News Ticker

Menu

Browsing "Older Posts"

Common Reputation

/ No Comments


Common Reputation
Is the definite opinion of the community in which the fact to be proved is known or exists.

It means the general or substantially undivided reputation, as distinguished from a partial or qualified one, although it need not be unanimous.

The general or substantially undivided reputation although it need not be unanimous. It is the definite opinion of the community in which the fact to be proved is known or exists.


Admissible Evidence Under This Exception
1. Common reputation existing previous to the controversy, respecting facts of public or general interest more than 30 years old, or respecting marriage or moral character
2. Monuments and inscriptions in public places as evidence of  common reputation.


Reputation
The opinion of a person by others.

Under this section, the character of a person is permitted to be established by his common reputation.

The character of a place as an opium joint may be proved by its common reputation in the community.(US v. Chua Chiok)


Character
The inherent qualities of a person.


The Following May Be Established By Common Reputation:
1. Matters of public interest more than 30 years old
2. Matters of general interest more than 30 years old
3. Matters respecting marriage or moral character and related facts
4. Individual moral character


As a general rule, the reputation of a person should be that existing in the place of his residence; it may also be that existing in the place where he is best known.


Evidence Of Negative Good Repute
Where the foundation proof shows that the witness was in such position that he would have heard reports derogatory to one’s character, the reputation testimony may be predicated on the
absence of reports of bad reputation or on the fact that the witness heard nothing against the person.

Family Reputation or Tradition

/ No Comments
family reputation or tradition


The exception refers to reputations/traditions existing in a
family previous to the controversy, in respect to the pedigree
of any one of its members. It may be received in evidence if
the witness testifying thereon be also a member of the family,
either by consanguinity or affinity.


Documentary evidence allowed under the exception: Entries in
family bibles or other family books, charts, engravings on
rings, family portraits and the like.


This enumeration, by ejusdem generis, is limited to objects
which are commonly known as "family possessions," or those
articles which represent, in effect, a family's joint statement
of its belief as to the pedigree of a person. These have been
described as objects "openly exhibited and well known to the
family," or those "which, if preserved in a family, may be
regarded as giving a family tradition." Other examples of these
objects which are regarded as reflective of a family's reputation
or tradition regarding pedigree are inscriptions on tombstones,
monuments or coffin plates. (Jison v. CA 98)


Gravador vs. Mamigo 1967
A person’s statement as to his date of birth and age, as he
learned of these from his parents or relatives, is an ante
litem motam declaration of a family tradition.


US vs. Agadas 36 Phil 246
Such statement (as to his age) prevails over the mere opinion of
the trial judge.


US vs. Evangelista
However, such statement (as to age)
cannot generally prevail over the secondary statement of his
father.



Act or Declaration Against Pedigree

/ No Comments
act or declaration against pedigree



Pedigree
Includes relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage, death,
the dates when, and the placer where these facts occurred and
the names of their relatives. It embraces also facts of family
history intimately connected with pedigree.


The act/declaration must be made by a person deceased, or
unable to testify, regarding the pedigree of another person
related to him by birth/marriage.


The rules do not require any specific degree of relationship but
the weight to which such act/declaration is entitled may be affected
by the degree of relationship.


The act/declaration is admissible if it occurred before the
controversy, and the relationship between the 2 persons is shown by
evidence other than such act/declaration.


The requirement that there be other proof than the declarations of
the declarant as to the relationship does not apply where it is
sought to reach the estate of the declarant himself and not merely
to establish a right through his declarations to the property or
some member of the family. (Tison v. CA)


Mendoza vs. CA 1991
Requisites for admissibility
1. The declarant is dead or unable to testify.
2. The pedigree must be in issue.
3. The declarant must be a relative of the person whose pedigree is
   in issue.
4. The declaration must be made before the controversy arose.
5. The relationship between the declarant and the person whose
   pedigree is in question must be shown by evidence other than
   such declaration.


Act or Declaration Against Pedigree Distinguished from Family
Reputation or Tradition
1. Act or Declaration Against Pedigree
   Witness need not be a member of the family

   Family Reputation or Tradition
   Witness is a member of the family

2. Act or Declaration Against Pedigree
   Testimony is about what the declarant, who is dead or unable
   to testify, said concerning the pedigree of the declarant’s
   family

   Family Reputation or Tradition
   Testimony is about family reputation or tradition covering
   matters of pedigree.


 



Nursing Board Exam Topnotchers May 2015

/ No Comments
nursing board exam topnotchers



The Following are the May 2015 Nursing Board Exam Topnotchers


1st Placer  - Benedict Rey Montas Serrano 86.40%
                   Bicol University - Legazpi


2nd Placer  - Charlyn Montebon Villa 86.20%
                   Riverside College


3rd Placer  - Marinell Ala Atos 85.60%
                   Bicol University - Legazpi

                   Kevin Ritardo Babia 85.60%
                   Southern Luzon State University - Lucban

                   Christine Mae Abrogena Galeon 85.60%
                   Our Lady of Fatima Universit - Quezon City


4th Placer  - Regine Agana Betita 85.20%
                   West Visayas State University - La Paz

                   Erika Sarrosa Bicol 85.20%
                   West Visayas State University

                   Mariah Monica Lopez Condeno 85.20%
                   Catanduanes State University - Virac

                   Michelle Abby Calixtro Maranan 85.20%
                   Our Lady of Fatima University - Valenzuela

                   Liezel Kate Pabillo Sindol 85.20%
                   West Visayas State University - La Paz

                   Danielle Ann Kapili Suarez 85.20%
                   Cebu Normal University


5th Placer  - Devin Edjohn Michael Aguelo Aballe 85%
                   Cebu Doctors University

                   Alexis John Solomon Castro 85%
                   University of Pangasinan

                   Janesca Lara Montero Comilang 85%
                   Centro Escolar University - Makati

                   Euben Hope Olaso Gamutan 85%
                   University of Bohol

                   Darwana Adin  Ibbang 85%
                   Ateneo De Zamboanga

                   Ma Rejena Grace Caballero Palatan 85%
                   Cebu City Medical Center

                   Arielle Joy Brillantes Rosales 85%
                   Cebu Normal University

                   Nina Leoves Sabardan 85%
                   Xavier University


6th Placer  - Julius Bryan Cristobal Abesamis 84.80%
                   San Beda College

                   Kristine Marie Manlapas Basas 84.80%
                   Bicol University - Daraga

                   Keren Joy Tuban Compelio 84.80%
                   Benguet State University - La Trinidad

                   Kerima Danica Lising Gayo 84.80%
                   UP-Manila

                   John Dene Patrick Rocero Job 84.80%
                   Makati Medical Center

                   Krissa Mae Duco Lapiz 84.80%
                   Holy Name University

                   Tazmeen Amin Mariwa 84.80%
                   Notre Dame of Jolo College

                   Mikaela Marie Baluyut Medina 84.80%
                   Angeles University Foundation


7th Placer  - Al-Gian Mendoza Dialogo 84.60%
                   Universidad De Santa Isabel

                   Jada Bianca Giray Diaz 84.60%
                   Perpetual Help College of Manila

                   Chara Maive Amor Torres Gabiana 84.60%
                   Cebu Normal University

                   Karla Patricia Ganagana Giorla 84.60%
                   Chinese General Hospital Colleges

                   Suharto Tulawie Jundam 84.60%
                   Manila Tytana Colleges Inc.

