documentary Evidence. As a result, some of the documentary
evidence was DENIED by the court mostly for being immaterial and
Lastly, the court is enjoined to observe the requirements of irrelevant. The Bank filed its motion for partial reconsideration, however
confidentiality and the preservation of the evidence. it was denied by the court.

 The Bank then filed a petition for certiorari with the CA alleging that the
G.R. No. 165606 February 6, 2006 Judge committed GADALEJ in only admitting the documentary exhibits
DEUTSCHE BANK MANILA vs. of the Bank as part of the testimonies of witnesses who testified
SPOUSES CHUA YOK SEE and REBECCA SEE, et. Al thereon. Also, there is no basis for the denial of the said exhibits
  CA: The judge’s rejection of documentary exhibits on valid and lawful Courts are further mandated to state the reason or reasons for their
grounds does not amount to grave abuse of discretion. He has the au- ruling if there are two or more objections by the other party. Due pro-
thority to admit or reject evidence determinative of the outcome of the cess requires no less. In this case, we note that, in the Order of Sep-
case. Judge’s inhibition from hearing the case is uncalled for. The issue tember 5, 2003, the trial court failed to state its reasons for reconsider-
of voluntary inhibition is primarily a matter of conscience and sound ing its earlier order, and for admitting the documentary evidence of the
discretion based on valid reasons on the part of the judge. Mere suspi- petitioners only as part of the testimonies of its witnesses. At any rate,
cion that a judge is partial to one of the parties is not enough to show we find that the issue raised in this case is not jurisdictional; hence, the
that the former favors the latter. Bare allegations cannot overturn the filing of the petition for certiorari with the CA was not proper.
presumption that a judge acted regularly and with impartiality.
 Petitioner, in imputing grave abuse of its discretion to the trial court in
 The bank elevates the case to the SC and contends that: its ruling on the admissibility of its documentary exhibits, relies on such
court’s previous order rejecting some of its exhibits. However, it should
o the RTC should have ruled only on the admissibility of the evi- be noted that the trial court has subsequently admitted all the docu-
dence. The trial court practically denied all of its documentary mentary exhibits of the petitioner although merely as part of the testi-
evidence on grounds not pertaining to their admissibility, but monies of the witnesses.
based on their weight or probative value. Petitioner submits
that admissibility of the evidence should not be confounded  We rule that neither of these rulings could be a basis for a certiorari
with its probative value. proceeding. The trial court, in so ruling, did not commit grave abuse of
discretion. Not every error in proceeding, or every erroneous conclu-
o The trial court’s finding that some of the documents were self- sion of law or fact, is abuse of discretion. If at all there was any mistake
serving because, while they may have been prepared by the in said decisions, such mistake can only be characterized as an error
petitioner, they were presented before the trial court and of- of judgment. A ruling on the admission of evidence, even if wrong, is
fered in evidence after respondents were given an opportunity not an abuse of discretion but simply an erroneous ruling. As long as
to rebut their veracity and authenticity. It avers that the trial the trial court acts within its jurisdiction, any alleged error committed in
court’s substantial lack of appreciation of the rules of evidence the exercise of its discretion will amount to nothing more than mere
amounts to grave abuse of discretion. errors of judgments, correctible by an appeal and not by a petition for
certiorari.
ISSUE:

Whether or not the presiding judge committed grave abuse of discretion in ad-  The records do not show that the trial court was motivated by malice
mitting the petitioner’s documentary exhibits only as part of the testimonies of and bad faith in issuing its orders. In fact, it even partially granted peti-
the witnesses who respectively testified thereon. tioner’s motion for reconsideration of its previous order denying some
of the documentary exhibits, and admitted all of its documentary exhib-
HELD: its as part of the testimonies of its witnesses. Even if the ruling may be
erroneous, it is not a sufficient ground to require the presiding judge to
NO. inhibit himself from hearing the case.
 Courts are required to resolve the admissibility of the evidence offered WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals
immediately after the objection is made or within a reasonable time. It in CA-G.R. SP No. 82912, dated September 30, 2004, is AFFIRMED.
must be made during the trial and at such time as will give the other
party an opportunity to meet the situation presented by the ruling.