Witnesses, their Qualifications and Disqualifications (9) Flashcards
Honesty is the Best Policy (58 cards)
qualification of a witness
GR
all persons who can
(1) Perceive/observe;
(2) Remember/recall the perception;
(3) Relate/communicate/convey/transmit the perception to others; and
(4) Recognize the duty to tell the court, under oath or affirmation
qualification of witness
GR: …
XPN:
- disqualification by reason of marriage (spousal immunity/marital disqualification)
2 disqualification by privilege information
Factors/circumstances NOT considered disqualification of witness
- religious belief
- political affiliation
- interest in the outcome of the case
- conviction of a crime
- party declared in default
- no rule that requires party to present authorization to testify as a witness for a party presenting him
Factors/circumstances NOT considered disqualification of witness > conviction of a crime
effect: even if convicted, you can still testify
XPNs
(1) A person convicted of the crime of falsification of a document, perjury or false testimony cannot be a witness to a will (Article 821, Civil Code)
(2) An accused convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, whenever made a co-accused in any criminal case, cannot be discharged to become a witness for the government (Rule 119, Section 17, Rules on Criminal Procedure)
note
Discharge means that the person is removed as a co-accused and will not be prosecuted for the crime in exchange for testifying against the remaining accused.
when objection to COMPETENCY must be raised
- BEFORE the witness testifies, or
- as soon as the ground for disqualification becomes apparent
EFFECT of failure to object to competency of a witness
Like any other exclusionary rules, the right to object to the competency/qualification of a witness is not self-executing mechanism. It must be invoked seasonably by the proper party, otherwise the failure to object amounts to a waiver and the witness’ testimony otherwise inadmissible becomes admissible and may be weighed according to its merits
DISQUALIFICATION of a witness
- by reason of marriage (marital disqualification rule or spousal immunity)
- by reason of privilege communication
Disqualification of a witness > Spousal Immunity >
REQUISITES
(a) There must be a valid existing marriage
(b) The spouse against whom the other spouse is called to testify must be a party to a case;
(c) The witness-spouse is called to testify against, not in favor of, the other spouse; and
(d) The spouse against whom the other spouse is called to testify has not given his/her consent.
Disqualification of a witness > Spousal Immunity >
EXCEPTIONS
(a) The case in which the husband or the wife is called to testify is a civil case filed by one spouse against the other spouse;
(b) The case is a criminal case for a crime committed by one spouse against the other spouse, or the other spouse’s direct ascendants or direct descendants.
(c) Where the relationship between the husband and wife is so strained negating the reason for the disqualification (Maximo Alvarez vs. Susan Ramirez, G.R. No.143349, 14 October 2005)
Disqualification of a witness > by reason of privileged communication
a. between H&W -who is the holder of this privilege?
b. duration of the PC between H&W
c. scope of the privilege
The privilege belongs to the spouse against whom the confidential communication is offered in evidence. It cannot be invoked by a third party
[b]
privilege survives death of either spouse [or] dissolution of marriage
[c]
it covers ALL forms of confidential communication (qualified) both in words & conduct communicative in anture
Disqualification of a witness > by reason of privileged communication > between H&W
Requisites of the H&W Privileged Communication
(1) There must be a valid marriage between the husband and the wife;
(2) There is a communication received in confidence by one spouse from the other spouse;
(3) The confidential communication is learned/received during the marriage; and
(4) The spouse against whom the confidential communication is being offered in evidence has not given his/her consent to the disclosure
WHEN to object
Marital Disqualification Rule/Spousal Immunity
Marital Communication Privilege
MDR/SI
- objection must be raised immediately AFTER the formal offer because the ground is deemed apparent.
MCP
- objection must be raise **immediately upon question pertaining to confidential comms between spouses is being asked.
Instance where privilege communication between spouses do no apply
(1) When the testimony of one spouse is sought in a civil case instituted by one spouse against the other spouse;
(2) When the testimony of one spouse is sought in a criminal case for a crime committed by one spouse against the other spouse or the other spouse’s direct ascendants or direct descendants.
(3) Where the communication is not intended to be confidential.
- Thus, at Waldo’s trial for the murder of Reno, the defense calls Reno’s widow to testify that immediately prior to his death, her husband Reno told her that it was Rando who shot Reno. The testimony of Reno’s widow is not covered since the communication- being a dying declaration is not meant to be confidential
distinction between MDR/SI & MPC?
(a) The marital disqualification rule prohibits the spouses from testifying against each other; while the marital privilege communication rule prohibits the spouse from disclosing confidential communication received from the other.