                   Ma Therese Lafayette Hernandez 84.60%
                   Philippine Women's University - Manila

                   Daisyrie Aidyl Tan Pamogas 84.60%
                   UP-School of Health and Sciences - Leyte

                   Jake Quilaton Taladro 84.60%
                   Saint Paul College Foundation Inc.

                   Elmera Mae Layola Toledo 84.60%
                   De La Salle University - Health Sciences Institute

                   Tarquin Orpheus Batucan Tomada 84.60%
                   Mindanao Sanitarium and Hospital Colleges of
                   Medical Arts Foundation

                   Ma Kristel Rose Orteza Vesagas 84.60%
                   Ateneo De Zamboanga


8th Placer  - Carla Mae Borongan Abrigo 84.40%
                   Silliman University

                   Elisha Gine Bagalanon Andales 84.40%
                   Cebu Normal University

                   Camille Agustin Billote 84.40%
                   University of Pangasinan

                   Cathlyn Mae Cando Carlos 84.40%
                   University of La Salette - Santiago

                   Rose Jessamae Montaus Cultura 84.40%
                   Cebu Doctors University

                   Cristhine Jane Bantugon De Castro 84.40%
                   Lyceum of the Philippines University - Batangas

                   Mika Marie Saturinas Desiderio 84.40%
                   Velez College

                   Fleurdelyn Manguiat Garing 84.40%
                   De La Salle University - Lipa

                   Ellaine Gayle Pielago Imperio 84.40%
                   Southern Luzon State University - Lucban

                   Jean Soriano Laluan 84.40%
                   University of Pangasinan

                   John Anthony Alboleras Ngo 84.40%
                   Southville International School And Colleges

                   Christine Joy Camilotes Roferos 84.40%
                   Cebu Normal University

                   Rencel Finnos Valdez Sabog 84.40%
                   Benguet State University - La Trinidad

                   Frances Mae Tayhopon Soberano 84.40%
                   West Visayas State University - La Paz

                   Gienel Alodia Bautista Tatlongmaria 84.40%
                  Adventist University of the Philippines

                   Carlo Magno Corpus Vistro 84.40%
                   Mariano Marcos State University - Batac


9th Placer  - Aira Mae Aguila Asagra 84.20%
                   Chinese General Hospital Colleges

                   Dominic Romero Asuncion 84.20%
                   University of Saint Louis - Tuguegarao

                   Ma Fesa Arbis Barrio 84.20%
                   West Visayas State University - La Paz

                   Jansel Jayme Buencaloloy 84.20%
                   Cebu Normal University

                   Louanne Tracy Cruz Calixijan 84.20%
                   University of Perpetula Help System - Laguna

                   Kate Lowin Aben Cardona 84.20%
                   University of Pangasinan

                   Elleine Ruth Rabino Canero 84.20%
                   University of the Cordilleras

                   Dennis Nuneza Del Mar 84.20%
                   Dr. Yanga's Colleges Inc.

                   Dayanara Galpo Dimatulac 84.20%
                   Bicol University - Legazpi

                   John Paolo Jacaban Espina 84.20%
                   UE-Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Medical Center

                   Sarah Santos Estrada 84.20%
                   University of Pangasinan

                   Alben Balen Fernandez 84.20%
                   University of Pangasinan

                   Michelle Ann Hamor Hilis 84.20%
                   Bicol University - Legazpi

                   Trisha Camille Arante Lagrito 84.20%
                   Xavier University

                   Stephanie Javellana Locsin 84.20%
                   Iloilo Doctors College

                   Marc Anthony Talagtag Manalili 84.20%
                   Bataan Peninsula State University - Balanga

                   Joji Mheple Bragado Mangiyo 84.20%
                   University of the Cordilleras

                   Mary Frances Uy Penalosa 84.20%
                   Velez College

                   Kimberley Kaye Bureros Sosmena 84.20%
                   Chinese General Hospital Colleges

                   Ma Jella Mirabel Turallo 84.20%
                   Bicol University - Legazpi

                   Aaron Tibay Vinluan 84.20%
                   FEU-Manila


10th Placer - Alexandra Marie Molano Allanigue 84%
                   Angeles University Foundation

                   Darwin Anthony Dela Cruz Antigua 84%
                   Gordon College

                   Sabrina Kristine Amil Avancena 84%
                   Silliman University

                   Charmaine Rose Jean Lim Bayan 84%
                   Ateneo De Zamboanga

                   Ma Gay Bronda Biscaro 84%
                   West Visayas State University - La Paz

                   Mabelle Blancada Consulta 84%
                   Bicol University - Legazpi

                   Ruel Ray Chan Cuay 84%
                   Xavier University

                   Joanna Francessca Lozada De Matias 84%
                   West Visayas State University - La Paz

                   Ma Paola Joy Pangilinan Esposo 84%
                   Wesleyan University Philippines - Cabanatuan City

                   Jomarie Mhel Papaya Himor 84%
                   Ateneo De Zamboanga

                   Jezreel Bon Tianzon Juanitez 84%
                   Olivarez College - Paranaque

                   Josua Casingal Lacsina 84%
                   Arellano University - Pasay

                   Renee Camille Lumeran Laguda 84%
                   Cebu Normal University

                   Llybe Kristen Sabuga Lobido 84%
                   Xavier University

                   Rodilyn Anne Dela Cruz Maravillo 84%
                   Perpetual Help College of Manila

                   Carmela Lea Reciproco Mira 84%
                   University of Makati

                   Liana Monique Puspos San Lorenzo 84%
                   De La Salle University - Health Sciences Institute

                   Dann Francis Bacusmo Sarnillo 84%
                   University of Cebu - Manilad

                   Jasafe Rinon Ong Taborada 84%
                   Cebu Normal University

                   Kathlyn Orozco Tan 84%
                   Cebu Normal University

                   Nico Eulogio Parungao Tiu 84%
                   Angeles University Foundation

             
             

                

Top Nursing Schools In The Philippines May 2015

/ No Comments
top nursing schools in the philippines


The Following are the Top Nursing Schools In The Philippines
Based On The Result Of The May 2015 Nurse Board Examination:

No.1  West Visayas State University - La Paz
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 153
      Number of those who passed - 153
      Number of those who failed - 0

      Silliman University
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examiees - 56
      Number of those who passed - 56
      Number of those who failed - 0

