Impeachment by Prior Inconsistent Statement

8/12/2019 Impeachment by Prior Inconsistent Statement

1/8

FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 73751 September 24, 1986

ROMAN R. VILLALON, JR., ROMAN R.C. III, ROMAN .C.IV, ROMAN A.C. V., JOS! CLARO C. "#$ ARS!NIO RO%C., "&& '(r#"me$ VILLALON, petitioners,vs.)ON. IN*!RM!+IA*! A!LLA*! CO-R* O-R*)S!CIAL CAS!S +IVISION/, )ON. INOC!NCIO +.MALIAMAN R!SI+ING J-+G! O R!GIONAL *RIALCO-R*, 0RANC) I A* SAN !RNAN+O, LA -NION/,CA*ALINA N!VAL V+A. +! !0-IA, C)IL+R!N OA*ROCINIO !0-IA J-S*INA, MARIANO, !LICI+A+,RANCISCO, !-G!NIA, MARIA, MARCIANA, "#$SIM!ON, "&& '(r#"me$ !0-IA/, respondents.

R E S O L U T I O N

M!L!NCIO)!RR!RA, J.:

On May 16, 1979, Civil Case No. 799 !or "#nn$l%ent o!&eed o! #'sol$te Sale, Re(overy o! )ossession and&a%a*es" +as !iled 'y private respondent Catalina NE#Lda. de E'$i-a, %oter o! te oter private respondents alls$rna%ed E'$i-a, a*ainst petitioner #tty. Ro%an R. illalon,/r. 0'rie!ly, petitioner illalon and is sons, 'e!ore te ten

Co$rt o! 2irst Instan(e o! La Union 0te Trial Co$rt, !or tere(overy o! a par(el o! land lo(ated at Ur'i-tondo, San /$an.La Union.

Te property involved +as also te s$'3e(t o! a &is'ar%entCase 0#d%. Case No. 1455 previo$sly !iled on /$ly , 197+it tis Co$rt 'y private respondent 2ran(is(o EUI8#,(ar*in* petitioner illalon +it !alsi!i(ation o! a deed o!

a'sol$te sale o! tat property in is and is sons !avor, '$t+i( petitioner illalon (lai%ed to ave 'een is (ontin*ent!ee !or te pro!essional servi(es e ad rendered toEUI8#s parents !or s$((ess!$lly andlin* Civil Case No.1415 entitled ")a$lino E'$i-a, et all vs. )atro(inio E'$i-a, et

al." 'e!ore te ten Co$rt o! 2irst Instan(e o! La Union,ran( II. Te &is'ar%ent Case +as re!erred 'y tis Co$rt tote O!!i(e o! te Soli(itor :eneral !or investi*ation, report andre(o%%endation +ere testi%onial eviden(e +as re(eived.Te (ase still pends tereat.

In te (o$rse o! te trial o! te Civil Case, petitionersintrod$(ed in eviden(e te testi%onies o! so%e o! te privaterespondents, na%ely, NE#L, EUI8#, and /$stina E'$i-aSan /$an 0NE#L, et als., in te &is'ar%ent Case !or tep$rpose o! i%pea(in* teir testi%onies in te Civil Case.

)rivate respondents !iled a Motion to Stri;e !ro% te re(ordso! te Civil Case all %atters relatin* to te pro(eedin*s in te&is'ar%ent Case. Over petitioners opposition, on Septe%'er

?@ERE2ORE, !indin* te %otion to 'e +ellAta;en, and as prayed !or in te %otion, all dire(tre!eren(es to te pro(eedin*s in te dis'ar%ent

(ase a*ainst #tty. illalon, /r. are ere'yordered stri;in* 0si( o$t !ro% te re(ords anden(e!ort, !$rter re!eren(es to s$( %attersare 'arred.