(b) The marital disqualification rule is co-terminus with the marriage; while the marital privilege communication rule survives death of either spouse or the marriage itself;
(c) The marital disqualification rule applies if the spouse against whom the testimony of the other spouse is offered is a party to a case; while marital privilege communication rule applies regardless of whether the spouses are parties in a case or not;
(d) The marital disqualification rule prohibits the spouses from testifying against each other on any matter; while marital privilege communication rule prohibits the spouses from disclosing confidential communication learned by one from the other during the marriage
Disqualification by reason of PC (privileged communication)
b. lawyer & client
- who holder the privilege?
- duration of privilege
- **it was held that either the client or his lawyer may raise the privilege. ** Republic Gear Co vs. Borg-Warner Corp, 381 F. 2d 551 CA 2 1967
- privilege survives the death of either the lawyer/client or the termination of the lawyer-client relationship
Disqualification by reason of PC (privileged communication) > lawyer & client
persons upon whom the disqualification is imposed:
(1) A licensed lawyer;
(2) Person reasonably believed by the client to be licensed to engage in the practice of law;
(3) Anyone assisting the licensed lawyer or person reasonably believed by the client to be duly licensed to practice law, including:
(a) Secretary;
(b) stenographer, or
(c) Clerk
Disqualification by reason of PC > lawyer & client
REQUISITES for privilege to apply
(1) There must be a communication made by the client to the lawyer, or an advice given by the lawyer to the client. Thus, where the lawyer testifies as an eyewitness to the crime involving his client, he may be cross-examined on matters in his direct testimony.
(2) The communication or advice must be given in confidence;
(3) The communication or advice must be given either:
(a) In the course of professional employment; or
(b) With a view to professional employment.
- This contemplates preliminary consultations, even if later on the attorney-client relationship was not perfected.
Disqualification by reason of PC > lawyer & client
Instances where this privilege does not apply
(1) When there is no lawyer-client relationship;
(2) When the communication was not intended to be confidential
(3) when the communication is made in the presence of third person, which negates confidentiality unless there is collusion
Disqualification by reason of PC > lawyer & client
EXCEPTIONS
- Furtherance of a crime or fraud or when the communication is for an unlawful purpose having for its object the commission of a crime
- claimants through the same deceased client
- Breach of duty by lawyer or client
- document attested by the lawyer
5 Joint clients
Disqualification by reason of PC > lawyer & client
Communication remains privileged even if it reaches a third party.
what condition is required in order that the privilege remain in that scenario?
The original parties took reasonable precautions to protect confidentiality.
Disqualification by reason of PC > lawyer & client
what is the effect when the communication otherwise privilege comes to the hands of a third party due to collusion or voluntary disclosure by the lawyer,
it remains to be privileged
Disqualification by reason of PC > lawyer & client
A, a lawyer, was representing B in a sensitive criminal case. During a casual conversation with C, a friend of A, A voluntarily disclosed confidential information B shared during their consultation. Later, C attempted to testify about the disclosed information in court. B objected, invoking attorney-client privilege. Resolve.
Where the communication otherwise privilege comes to the hands of a third party due to collusion or voluntary disclosure by the lawyer, the communication shall remain privileged
Disqualification by reason of PC > lawyer & client
XYZ Corporation consulted Attorney E regarding a potential merger. As part of the consultation, multiple employees provided confidential information to E to assist him in giving sound legal advice. During litigation, the opposing party sought to compel one of the employees to disclose their communication with E. XYZ Corporation asserted attorney-client privilege. Resolve.
The attorney-client privilege applies if the client is either a natural or juridical person like corporation. Where the client is a corporation, the attorney-client privilege extends to the employees of the company and thus their communication to the lawyer for the purpose of enabling the lawyer to give sound and informed legal advice are considered privilege (Upjohn Co. vs. United States, 449 U.S. 383 (1981)). The “control group test” is no longer controlling.
Disqualification by reason of PC > lawyer & client
F, a businessman, sought legal advice from Attorney G about his involvement in a highly publicized smuggling case. During an investigation, the authorities demanded that Attorney G reveal F’s identity, arguing that client identity is not confidential. F objected, arguing that revealing his identity would implicate him in the very activity for which he sought legal advice. Resolve.
General rule: The identity of a client is not confidential. Exception: Where strong probability exists that revealing the client’s identity would implicate the client to the very activity for which he sought the lawyer’s advice (Teodoro Regala, et. al. vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.105938, 20 September 1996)