      Chinese General Hospital Colleges
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examiees - 55
      Number of those who passed - 55
      Number of those who failed - 0


No.2  De La Salle University - Health Sciences Institute
      Passing Percentage - 98.70%
      Number of Examiees - 77
      Number of those who passed - 76
      Number of those who failed - 1


No.3  Benguet State University - La Trinidad
      Passing Percentage - 98.68%
      Number of Examiees - 76
      Number of those who passed - 75
      Number of those who failed - 1


No.4  FEU-Nicanor Reyes Medical Foundation
      Passing Percentage - 96.61%
      Number of Examiees - 59
      Number of those who passed - 57
      Number of those who failed - 2


No.5  Bicol University - Legazpi
      Passing Percentage - 96.23%
      Number of Examiees - 106
      Number of those who passed - 102
      Number of those who failed - 4


No.6  Angeles University Foundation
      Passing Percentage - 96%
      Number of Examiees - 75
      Number of those who passed - 72
      Number of those who failed - 3


No.7  Ateneo De Zamboanga
      Passing Percentage - 92.36%
      Number of Examiees - 144
      Number of those who passed - 133
      Number of those who failed - 11


No.8  Southern Luzon State University - Lucban
      Passing Percentage - 91.86%
      Number of Examiees - 86
      Number of those who passed - 79
      Number of those who failed - 7


No.9  Universidad De Santa Isabel
      Passing Percentage - 91.67%
      Number of Examiees - 72
      Number of those who passed - 66
      Number of those who failed - 6


No.10 University of Saint La Salle
      Passing Percentage - 90.91%
      Number of Examiees - 55
      Number of those who passed - 50
      Number of those who failed - 5


Note: PRC publishes only the Top Performing Schools which
garnered a passing percentage of 80% and have at least 50
examinees.


But it is worth mentioning that the following Nursing Schools
performed well in this nursing board examination.

     
      Cebu Normal University
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 43


      Saint Paul University - Dumaguete
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 38


      Cebu City Medical Center
      Passing percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 32


      Xavier University
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 27
 

      Bicol University - Tabaco
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 20  


      Adamson University
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 19


      UP-School of Health and Sciences - Leyte
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 18

Nurse Board Exam Result May 2015

/ No Comments
nurse board exam result



The result of the May 2015 Nurse Board Exam has been released.


Click here to view the complete names of those who passed.


17,891 took the Nursing Board Examination but only 9707 passed.


The Members of the Board of Nursing who gave the examination
are the following:
1. Carmencita M. Abaquin, Chairman
2. Perla G. Po, Member
3. Gloria B. Arcos, Member
4. Carmelita C. Divinagracia, Member
5. Carfredda P. Dumlao, Member
6. Glenda S. Arquiza, Member
7. Florence C. Cawaon, Member


The May 2015 Nurse Board Exam 1st Placer is Benedict Rey Montas
Serrano. He has a passing percentage of 86.40%. He is a graduate
of Bicol University in Legazpi City.


      Related: Top Ten Examinees


3 Nursing Schools Tied for 1st Place as the No.1 Nursing School
in the Philippines. All of them has a passing percentage of 100%.


The following Schools Tied for 1st Place:
1. Chinese General Hospital Colleges
2. Silliman University
3. West Visayas State University in Lapaz


      Related: Top Nursing Schools In The Philippines


96 Examinees made it to the Top Ten.


475 Nursing Schools participated in this examination.


The Board of Nursing gave the exam in the following Cities:
1.  Manila
2.  Bacolod
3.  Baguio
4.  Cabanatuan
5.  Cagayan de Oro
6.  Cebu
7.  Dagupan
8.  Davao
9.  Iloilo
10. Laoag
11. Legazpi
12. Lucena,
13. Pagadian
14. Tacloban,
15. Tuguegarao
16. Zamboanga


Registration for the issuance of Professional Identification Card
(ID) and Certificate of Registration will be announced later.


Those who will register are required to bring the following:
1. Duly accomplished Oath Form or Panunumpa ng Propesyonal
2. Current Community Tax Certificate (cedula)
3. 1 piece passport size picture (colored with white background
   and complete name tag)
3. 2 sets of metered documentary stamps and 1 short brown envelope
   with name and profession and to pay the Initial Registration
   Fee of P600 and Annual Registration Fee of P450 for 2015-2018.


Successful examinees should personally register and sign in the
Roster of Registered Professionals.

Declaration Against Interest

/ No Comments


Requisites
1. That the declarant is dead and unable to testify
2. That it relates to facts against the interest of the
   declarant
3. That at the time he made the said declaration the declarant
   was aware that the same was contrary to his aforesaid interest
4. That the declarant had no motive to falsify and he believed
   such actual declarant to be true.


Reason For Such Admission
1. Necessity – such declarations are the only mode of proof
   available
2. Trustworthiness – persons do not make statements that are
   disadvantageous to themselves without substantial reason
   to believe that the statements are true. Self-interest
   induces men to be cautious in saying anything against
   themselves. In other words, we can safely trust a man when
   he speaks against his interest.


Interest Covered
1. Proprietary interest
2. Penal interest
3. Pecuniary interest


The declarant must realize at the very time of making the
declaration that his declaration is against his interest,
that a reasonable man in his position would not have made
the declaration unless he believed it to be true.


It is essential that at the time of the statement, the
declarant’s interest affected thereby should be
actual/real/apparent not merely contingent, future or
unconditional, otherwise, the declaration would not in
reality be against interest.


Admission vs Declaration Against Interest
1. Admission
   An Admission need to be, although of course, it will
   greatly enhance its probative weight if it be so made.

   Declaration Against Interest
   The declaration against interest must have been made
   against the proprietary or pecuniary interest of the parties.

2. Admission
   Made by a party himself and is a primary evidence and competent
   though he be present in court and ready to testify.

   Declaration Against Interest
   Must have been made by person who is either deceased or unable
   to testify.

3. Admission
   Admission can be made anytime

   Declaration Against Interest
   The declaration against interest must have been made anti
   litem motam.


Declaration against interest distinguished from admission:
1. An admission is not necessarily against the interest of
   the admitter WHILE the declaration must be against the
   declarant's own interest
2. An admission may be received even if the admitter is
   alive WHILE the declarant must be dead or is unable to
   testify
3. An admission may be received in evidence only against the
   admitter and those identified with him in legal interest
   WHILE the declaration may be received even against third
   persons. (Smith v. Moore, 142 N.C. 277)


When declaration against interest received in evidence:
1. Against the declarant
2. Against his successors in interest and
3. Against third persons

Dying Declaration

/ No Comments
dying declaration


Dying Declaration
The ante mortem statements made by a person after the mortal
wound has been inflicted under the belief that the death is
certain, stating the fact concerning the cause of and the
circumstances surrounding the attack.

When Applicable
It applies to any case where the death of the declarant is the
subject of the inquiry.

