e. Previous Conduct as Evidence

Reason for Res Inter Alios Acta rule

The reason for the rule is that, on a principle of good faith and mutual convenience, a man’s own acts are binding upon himself, and are evidence against him. It would not only be inconvenient, but also manifestly unjust, that a man should be bound by the acts of mere unauthorized strangers; and that if a party ought not to be bound by the acts of strangers, neither ought their acts or conduct be used as evidence against him. (People v. Raquel, G.R. No. 119005, 1996)

Two branches of the res inter alios acta rule

• The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another (Rule 130, Sec. 29)
• Similar Acts Rule: Evidence of one’s previous conduct or similar acts at one time is not admissible to prove that he did or did not do the same or a similar act at another time (Rule 130, Sec. 35)

This rule only applies to extrajudicial declarations (People v. Raquel, G.R. No. 119006, 2006)

PREVIOUS CONDUCT 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 similar thing at another time. (Rule 130, Sec. 35)

Exceptions: - Similar acts may be received as evidence to prove.

• A specific intent or knowledge
• Identity
• Plan
• System
• Scheme
• Habit
• Custom
• Usage; and
• The like.

The prosecution may, however, introduce the robbery in January to prove the robbery in June to establish a modus operandi: that in both robberies, the robbers used explosives to gain entry into the bank, that the robbers threw tear gas while wearing gas masks; and that the robbers struck at the close of bank hours.

NOTE: Rule 130, Sec. 35 is the second branch of the res inter alios acta rule and applies to both civil and criminal cases.

Burden of proof: The offering party must allege and prove specific, repetitive conduct that might constitute evidence of habit. The examples offered in evidence to prove habit, or pattern of evidence must be numerous enough to base on inference of systematic conduct. Mere similarity of contracts does not present the kind of sufficiently similar circumstances to outweigh the danger of prejudice and confusion. (Boston Bank v. Manalo, G.R. No. 158149, 2006)

The general rule is that evidence of other offenses committed by the defendant is inadmissible. However, such evidence may be admitted where its purpose is to ascertain the knowledge and intent of the defendant to fix his negligence. Evidence which tends to explain or establish conduct of the accused or defendant is admissible unless it has no legitimate bearing on the issue (irrelevant) or where it is merely calculated to prejudice the accused. (US v. Pineda, G.R. No. L-12858, 1918)

While evidence of another crime is generally not admissible in another prosecution, it is admissible when it is otherwise relevant, as where it tends to identify the defendant as the perpetrator of the robbery charged, or tends to show his presence at the scene or in the vicinity of the crime at the time charged or when it is evidence of a circumstance connected with the crime. (People v. Irang, G.R. No. L-45179, 1937)

Similar Acts Rule in Special Laws

• RAPE SHIELD (SEC. 6, R.A. No. 8505): In prosecutions for rape, evidence of the complainant’s past sexual conduct, opinion thereof, or of his/her reputation shall not be admitted:

Exception: Unless, and only to the extent that the court finds that, such evidence is relevant and material to the case.

• RULE ON EXAMINATION OF CHILD WITNESSES (Sec. 30): The following evidence is not admissible in any criminal proceeding involving alleged sexual child abuse:
• Evidence offered to prove that the alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior; and
• Evidence offered to prove the sexual predisposition of the alleged victim

Exception: Evidence of specific instances of sexual behavior by the alleged victim to prove that a person, other than the accused, was the source of the semen, injury, or other physical evidence. (This is admissible.)