What the ‘plain view’ cases have in common is that the police officer in each of them had a prior justification for an intrusion in the course of which he came inadvertently across a piece of evidence incriminating the accused. The doctrine serves to supplement the prior justification-whether it be a warrant for another object, hot pursuit, search incident to a lawful-arrest, or some other legitimate reason for being present unconnected with a search directed against the accused-and permits the warrantless seizure. Of course, the extension of the original justification is legitimate only where it is immediately apparent to the police that they have evidence before them; the ‘plain view’ doctrine may not be used to extend a general exploratory search from one object to another until something incriminating at last emerges.

PEOPLE v. DOMINGUEZ Et.al – G.R. No. 229420, February 19, 2018

Facts: On January 13, 2011, Venson Evangelista, a car salesman, was abducted in Cubao, Quezon City by a group of men later pinpointed as the respondents herein. Evangelista’s charred remains were discovered the following day in Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija. In connection with the incident, Alfred Mendiola (Mendiola) and Ferdinand Parulan (Parulan) voluntarily surrendered toContinue reading “PEOPLE v. DOMINGUEZ Et.al – G.R. No. 229420, February 19, 2018”

VDA. DE MANGUERRA vs. RISOS, G.R. No. 152643, August 28, 2008

Facts: on September 10, 1999, Concepcion, who was a resident of Cebu City, while on vacation in Manila, was unexpectedly confined at the Makati Medical Center due to upper gastro-intestinal bleeding; and was advised to stay in Manila for further treatment. On November 4, 1999, respondents were charged with Estafa Through Falsification of Public DocumentContinue reading “VDA. DE MANGUERRA vs. RISOS, G.R. No. 152643, August 28, 2008”

PEOPLE vs. WEBB, G.R. No. 176864, December 14, 2010

Facts: On June 30, 1991 Estrellita Vizconde and her daughters Carmela, nineteen years old, and Jennifer, seven, were brutally slain at their home in Parañaque City. Following an intense investigation, the police arrested a group of suspects, some of whom gave detailed confessions. But the trial court smelled a frame-up and eventually ordered them discharged.Continue reading “PEOPLE vs. WEBB, G.R. No. 176864, December 14, 2010”

Kiel v. Estate of Sabert, GR 21639, 25 September 1924

Facts: In 1907, Albert F. Kiel along with William Milfeil commenced to work on certain public lands situated in the municipality of Parang, Province of Cotabato, known as Parang Plantation Company. Kiel subsequently took over the interest of Milfeil. In 1910, Kiel and P. S. Sabert entered into an agreement to develop the Parang PlantationContinue reading “Kiel v. Estate of Sabert, GR 21639, 25 September 1924”

Uy Chico v. Union Life Assurance Society, GR 9231, 6 January 1915 – 

Facts: The plaintiff and his brother took over the business and continued it under the same name, “Uy Layco.” The plaintiff purchased his brother’s interest in the business and continued to carry on the business under the father’s name. Sometime before the date of the fire, “Uy Layco” was heavily indebted and subsequent thereto theContinue reading “Uy Chico v. Union Life Assurance Society, GR 9231, 6 January 1915 – “

People v. Tan – GR L-14257 (1959)

Facts: Respondent Judge rejected the admission of the Triplicate carbon copy as evidence of the prosecution. Issue: Whether a triplicates carbon copies are not admissible unless it is first proven that the originals were lost and cannot be produced. Held: No, the admissibly of duplicates or triplicates has long been a settled question and weContinue reading “People v. Tan – GR L-14257 (1959)”

People v. Tandoy – GR 80505, 4 December 1990

Facts: Appellant was arrested in a buy-bust operation for selling Marijuana in the streets of Makati. RTC convicted the appellant. The appellant appeal to the CA arguing that the RTC erred in admitting a xerox copy of the buy-bust money as evidence. The appellant alleged that the admission of the said evidence is against theContinue reading “People v. Tandoy – GR 80505, 4 December 1990”


RULE 128 GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 1. Evidence defined. – Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these [R]ules, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact. (1) Section 2. Scope. – The rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all trials and hearings, except as otherwiseContinue reading “2019 AMENDMENTS TO THE 1989 REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE (A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)”

Ramirez v. CA – GR 93833, 28 September 1995

Facts: A civil case damages was filed by petitioner Socorro D. Ramirez in the RTC of Quezon City alleging that the private respondent, Ester S. Garcia, in a confrontation in the latter’s office, allegedly vexed, insulted and humiliated her in a “hostile and furious mood” and in a manner offensive to petitioner’s dignity and personality,”Continue reading “Ramirez v. CA – GR 93833, 28 September 1995”