Requisites
1. That the death is imminent and the declarant is conscious
   of such fact
2. That the declaration refers to the cause and the surrounding
   circumstances of such death
3. That the declaration refers to the facts which the victim
   is competent to testify to
4. That the declaration is offered in a case wherein the
   declarant’s death is subject of the inquiry (the victim
   necessarily must have died)
5. That the statement must be complete in itself.
   (People vs. De Joya, 203 SCRA 343).

Reason For Its Admission
1. Necessity – because the declarant’s death renders
   impossible his taking the witness stand
2. Trustworthiness – at the point of death, every motive for
   falsehood is silenced. The mind is induced by the most
   powerful consideration to speak the truth.

Determination Of Consciousness Of Impending Death:
1. Utterances
2. Circumstances – that at the time of the making of the
   declaration, the declarant did not expect to survive the
   injury from which he actually died
3. Actual character and seriousness of his wounds
4. By his conduct.

A dying declaration may be oral or written or made by signs
which could be interpreted and testified to by a witness
thereto.

There must be settled, hopeless expectation that death is at
hand. It is sufficient that he believed himself in imminent
danger of death at the time of such declaration.

Dying declarations favorable to the accused are admissible.

Dying declarations may also be regarded as part of the res
gestae as they were made soon after the startling occurrence
without the opportunity for fabrication or concoction.

Dying declaration is NOT considered as a confidential
communication between the spouses.

A dying declaration may be attacked on the ground that any of
the requisites for its admissibility are not present and the
same may be impeached in the same manner as the testimony of
any of the witness on the stand.

Explain the concept of dying declaration as an exception to
the hearsay rule.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. The declaration of a dying person,
b. Made under consciousness of an impending death,
c. May be received in any case wherein his death is the
   subject of inquiry,
d. As evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of
   such death.

Requisites of ante-mortem statement:
a. It must concern any case involved in and the circumstances
   surrounding the declarant's death
b. At the time of the declaration, the declarant must be
   conscious of impending death
c. The declarant must be competent as a witness
d. The declaration must be offered in any case wherein the
   death of the declarant is the subject of inquiry and
e. The declarant actually died, otherwise, the declaration may
   be admitted as part of the res gestae and not as a dying
   declaration.

(People vs. Tanaman, et al., G.R. No. 71768, July 28, 1987)
Victim need not state that he has lost all hope of recovery.
It is sufficient that circumstances are such as to inevitably
lead to the conclusion that at the time the declaration was
made, the declarant would not expect to survive the injury
from which he actually died. The degree and seriousness of
the wounds and the fact that death supervened thereafter
constitute substantial evidence of the victim's consciousness
of his impending death.

Dying declaration has weight even if declarant did not die
immediately after his declaration:

The fact that the declarant died four (4) hours after his
statement does not diminish the probative value of the dying
declaration since it is not indispensable that the a declarant
expires immediately thereafter.

It is the belief of impending death and not the rapid succession
of death that renders the dying declaration admissible.
(People v. Bautista, G.R. No. 111149, prom. September 5, 1997)

Mere gesture of dying victim inconclusive: The gesture of a
dying woman in pointing to a direction, when asked for the
identity of her assailant, is too vague to be given such
probative value in determining the culpability of the accused.

REASON: Unlike an oral or a written declaration, a simple
gesture of the hand unaccompanied by words, is open to various
interpretations by the witness who testifies To its existence.
Thus, the evidence comes to the court couched in the witness'
second hand perception and possibly, imbued with his personal
meanings and biases. This is what makes hearsay evidence
objectionable. The second hand evidence is placed before the
court without the benefit of cross-examination by the party
against whom it is brought, nor of any other means of
assessing the competence and credibility of the source.
(People vs. Ola, G.R. No. L-47147, July 3, 1987)










Top Architect Schools In The Philippines June 2015

/ No Comments
top architect schools in the philippines



The Following are the Top Architect Schools in the Philippines Based on the result of the June 2015 Architect Board Examination.

View the 2019 top performing architect schools


No.1  UST
          Passing Percentage - 88.74%
          Number of Examinees - 222
          Number of those who passed - 197
          Number of those who failed - 25

No.2  University of San Carlos
          Passing Percentage - 85.92%
          Number of Examinees - 71
          Number of those who passed - 61
          Number of those who failed - 10


Note: The PRC do not publish the lists of the Top Performing Schools In The Board Exam with less than 50 examinees.
 

But the following Architect Schools performed very well in this examination.


      UP-Diliman
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 49
      Number of those who passed - 49
      Number of those who failed - 0

      UP-Mindanao
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 12
      Number of those who passed - 12
      Number of those who failed - 0

      De La Salle University - Dasmarinas
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 7
      Number of those who passed - 7
      Number of those who failed - 0

      Ateneo De Davao University
      Passing Percentage - 85.71%
      Number of Examinees - 21
      Number of those who passed - 18
      Number of those who failed - 3


      Bohol Island State University
      Passing Percentage - 84.21%
      Number of Examinees - 19
      Number of those who passed - 16
      Number of those who failed - 3

      Camarines Sur Polytechnic Colleges
      Passing Percentage - 82.61%
      Number of Examinees - 23
      Number of those who passed - 19
      Number of those who failed - 4

      Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila
      Passing Percentage - 81.82%
      Number of Examinees - 33
      Number of those who passed - 27
      Number of those who failed - 6

      Saint Louis University - Baguio City
      Passing Percentage - 81.58%
      Number of Examinees - 38
      Number of those who passed - 31
      Number of those who failed - 7

      University of Saint Louis - Tuguegarao
      Passing Percentage - 80.77%
      Number of Examinees - 26
      Number of those who passed - 21
      Number of those who failed - 5


      UP-Mindanao
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 12
      Number of those who passed - 12
      Number of those who failed - 0

      De La Salle University - Dasmarinas
      Passing Percentage - 100%
      Number of Examinees - 7
      Number of those who passed - 7
      Number of those who failed - 0

Architect Board Exam Topnotchers June 2015

/ No Comments
architect board exam topnotchers



Architect Board Exam Topnotchers. Based on the result of the June 2015 Architect Board Examination.