Te Trial Co$rt opined tat te ad%ission o! te (ontestedeviden(e +o$ld violate Se(tion 1


2/8

"is not at li'erty to +aive te privile*e o! (on!identiality" o! tepro(eedin*s in te &is'ar%ent Case (onsiderin* te p$'li(interest involved "even i! it +o$ld serve is interest," and tatSe(tion 1


3/8

o((asions tey ad %ade state%ents in(onsistent +it testate%ents %ade d$rin* te trial, despite te !a(t tat s$(state%ents are %aterial to te iss$es in te Civil Case. Tes$'3e(t %atter involved in te dis'ar%ent pro(eedin*s i.e.,te alle*ed !alsi!i(ation o! te deed o! a'sol$te sale in

petitioners !avor, is te sa%e iss$e raised in te Civil Case+erein te ann$l%ent o! te said deed o! a'sol$te sale isso$*t.

#d%ittedly, said Order is interlo($tory in (ara(ter. @o+ever,sin(e it +as iss$ed in patent a'$se o! dis(retion, (ertiorarilies. (ertiorari %ay 'e availed o! to (ontest an interlo($toryorder to (orre(t a patent a'$se o! dis(retion 'y te lo+er

Co$rt in iss$in* te sa%e. 3It %ay also 'e applied !or +ente 'roader interests o! 3$sti(e so re=$ire or +en ordinary

appeal is not an ade=$ate re%edy,

4

as in tis (ase. Te o!!ero! eviden(e, s$**ested 'y respondent #ppellate Co$rt as are%edy open to petitioners, +ile pro(ed$rally (orre(t, +o$ld'e inade=$ate and ine!!e(tive !or p$rposes o! i%pea(%ent.Te 'roader interests o! 3$sti(e +o$ld ten re=$ire tatpetitioners 'e *iven s$!!i(ient latit$de to present and proveteir i%pea(in* eviden(e !or 3$di(ial appre(iation.

?ile pro(eedin*s a*ainst attorneys so$ld, indeed, 'eprivate and (on!idential e(ept !or te !inal order +i( sall

'e %ade p$'li(, 5 tat (on!identiality is a privile*ed ri*t

+i( %ay 'e +aived 'y te very la+yer in +o% and !or teprote(tion o! +ose personal and pro!essional rep$tation it isvested, p$rs$ant to te *eneral prin(iple tat ri*ts %ay 'e+aived $nless te +aiver is (ontrary to p$'li( poli(y, a%on*

oters. 6 In !a(t, te Co$rt also notes tat even privaterespondents (o$nsel to$(ed on so%e %atters testi!ied to 'yNE#L in te dis'ar%ent pro(eedin*s and +i( +ere te

s$'3e(t o! (ross ea%ination.

#CCOR&IN:LF, te Co$rt ere'y SETS #SI&E respondent#ppellate Co$rts &e(ision dated 2e'r$ary B, 1956, andResol$tion dated 2e'r$ary 19, 1956, and dire(ts te Re*ionalTrial Co$rt o! La Union, at San 2ernando, to allo+ te

testi%onies o! private respondents 0plainti!!s 'elo+, %orespe(i!i(ally tose o! Catalina Neval da. de E'$i-a,2ran(is(o E'$i-a and /$stina E'$i-a San /$an, *iven in#d%inistrative Case No. 1455 and all oter re!eren(estereto to re%ain in te re(ords o! Civil Case No. 799entitled "Catalina Neval da. de E'$i-a, )lainti!!, vers$sRo%an R. illalon, /r., et al., &e!endantsD Cildren o!)atro(inio E'$i-a> /$stina, et al., all s$rna%ed E'$i-aIntervenors. "

Te Te%porary Restrainin* Order ereto!ore iss$ed is ere'yli!ted.

SO OR&ERE&.

Yap (Chairman), Narvasa, Paras, * and e!iciano, ""., conc#r.

Cr#$, "., is on !eave.

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 26708. September 29, 1927.]

THE EO!E OF THE HI!IINE IS!"NDS,Plaintiff-Appellee, #. "!E$O RES"%"!,Defendant-Appellant.

