Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
It can either be proved by clear and convincing evidence or by a preponderance of the evidence. In this respect, affirmative defenses differ from ordinary defenses [claim of right, alibi, infancy, necessity, and self-defense (which is an affirmative defense at common law)], which the prosecution has the burden of disproving beyond a reasonable ...
The law of evidence, also known as the rules of evidence, encompasses the rules and legal principles that govern the proof of facts in a legal proceeding. These rules determine what evidence must or must not be considered by the trier of fact in reaching its decision.
Republic Act No. 386, the Civil Code of the Philippines (1949). Act No. 3815, the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines (1930). The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. Luis B. Reyes, The Revised Penal Code: Criminal Law 20 (1998, 14th ed.). Antonio L. Gregorio, Fundamentals of Criminal Law Review 50-51 (1997).
The sixth-century Digest of Justinian (22.3.2) provides, as a general rule of evidence: Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat [1] —"Proof lies on him who asserts, not on him who denies". [2] It is there attributed to the second and third century jurist Julius Paulus. It was introduced in Roman criminal law by emperor Antoninus Pius. [3]
some criminal act as the source of the injury. For example: Homicide: 1) An individual has died 2) as a result of action (or inaction) by another person. Larceny: 1) Property is missing 2) because it was stolen. In essence corpus delicti of crimes refers to evidence that a violation of law occurred; no literal 'body' is needed.
First enacted in 1930, it remains in effect today, despite several amendments thereto. It does not comprise a comprehensive compendium of all Philippine penal laws. The Revised Penal Code itself was enacted as Act No. 3815, and some Philippine criminal laws have been enacted outside of the Revised Penal Code as separate Republic Acts.
Compared to the criminal standard of “proof beyond a reasonable doubt,” the preponderance of the evidence standard is “a somewhat easier standard to meet.” [16] Preponderance of the evidence is also the standard of proof used in United States administrative law. In at least one case, there is a statutory definition of the standard.
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(a) provides that "Any error, defect, irregularity or variance which does not affect substantial rights shall be disregarded."