View the 2019 Architect Licensure Examination Topnotchers


1st Placer  - Christian Lyle David La Madrid 85.90%
                    UST


2nd Placer  - Joachim Michael Lim Espina 85.20%
                    University of San Carlos


3rd Placer  - Veronica Villamayor Puda 85.10%
                    UP-Diliman


4th Placer  - Gelmer Sarah Del Valle Santos 84.90%
                    UP-Diliman


5th Placer  - Christian Santos Salandanan 84.80%
                    UST


6th Placer  - Bianca Marie Garcia Villamayor 84.20%
                    UST


7th Placer  - Francino Paraz Delima 84.10%
                    University of San Carlos


                    Ernest Antonio Palmero Mines 84.10%
                    Universtity of Mindanao - Davao City


                    Kathleen Anne Natividad Veloso 84.10%
                    Ateneo De Davao University


8th Placer  - Rui Carlo Soriano Hombrebueno 83.90%
                    TIP-Manila


                    Jo Jerico Estoque Manalang 83.90%
                    University of Nueva Caceres


                    Lucky Meljay Cristobal Mercado 83.90%
                    Northwestern University


                    Blitzer Grayson Dela Cruz Reyes 83.90%
                    Bulacan State University - Malolos


9th Placer  - Rudy Michael Alcaraz Ancheta 83.80%
                    FEU-Manila


10th Placer - Joan Mae March Manguilimotan Bermejo 83.70%
                    UP-Diliman


                    Nielsen Brian Chua Uy 83.70%
                    De La Salle University - College of Saint Benilde
   

Architect Board Exam Result June 2015

/ No Comments
architect board exam result



The result of the June 2015 Architect Board Exam has been released.

View the 2019 Architect Licensure Examination Results


Click here to view the complete names of those who passed.


1,964 examinees took the exam but only 1,201 passed.

University of Santo Tomas is the No.1 Architect School. It has a passing percentage of 88.74%. Out of its 222 examinees, 197 passed.


      Related: Top Architect Schools


The Architect Board Exam 1st Placer is Christian Lyle David La Madrid. He is a graduate of the University of Santo Tomas. He has a passing percentage of 85.90%.


      Related: Top Ten Examinees


86 Architecture schools participated in the examination.

The Architect Board Exam was given in the cities of Manila, Cebu and Legazpi on June 12 and 14, 2015.

The Members of the Board of Architect who gave the examination are the following:
1. Arch. Rolando L. Cordero, Chairman
2. Arch. Fidel Jose R. Siapno, Board Member

Registration for the issuance of Professional Identification Card (ID) and Certificate of Registration will be on July 9, 10 and 13, 2015.

Those who will register are required to bring the following:
1. Duly accomplished Oath Form or Panunumpa ng Propesyonal
2. Current Community Tax Certificate (cedula)
3. 1 piece passport size picture (colored with white background and complete name tag)
4. 2 sets of metered documentary stamps and 1 short brown envelope with name and profession and to pay the Initial Registration Fee of P600 and Annual Registration Fee of P450 for 2015-2018.

Successful examinees should personally register and sign in the Roster of Registered Professionals.




Hearsay Rule

/ No Comments
hearsay rule


Any evidence, whether oral or documentary is hearsay if its
probative value is not based on the personal knowledge of the
witness but on the knowledge of some other person not on the
witness stand.

Reason for Exclusion of Hearsay Evidence
It is excluded because the party against whom it is presented
is deprived of his right and opportunity to cross examine the
person to whom the statements or writings are attributed.

Hearsay evidence not objected to may be admissible but whether
objected to or not, has no probative value, and as opposed to
direct primary evidence, the latter always prevails.

General Rule
Hearsay Evidence is inadmissible.

Exceptions
1.  Dying Declaration
2.  Declaration Against Interest
3.  Act Or Declaration Against Pedigree
4.  Family Reputation Or Tradition Against Pedigree
5.  Common Reputation
6.  Res Gestae
7.  Entries In The Ordinary Course of Business
8.  Entries In Official Records
9.  Commercial Lists
10. Learned Treatises
11. Testimony Or Deposition At A Former Proceeding

Reason for the Exceptions
The exceptions are admissible for reasons of NECESSITY and
TRUSTWORTHINESS.

Doctrine of Independently Relevant Statements
The witness may testify to the statements made by a person, if
for instance, the fact that such statements were made by the
latter would indicate the latter’s mental state and physical
condition.

Independent of whether the facts stated are true or not, they
are relevant since they are the facts in issue or are
circumstantial evidence of the facts in issue.

Two Classes of Independently Relevant Statements
1. Those statement s which are the very fact in issue
2. Those statements which are circumstantial evidence of the fact
   in issue. It includes the following:
   a. Statement of a person showing his state of mind that is,
      his mental condition, knowledge, belief, intention, ill-will,
      and other emotions;
   b. Statements of persons which shows his physical condition
      as illness and the like;
   c. Statements of a person from which an inference may be
      made as to the state of mind of another, that is,
      knowledge, belief, motive, good/bad faith of the latter;
   d. Statements which may identify the date, place, person
      in question;
   e. Statements showing the lack of credibility of a witness

Explain The Meaning Of The Hearsay Rule
Suggested Answer:
a. A Witness can testify
b. Only to those facts
c. Which he knows of his personal knowledge;
d. That is which are derived from his own perception,
e. Except as otherwise provided in these rules of Court.

Consequently, facts which are not derived from the perception
of the witness is hearsay, and not admissible.

The rule is not limited to oral testimony, it also includes
writings. (20 Am. Jur. 400)

Examples of Hearsay Evidence
1. The testimony of a witness as to what he has heard another
   person say about the facts in dispute.
   (People vs. Reyes, 76 Phil. 354; Aldecoa & Co., vs. WArner
   Barnes & Co., 30 Phil. 153) NOTE: See concept of independent
   relevant statement.
2. Affidavits.
   (Marisfosque vs. Luna, L-9095, May 25, 1957; People v.
   Pagkaliwagan, 76 Phil. 457)
3. A letter offered in evidence to establish the facts in issue.
   (Pastor vs. Gaspar, 2 Phil. 592; People v. Carlos, 47 Phil. 626)
4. A medical certificate to the extent of the injuries found
   by the doctor on the offended party's body.
   (De Guia vs. Meralco, 40 Phil. 706)
5. A resolution of the municipal council of a certain
   municipality as to the character of an accused in a criminal
   case. (U.S. vs. Tanjuatco, 1 Phil. 374)

General Rule
Affidavits without presenting afiant in court is mere hearsay.
The constitutional right to confrontation precludes reliance
on affidavits. Such a constitutional safeguard cannot be satisfied
unless the opportunity is given to the accused to test the
credibility of any person, who, by affidavit or deposition would
impute the commission of an offense to him. It would be to
disregard one of the most valuable guarantees of a person
accused if solely on the affidavits presented, his guilt could
be predicated.
(People vs. Santos, et al., 139 SCRA 586-587 citing
People vs. Lavarez, 23 SCRA 1301)

Exceptions
When Affidavits are given weight.
1. Where said affidavits are overwhelming, uncontroverted by
   competent evidence and not inherently improbable.
   (Top-Weld Manufacturing, Inc. v. ECED, S.A., et al.,
   138 SCRA 132)
2. Under the Rule on Summary Procedure for civil cases;
3. 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.
   (Sec. 7, Rule 133, ROC)

Explain and illustrate the concept of an independent relevant
statement.
Suggested Answer:
It is a statement intended not to establish the truth of the
facts asserted in that statement, but to establish only the
tenor of the statement, not the truth of the facts therein
asserted.