&e'()*+e- G. I'+o + V*/ete Sotto orAppellant.

3 Impeachment by Prior Inconsistent Statement


4/8

"ttoreGeer+' $+r+*'+ orAppellee.

S3!!"%4S

1. CRIMIN! PROC"D#R"$ "VID"NC"$ %ITN"SS"S. & The

mere 'act that the (itness (as an acc)se*+ e,c-)*e* 'rom the

in'ormation in or*er to be )se* as a (itness 'or the prosec)tion+*oes not preent him 'rom te--in/ the tr)th+ especia--y in the

absence o' proo' sho(in/ his interest in testi'yin/ a/ainst theAppellant.

2. ID.$ ID.$ ID.$ CONTRDICTION IN T"STIMON0. & Theapparent contra*iction bet(een the testimony /ien by the (itness

in the Co)rt o' First Instance an* that /ien in the )stice o' thepeace co)rt+ is not s)''icient to *iscre*it it+ i' he (as not /ien

amp-e opport)nity to e,p-ain it in the Co)rt o' First Instance. Themere presentation o' the *oc)ment containin/ sai* *ec-aration ma*e

in the )stice o' the peace co)rt is not s)''icient$ it m)st be rea* to

him in or*er that he may e,p-ain the *iscrepancies note*. #. S. V.4a-)yot+ 56 Phi-.+ 37.8

3. ID.$ ID.$ CC#S"D9S COND#CT. & The 'act that the acc)se*

(ent to the *ecease*9s ho)se an* assiste* in the preparations o' his

')nera-+ is not incompatib-e (ith his /)i-t.

D E 5 I S I O N

VI!!"&OR,J.

The ei*ence sho(s+ as an in*isp)tab-e 'act+ that in the ear-y

mornin/ o' pri- 2:+ 1;27+ one Primo Or*i< *ie* at his o(n home

in the barrio o' 4o/o+ m)nicipa-ity o' Maasin+ !eyte+ 'rom thee''ects o' an interna- hemorrha/e ca)se* by a sharp (o)n* in the

-e't -)n/+ as appears 'rom the *eath certi'icate+ mar=e* ",hibit .

s a conse>)ence o' this+ an in'ormation (as 'i-e* (ith the Co)rt o'

First Instance o' !eyte in Maasin+ rea*in/ as 'o--o(s?/c?chanrob-es.com.ph

@That on or abo)t pri- 2:+ 1;27+ in the m)nicipa-ity o' Maasin+Proince o' !eyte+ Phi-ippine Is-an*s+ the sai* acc)se*+ (i--')--y+

)n-a(')--y an* crimina--y+ (ith treachery an* ei*ent

preme*itation+ conspirin/ amon/st themse-es an* actin/ incommon a/reement an* ta=in/ a*anta/e o' noct)rnity+ m)t)a--y

ai*in/ each other+ opene* the (in*o( an* =i--e* Primo Or*i< bymeans o' a shot 'rom a 9Smith9 3 ca-iber reo-er+ in'-ictin/ a

(o)n* in the )pper part o' the -e't nipp-e+ (hich pro*)ce* theinstant *eath o' sai* Primo Or*i)ittin/ the acc)se*-eo Resaba- on the /ro)n* o' reasonab-e *o)bt.

5 Impeachment by Prior Inconsistent Statement


5/8

The ttorneyBenera- in t)rn as=s that the )*/ment ren*ere*+bein/ in accor*ance (ith the ei*ence an* the -a(+ be a''irme* (ith

the costs a/ainst theAppellant.