Illustration:
In a libel case, if the prosecution witness testifies that he
heard the accused say that the complainant was a rapist, this
testimony is admissible not to prove that the complainant was
really a rapist, but merely to show what the accused uttered.
Independent relevant statements are hearsay in character but
not legal hearsay. hence they are not considered as exceptions
to the hearsay rule.













Unaccepted Offer

/ No Comments


This section complements the rule on tender of payment
(Art.1256,Civil Code) by providing that said offer of payment
must be made in writing. Such tender of payment must, however,
be followed by consignation of the amount in court in order to
produce the effects of valid payment.

The rule covers:
1. Payment of sum of money - if the amount is short of the
   amount of liability or not in the currency which is the legal
   tender here in the Philippines, the creditor has a reason not
   to accept the tender. Or even if the legal tender is not that
   one to which the parties agreed
2. Delivery of document – if not that agreed document, creditor
   may refused acceptance;
3. Delivery of personal property – creditor may refuse and it
   does not amount to a tender if the personal property is not
   that one agreed upon.

Delivery or unaccepted offer does not release the debtor from
obligation but it can excuse the debtor from delivery.

Upon a valid unaccepted offer, the creditor shall absorb all the
circumstantial damages to the property. However, the debtor must
prove that there is no negligent on his part.

The court has to resolve the issue on whether there is a just
cause in the refusal if the creditor denied the consignation of
the debtor in the basis that there is no just cause.

The requirement that the tender of payment must have been
refused without just cause by the creditor does not imply that
for the judicial authority to accept consignation it has to
examine whether or not the creditor had a just reason for
refusing the tender. In order that the consignation of an amount
or thing may be made the refusal of the creditor of the tender of
payment is enough, without regard to the reason for his refusal,
which will only be taken into account to resolve definitely
whether the consignation made will be efficacious against his
opposition.


Civil Code Of The Philippines
Art. 1256.
If the creditor to whom tender of payment has been made refuses
without just cause to accept it, the debtor shall be released
from responsibility by the consignation of the thing or sum due.
Consignation alone shall produce the same effect in the
following cases:

1. When the creditor is absent or unknown, or does not appear
   at the place of payment

2. When he is incapacitated to receive the payment at the time
   it is due

3. When, without just cause, he refuses to give a receipt

4. When two or more persons claim the same right to collect

5. When the title of the obligation has been lost. (1176a)

Top Environmental Planner School

/ No Comments
top environmental planner school


Based on the result of the June 2015 Environmental Planner
Board Examination.



No.1 UP-Diliman
         Passing Percentage - 92.31%
         Number of Examinees - 26
         Number of those who passed - 24
         Number of those who failed - 2


No.2 UP-Los Banos
         Passing Percentage - 86.67%
         Number of Examinees - 15
         Number of those who passed - 13
         Number of those who failed - 2


No.3 Mindanao State University - Marawi City
         Passing Percentage - 100%
         Number of Examinees - 8
         Number of those who passed - 8
         Number of those who failed - 0


No.4 Ateneo De Manila University - QC
         Passing Percentage - 85.71%
         Number of Examinees - 7
         Number of those who passed - 6
         Number of those who failed - 1


No.5 Mapua Institute of Technology
         Passing Percentage - 80%
         Number of Examinees - 5
         Number of those who passed - 4
         Number of those who failed - 1


        Manuel S. Enverga University Foundation - Lucena City
        Passing Percentage - 80%
        Number of Examinees - 5
        Number of those who passed - 4
        Number of those who failed - 1


Notes: PRC does not officially publish the Top Performing
Schools in the licensure examination unless the required
50 or more examinees and 80% passing percentage are met.

Environmental Planner Board Exam Result June 2015

/ No Comments
environmental planner board exam result


Environmental Planner Board Exam Result

The result of the June 2015 Environmental Board Exam has been
released.


Click here to view the complete names of those who passed.


357 examinees took the exam but only 178 passed.

The Environmental Planner Board Exam 1st Placer is Cid Leandro
Miranda Jacobo. He obtained a passing percentage of 80.05%.
He is a graduate of Ateneo De Manila University in Quezon City.

UP-Diliman has the most number of examinees with 26. UP-Diliman
has a passing percentage of 92.31%.

     
        Related: Top Performing Schools


UST comes next with 20 examinees. It has a passing percentage of
60%.

132 Schools participated in the examination.

The Environmental Planner Board Exam was held in the
following Cities:
1.  Manila
2.  Cebu
3.  Davao
4.  Legazpi

The following are the members of the Board Of Environmental
Planning who gave the examination.
1. Josefina M. Ramos, Chairman
2. Lirio T. Abuyuan, Member
3. Dolores A. Endriga, Member

Registration for the issuance of Professional Identification Card
(ID) and Certificate of Registration will start on June 22, 2015.

Those who will register are required to bring the following:
1. Duly accomplished Oath Form or Panunumpa ng Propesyonal
2. Current Community Tax Certificate (cedula)
3. 1 piece passport size picture (colored with white background
   and complete name tag)
4. 2 sets of metered documentary stamps and 1 short brown
   envelope with name and profession and to pay the Initial
   Registration Fee of P600 and Annual Registration Fee of
   P450 for 2015-2018.

Successful examinees should personally register and sign in
the Roster of Registered Professionals.



Similar Acts As Evidence

/ No Comments
similar acts as evidence


General Rule
Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time
is not admissible to prove that he did or did not do the same or
a similar thing at another time.

Exceptions
Where the evidence or similar acts may prove:
1. A specific intent or knowledge
2. Identity
3. A plan, system or scheme;
4. A specific habit
5. Established customs, usages and the like

Reason For The Rule
To compel the defendant to meet charges of which the indictment
gives him no information, confuses him in his defense, raises a
variety of issue, and thus diverts the attention of the court
from the charge immediately before it. It is an application of
the principle that the evidence must be confined to the point in
issue in the case on trial. In other words, evidence of collateral
offenses must not be received as substantive evidence of the
offense on trial.

Section 34 is the second branch of the rule of res inter alios
acta and applies to both civil and criminal cases.

This section just like the first branch of the res inter alias
acta rule provided for in Sec. 28, Rule 130, is strictly enforced
in all cases where it is applicable.

Evidence of similar offenses involving the making of other false
representations, is admissible against the  prisoner to show that
he is aware of the falsity of the statements made by him in the
present case and that knowing them to be false, he made them
with intent to deceive.

Evidence of a number of crimes is admissible in a prosecution for
robbery where it has the tendency to identify the accused or show
his presence at the  scene of the crime but not where the evidence
is to  prove that the accused committed another crime wholly
independent of that for which he is on trial.

Previous acts of negligence, that is, selling barium chlorate
instead of potassium chlorate, is admissible to show knowledge
or intent.

In civil cases the rule as to proof of commission of an act by
showing the commission of similar acts by the same person at other
times and under other circumstances is the same as in a criminal
prosecution.

Is previous conduct admissible in evidence ? Explain.
Suggested Answer:
Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time
is not admissible to prove that he did or did not do the same
thing or a similar thing at another time.

Cruz, et al., vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 126713, prom.
July 27, 1998
Rationale Behind The Prohibition
Evidence of similar acts or occurrences compels the defendant
to meet allegations that are not mentioned in the complaint,
confuses him in his defense, raises a variety of irrelevant
issues, and diverts the attention of the court from the issues
immediately before it.

Exception or when previous conduct admissible in evidence:
1. Evidence that one did or did not do
2. a certain thing at one time
3. may be received in evidence to prove
   a. a specific intent or knowledge,
   b. identity, plan, system, scheme,
   c. habit, custom or usage, and the like.









Confession

/ No Comments
confession



Confession
Categorical acknowledgement of guilt made by an accused in a
criminal case, without any exculpatory statement or explanation.
If the accused admits having committed the act in question but
alleges a justification therefore, the same is merely an
admission.

There can also be a confession of judgment in a civil
case where the party expressly admits his liability.

Confession may either be oral or in writing and if in
writing, it need not be under oath.

The fact that the extrajudicial confession was made while the
accused was under arrest does not render it inadmissible where
the same was made and admitted prior to the 1973 Constitution.

A confession may either be judicial or extrajudicial.

Judicial Confession
One made before a court in which the case is pending and in
the course of legal proceedings therein and, by itself, can
sustain a conviction even in capital offenses.

Extrajudicial Confession
O in any other ne madeplace or occasion and cannot sustain a
conviction unless corroborated by evidence of the corpus delicti.
This section refers to extrajudicial confessions.

Requisites
1. The confession must involve an express and categorical
   acknowledgment of guilt.
2. The facts admitted must be constitutive of a criminal offense
3. The confession must have been given voluntarily
4. the confession must have been intelligently made, the accused
   realizing the importance or legal significance of this act.
5. There must have been no violation of Section 12, Art. III of
   the 1987 Constitution.

Confessions are presumed to be voluntary and the onus is on the
defense to prove that it was involuntary for having been obtained
by violence, intimidation, threat or promise of reward or leniency.

The Following Circumstances Have Been Held To Be Indicia Of The
Voluntariness Of A Confession:

      The confession contains details which the
      police could not have supplied or invented.

      The confession contains details which could
      have been known only to the accused.

      The confession contains statements which
      are exculpatory in nature.

      The confession contains corrections made by
      the accused in his handwriting or with his
      initials and which corrected facts are best
      known to the accused.

      The accused is sufficiently educated and
      aware of the consequences of his act.

      It was made in the presence of impartial
      witnesses with the accused acting normally
      on that occasion.

      There is lack of motive on the part of the
      investigators to extract a confession, with
      improbabilities and inconsistencies in the
      attempt of the accused to repudiate his
      confession.

      The accused questioned the voluntariness of
      the confession only for the first time at the
      trial of the case.

      The contents of the confession were affirmed
      by the accused in his voluntary participation
      in the reenactment of the crime, as shown by
      his silent acquiescence thereto.

      The facts contained in the confession were confirmed by
      other subsequent facts.

      After his confession, the accused was subjected to
      physical examination and there were no signs of
      maltreatment or the accused never complained thereof,
      but not where he failed to complain to the judge on a
      reasonable apprehension of further maltreatment as he
      was still in the custody of his torturers.

If the extrajudicial confession was obtained before the effectivity
of the 1973 Constitution on January 17, 1973, the same is
admissible in evidence even if the confessant was not informed
of his right to silence and to counsel as this constitutional
mandate should be given a prospective, and not a retrospective
effective and this doctrine applies even if the confession was
made while the accused was under arrest.

Under the current rule, the confession is inadmissible if there
is a violation of the accused’s right to counsel and to silence.

Where, before the statement containing the extrajudicial confession
of guilt was taken, the accused was asked whether he was familiar
with the provisions of then Section 20, Art. IV of the 1973
Constitution and he answered in the affirmative, and the statement
which he signed states that he had been apprised of his
constitutional rights with the warning that anything he would
say might be used for or against him in court, such extrajudicial
confession is admissible in evidence, especially where he thereafter
failed to impugn the same by not taking the witness stand although
assisted by counsel.

Where the verbal extrajudicial confession was made without
counsel, but it was spontaneously made by the accused immediately
after the assault, the same is admissible not under the confession
rule but as part of the res gestae, aside from the consideration
that no custodial investigation was involved.

Where the accused was merely told of his constitutional rights
and asked if he understood what he was told, but he was never
asked whether he wanted to exercise or avail himself of such
rights, his extrajudicial confession is inadmissible.

General Rule
The extrajudicial confession of an accused is binding only upon
himself and is not admissible against his co-accused.

Exceptions
1. If the latter impliedly acquiesced in or adopted said confession
   by not questioning its truthfulness, as where it was made in his
   presence and he did not remonstrate against his being implicated
   therein
2. If the accused persons voluntarily and independently executed
   identical confessions without conclusion, commonly known as
   interlocking confessions which confessions are corroborated by
   other evidence and without contradiction by the co-accused who
   was present.
3. If the accused persons voluntarily and independently executed
   identical confessions without conclusion, commonly known as
   interlocking confessions, which confessions are corroborated
   by other evidence, and without contradiction but the co-accused
   who was present.
4. Where the accused admitted the facts stated by the confessant
   after being apprised of such confession
5. If they are charged as co-conspirators of the crime which was
   confessed by one of the accused and said confession is used
   only as a corroborating evidence.
6. If they are charged as co-conspirators of the crime which was
   confessed by one of the accused and said confession is used
   only as a corroborating evidence.
7. Where the confession is used as circumstantial evidence to
   show the probability of participation by the co-conspirator.
8. Where the confessant testified for his co-defendant or
9. Where the co-conspirator’s extra judicial confession is
   corroborated by other evidence of record.

This section, as now amended, declares as admissible the
confession of the accused not only with respect to the offense
charged but also any offense necessarily included therein. On
the other hand, the 1987 Constitution specifically provides that,
illegal confessions and admissions are inadmissible against the
confessant or the admitter, hence they are admissible against the
persons who violated the constitutional prohibition against
obtaining illegal confessions or admissions.


Distinguish Extrajudicial Confessions From Admissions.
Suggested Answer: A confession, as distinguished from admission,
is a declaration made at any time by a person, voluntarily and
without compulsion or inducement, stating or acknowledging that
he had committed or participated in the commission of a crime.
The term, admission, on the other hand, is usually applied in
criminal cases to statements of fact by the accused which do not
directly involve an acknowledgment of the guilt of the
accused or of criminal intent to commit the offense with which he
is charged. (U.S. v. Corrales, 28 Phil. 365)

Question:
If an Accused executed a valid extrajudicial confession, may he
be convicted of the crime charges if the Prosecution adduced,
in addition to the confession, only circumstancial evidence to
prove corpus delicti? Explain.