B-icerio Orit testi'ie* that on the mornin/ o' pri- 2:+ 1;27+ the

acc)se*+ arme* (ith a reo-er+ inite* him to Primo Or*i


6/8

The *e'ense ar/)es that B-icerio Orit is not a cre*ib-e (itness+

beca)se o' his hain/ been e,c-)*e* 'rom the in'ormation to be)se* as a (itness 'or the prosec)tion$ an*+ beca)se+ moreoer+ o'

the contra*ictions in his testimony at the pre-iminary inesti/ation

an* *)rin/ the tria-. %e are o' the opinion that the mere 'act o'hain/ been e,c-)*e* 'rom the in'ormation to be )se* as a (itness

'or the Boernment+ *oes not preent this (itness 'rom te--in/ thetr)th in this case+ especia--y in the absence o' proo' sho(in/ the

interest he mi/ht possib-y hae in testi'yin/ a/ainst the acc)se*.

Neither is the apparent contra*iction (hich may be note* in his*ec-arations be'ore the co)rt o' the )stice o' the peace+ an* be'ore

the co)rt o' 'irst instance s)''icient to *iscre*it his testimony+ 'orthe simp-e reason that this (itness (as not /ien amp-e opport)nity+

by a rea*in/ to him o' his *ec-arations be'ore the co)rt o' the )sticeo' the peace. to e,p-ain the *iscrepancies note* by co)nse- 'or the

acc)se*. The mere presentation o' ",hibit 1+ (itho)t sai*

*ec-aration hain/ been rea* to the (itness (hi-e he testi'ie* in theCo)rt o' First Instance+ is no /ro)n* 'or impeachin/ his testimony.

#. S. . 4a-)yot+ 56 Phi-.+ 3:+ 567.8

The *e'ense a-so impeaches Carme-o Or*i)a-i'ie* bytreachery 'or+ in the commission o' the crime+ the acc)se* emp-oye*

(ays+ means+ an* 'orms that ten*e* *irect-y an* especia--y to ass)reit+ (itho)t ris= to his person 'rom any *e'ense the assa)-te* party

mi/ht ma=e.

The tria- co)rt impose* the *eath pena-ty on the acc)se*+ by reason

o' the a//raatin/ circ)mstances o' ei*ent preme*itation+noct)rnity+ an* *(e--in/+ (itho)t any miti/atin/ circ)mstances to

o''set them. On this point the opinion o' the co)rt is *ii*e*+ (iththe res)-t that (e cannot impose on the acc)se* the ma,im)m

pena-ty+ or *eath+ in accor*ance (ith ct No. 3165+ beca)se the

ote o' the members o' the co)rt (ho too= part in the *isc)ssion o'the case+ as to the )stice o' the imposition o' the *eath pena-ty (as

not )nanimo)s. n*+ it bein/ so+ it is )nnecessary to *isc)ss in*etai- the presence o' the sai* a//raatin/ circ)mstances.

In irt)e (hereo'+ (e are o' the opinion+ an* so ho-*+ that theacc)se* is /)i-ty o' the crime o' m)r*er+ committe* (ith treachery+

on the person o' Primo Or*i


7/8

7 F.2 1191 198:

4NITED ST"TES o "mer*/+, '+*t*"ppe''ee,

#.5'*to ;E%STER, Dee+t"ppe''+t.

No. 221;:.

4*te St+te- 5o)rt o "ppe+'-, Se#et< 5*r/)*t.

r/)e* an)ary :+ 1;5.

Deci*e* May ;+ 1;5.

11;2G11;2 Richar* Doy-e+ Dani--e+ I--.+ 'or *e'en*antappe--ant.

Frances C. A)-in+ sst. #.S. tty.+ Dani--e+ I--.+ 'or p-ainti''

appe--ee.

4e'ore "SCA4CA+ POSN"R an* COFF"0+ Circ)it )*/es.

POSN"R+ Circ)it )*/e.