Suggested Answer:
YES. Section 3 of Rule 133 states that a mere voluntary extrajudicial
confession uncorroborated by independent proof of the corpus delicti
is not sufficient to sustain a judgment of conviction. There must
be independent proof of the corpus delicti. The evidence may be
circumstantial but just the same, there should be some evidence
substantiating the confession. (US vs. De la Crux, 2 Phil. 148)

Question:
Would you answer to the immediately preceding question be the
same if the Prosecution adduced, an addition to the confession,
only substantial evidence to prove corpus delicti? Explain.

Suggested Answer:
YES. What is required is that some evidence apart from the
confession would tend to show that the crime was in fact
committed. This may be supplied by substantial evidence, or
that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might
accept as adequate to justify a conclusion.






















Admission By Silence

/ No Comments
admission by silence


An act/declaration made in the presence and within the
hearing/observation of a party who does/says nothing when
the act/declaration is such as naturally to call for
action/comment if not true, and when proper and possible for
him to do so, may be given in evidence against him.


The rule that the silence of the party against whom a claim or
a right is asserted may be construed as an admission of the
truth of the assertion rests on that instinct of our nature,
which leads us to resist an unfounded demand.

When Applicable
This rule applies in both criminal as well as in civil cases.

Requisites
1. He must have heard or observed the act or declaration of
   the other person
2. He must have had the opportunity to deny it
3. He must have understood the statement;
4. He must have an interest to object, such that he would
   naturally have done so, as if the statement was not true
5. The facts are within his knowledge
6. The fact admitted or the inference to be drawn from his
   silence is material to the issue.

Gabriel vs. Baens 56 Phil 314
Rationale Behind Rule On Admission By Silence
The reason is the recognized rule that if a man remains silent
when he ought to speak, he will be debarred from speaking later.
Qui tacet consitere videtur or silence means consent.

Exceptions To The Rule On Admission By Silence Or 
Instances Where There Is No Admission By Silence
1. Where no good reason exists for the party to comment on the
   act or declaration as when the act or declaration was not
   specifically directed to the party who remained silent.
   (80 A.L.R., Anno., 1272)
2. When the party had no opportunity to comment on the act or
   declaration.
   (People v. Ranario, 49 Phil. 220)
3. Where the act or declaration was made in the course of an
   official investigation.
   (People v. Tia Fong, 98 Phil. 609)
4. When silence is upon advice of counsel.
   (People v. Kozlowski, 115 A.L.R.1505)


The rule on admission by silence applies where a person was
surprised in the act or even if he is already in the custody
of the police.

Voluntary participation in a reenactment of the crime conducted
by the police is considered a tacit admission of complicity.

However, for a reenactment to be given any evidentiary weight,
the validity and efficacy of the confession must first be
shown. The implication of guilt is not derived from mere
silence but from appellant’s silent acquiescence in participating
in the reenactment of the crime.

The rule DOES NOT apply if the statements adverse to the party were
made in the course of an official investigation, as where he was
pointed out in the course of a custodial investigation and was
neither asked to reply nor comment on such imputations or
where the party had a justifiable reason to remain silent, as
where he was acting on advice of counsel, otherwise his right
to silence would be illusory.

No admission can be implied from silence where the failure to
answer was caused by constraint, or the party was not aware at
the time that he had an interest, or believed that he had no
interest, or was only indirectly affected, or where as the matter
was presented, he had no interest to object, for example, where
the statement was not addressed to him or was in his favor.

The same absence of relevancy occurs where an answer would be
unseemly interruption of orderly proceedings then in progress,
such as the delivery of a sermon, the taking of the deposition
or of testimony in open court or the discharge by a judge,
magistrate, counsel, or other person of his proper function in
court proceedings

A person under investigation for the commission of an offense has
the right to remain silent and to be informed of that right.

The rule applies to adverse statements in writing if the party was
carrying on a mutual correspondence with the declarant. However,
if there was no such mutual correspondence, the rule is relaxed
on the theory that while the party would have immediately
reacted by a denial of the statement were orally made in his
presence, such prompt response can generally not be expected if
the party still has to resort to a written reply.









PDEA Academy

/ No Comments
pdea academy



R.A.9165 otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs
Act of 2002 provides that the PDEA Academy shall be established
either in Baguio City or in Tagaytay City.

The PDEA Academy shall be responsible for the recruitment and
training of future PDEA Agents as well as other personnel.


        Related: Qualifications of a PDEA Agent


Aside from firearms training and self defense training, PDEA
recruits undertakes courses such as anti-illegal drug
investigation course and Airport Drug Interdiction course.

PDEA's core value's are taken from its own name PDEA
      Professional
      Dynamic
      Excellence-Driven
      Accountable

PDEA's screening process for agent applicants are very rigid.
They must undergo and pass the following:
1. Neuro-Psychological Examination
2. Medical Examination
3. Physical Examination
4. Agility Test
5. Background Investigation
6. Panel Interview

Those PDEA recruits undertaking training right now consist
mostly of Criminology and Nursing graduates. There are few
law graduates also.

The PDEA Academy is presently training its 7th batch of
recruits. There training started last March and will end 6
months thereafter.

The PDEA Academy is headed by a Superintendent. This position
requires the rank of a Director. The PDEA Director General
has the power to make the appointment.

PDEA Academy in its early years is housed in Baguio City. The
Training Center and Housing of its recruits are in the same
Compound as that of the NBI CAR Regional Office.

PDEA Academy presently is located in Camp General Mariano
N. Castañeda in Silang, Cavite. Remember that the law requires
that the PDEA Academy must be located in Baguio City or Tagaytay
City or any other suitable place. I do not know if the present
location is really suitable. The Baguio City training center
before is very ideal considering that the climate is conducive
to learning and it is located in the heart of Benguet. Benguet
province is one of the major producer of the most popular
prohibited drug in the Philippines which is the Marijuana.

PDEA do not recruit at regular interval. It recruits agents
and personnel as the need arises. Vacancies are posted in
its official website. Just check it out often if interested.

     
        Links are posted on this article


PDEA agent recruits training usually last for 6 months.

The entry level salary for agents is Salary Grade 11 under
the Salary Standardization law. Salary Grade 11 is more or
less P14,000 which is modest if you are a college graduate
and Civil Service Professional eligible.

The Dangerous Drugs Board is the one who has the power to provide
for the qualifications and requirements for PDEA recruits.

The PDEA serves as the implementing arm of the Dangerous Drugs
Board. It is similar to that of the DOJ with respect to the NBI.

The Dangerous Drugs Board which is under the office of the
President of the Republic of the Philippines is responsible
for policy making and strategy formulating for drug prevention
and control.