The *e'en*ant+ %ebster+ (as conicte* o' ai*in/ an* abettin/ the

robbery o' a 'e*era--y ins)re* ban= an* receiin/ sto-en ban= ')n*s+

(as sentence* to nine years in prison+ an* appea-s. On-y one iss)enee* be *isc)sse*. The /oernment ca--e* the ban= robber+ Hin/

(ho ha* p-ea*e* /)i-ty an* been /ien a -on/ prison term8+ as a(itness a/ainst %ebster. Hin/ /ae testimony that i' be-iee* (o)-*

hae e,c)-pate* the *e'en*ant+ (here)pon the /oernmentintro*)ce* prior inconsistent statements that Hin/ ha* /ien the

F4I inc)-patin/ %ebster. -tho)/h the co)rt instr)cte* the )ry that

it co)-* consi*er the statements on-y 'or p)rposes o' impeachment+%ebster ar/)es that this (as not /oo* eno)/h+ that the /oernment

sho)-* not be a--o(e* to /et ina*missib-e ei*ence be'ore the )ryby ca--in/ a hosti-e (itness an* then )sin/ his o)to'co)rt

statements+ (hich (o)-* other(ise be ina*missib-e hearsay+ to

impeach him.

R)-e 76 o' the Fe*era- R)-es o' "i*ence proi*es? @The

cre*ibi-ity o' a (itness may be attac=e* by any party+ inc-)*in/ the

party ca--in/ him.@ 4)t it (o)-* be an ab)se o' the r)-e+ in acrimina- case+ 'or the prosec)tion to ca-- a (itness that it =ne(

(o)-* not /ie it )se')- ei*ence+ )st so it co)-* intro*)ce hearsayei*ence a/ainst the *e'en*ant in the hope that the )ry (o)-* miss

the s)bt-e *istinction bet(een impeachment an* s)bstantie

ei*ence & or+ i' it *i*nJt miss it+ (o)-* i/nore it. The p)rpose(o)-* not be to impeach the (itness b)t to p)t in hearsay as

s)bstantie ei*ence a/ainst the *e'en*ant+ (hich R)-e 76 *oesnot contemp-ate or a)thori


8/8

)n*erMorlang,to the a*mission o' Hin/Js prior inconsistentstatements.

%ebster )r/es )s+ on the a)thority o' Braham+ Aan*boo= o' Fe*era-

"i*ence K 76.3 1;1 an* S)pp.1;38+ to /o beyon* the /oo*'aith stan*ar* an* ho-* that the /oernment may not impeach a

(itness (ith his prior inconsistent statements )n-ess it is s)rprise*an* harme* by the (itnessJs testimony. 4)t (e thin= it (o)-* be a

mista=e to /ra't s)ch a re>)irement to R)-e 76+ een i' s)ch a /ra't

(o)-* be (ithin the po(er o' )*icia- interpretation o' the r)-e.S)ppose the /oernment ca--e* an a*erse (itness that it tho)/ht

(o)-* /ie ei*ence both he-p')- an* harm')- to it+ b)t it a-sotho)/ht that the harm')- aspect co)-* be n)--i'ie* by intro*)cin/ the

(itnessJs prior inconsistent statement. s there (o)-* be no e-emento' s)rprise+ Pro'essor Braham (o)-* 'orbi* the intro*)ction o' the

prior statements$ yet (e are at a -oss to )n*erstan* (hy the

/oernment sho)-* be p)t to the choice bet(een the Scy--a o''or/oin/ impeachment an* the Charyb*is o' not ca--in/ at a-- a

(itness 'rom (hom it e,pects to e-icit /en)ine-y he-p')- ei*ence.The /oo*'aith stan*ar* stri=es a better ba-ance$ an* it is a-(ays

open to the *e'en*ant to ar/)e that the probatie a-)e o' the

ei*ence o''ere* to impeach the (itness is c-ear-y o)t(ei/he* bythe pre)*icia- impact it mi/ht hae on the )ry+ beca)se the )ry

(o)-* hae *i''ic)-ty con'inin/ )se o' the ei*ence toimpeachment. See Fe*.R."i*. 563.

The )*/ment o' coniction is

FFIRM"D.

Impeachment by Prior Inconsistent Statement

Impeachment by Prior Inconsistent Statement

Documents

Transcript of Impeachment by Prior Inconsistent Statement