2018 BAR EXAMINATIONS
CRIMINAL LAW
I serve as a lookout for Red and Rod while the
Roberto and Ricardo have had a long-
standing dispute regarding conflicting claims
over the ownership of a parcel of land. One
night, Roberto was so enraged that he
decided to kill Ricardo. Roberto asked his best
friend, Rafael, to lend him a gun and drive him
to Ricardo's house. Rafael knew about
Roberto's plan to kill Ricardo, but agreed to
lend him a gun nevertheless. Rafael also
drove Roberto to the street corner nearest the
house of Ricardo. Rafael waited for him there,
until the task had been accomplished, so that
he could drive Roberto to the next town to
evade arrest. Roberto also asked another
friend, Ruel, to stand guard outside Ricardo's
house, for the purpose of warning him in case
there was any danger or possible witnesses,
and to keep other persons away from the
vicinity. All three - Roberto, Rafael and Ruel -
agreed to the plan and their respective roles.
On the agreed date, Rafael drove Roberto
and Ruel to the nearest corner near Ricardo's
house. Roberto and Ruel walked about 50
meters where Ruel took his post as guard,
and Roberto walked about five (5) meters
more, aimed the gun at Ricardo's bedroom,
and peppered it with bullets. When he thought
that he had accomplished his plan, Roberto
ran away, followed by Ruel, and together they
rode in Rafael's car where they drove to the
next town to spend the night there. It turned
out that Ricardo was out of town when the
incident happened, and no one was in his
room at the time it was peppered with bullets.
Thus, no one was killed or injured during the
incident.
(a) Was a crime committed? If yes,
what is/are the crime/s committed
(2.5%); and
(b) If a crime was committed, what is
the degree of participation of Roberto,
Rafael, and Ruel? (2.5%)
II
Rico, a hit man, positioned himself at the
rooftop of a nearby building of a bank, to
two were robbing the bank, as the three of
them had previously planned. Ramiro, a
policeman, responded to the reported robbery.
Rico saw Ramiro and, to eliminate the danger
of Red and Rod being caught, pulled the
trigger of his rifle, intending to kill Ramiro. He
missed as Ramiro slipped and fell down to the
ground. Instead, a woman depositor who was
coming out of the bank was fatally shot. After
their apprehension, Rico, Red, and Rod were
charged with the special complex crime of
robbery with homicide. Rico's defense was
that he never intended to shoot and kill the
woman, only Ramiro. Red and Rod's defense
was that they were not responsible for the
death of the woman as they had no
participation therein.
(a) Is Rico's defense meritorious?
(2.5%)
(b) Is Red and Rod's defense
meritorious? (2.5%)
III
On February 5, 2017, Rho Rio Fraternity held
initiation rites. Present were: (i) Redmont, the
Lord Chancellor and head of the fraternity; (ii)
ten (10) members, one (1) of whom was Ric,
and (iii) five (5) neophytes, one (1) of whom
was Ronald. Absent were: (i) Rollie, the
fraternity's Vice Chancellor and who actually
planned the initiation; and (ii) Ronnie, the
owner of the house where the initiation was
conducted.
Due to the severe beating suffered by Ronald
on that occasion, he lost consciousness and
was brought to the nearest hospital by
Redmont and Ric. However, Ronald was
declared dead on arrival at the hospital.
During the investigation of the case, it was
found out that, although Ronald really wanted
to join the fraternity because his father is also
a member of the same fraternity, it was his
best friend Ric who ultimately convinced him
to join the fraternity and, as a prerequisite
thereto, undergo initiation. It was also shown
that Redmont and Ric did not actually
participate in the beating of the neophytes
(hazing). The two (2) either merely watched
the hazing or helped in preparing food. And,
lastly, two (2) days prior thereto, Ronnie
texted Rollie that the fraternity may use his
house as the venue for the planned initiation.
Aside from those who actually participated in
the hazing, Redmont, Rollie, Ric, and Ronnie
were criminally charged for the hazing of
Ronald that resulted in the latter's death.
(a) Are the four criminally liable?
(2.5%)
(b) Can all those criminally charged be
exonerated upon proof that Ronald,
knowing the risks, voluntarily
submitted himself to the initiation? Will
the absence of proof that the accused
intended to kill the victim affect their
liability? (2.5%)
IV
On the way home from work, Rica lost her
necklace to a snatcher. A week later, she saw
what looked like her necklace on display in a
jewelry store in Raon. Believing that the
necklace on display was the same necklace
snatched from her the week before, she
surreptitiously took the necklace without the
knowledge and consent of the store owner.
Later, the loss of the necklace was
discovered, and Rica was shown on the
CCTV camera of the store as the culprit.
Accordingly, Rica was charged with theft of
the necklace. Rica raised the defense that she
could not be guilty as charged because she
was the owner of the necklace and that the
element of intent to gain was lacking.
What should be the verdict if:
(a) The necklace is proven to be
owned by Rica? (2.5%)
(b) It is proven that the store acquired
the necklace from another person who
was the real owner of the necklace?
(2.5%)
V
With a promise of reward, Robert asked Romy
to bring him a young girl that he (Robert) can
have carnal knowledge with. Romy agreed,
seized an eight-year old girl and brought her
to Robert. After receiving his reward, Romy
left while Robert proceeded to have carnal
knowledge with the girl.
(a) For what felony may Robert and
Romy be charged? (2.5%)
(b) Will your answer in (a) be the
same if the victim is a 15-year old lass
who was enticed, through cunning and
deceit of Romy, to voluntarily go to the
house of Robert where the latter
subsequently had carnal knowledge
with her? (2.5%)
VI
A group of homeless and destitute persons
invaded and occupied the houses built by the
National Housing Authority (NHA) for certain
military personnel. To gain entry to the
houses, the group intimidated the security
guards posted at the entrance gate with the
firearms they were carrying and destroyed the
padlocks of the doors of the houses with the
use of crowbars and hammers. They claimed
that they would occupy the houses and live
therein because the houses were idle and
they were entitled to free housing from the
government.
For the reason that the houses were already
awarded to military personnel who have been
found to have fully complied with the
requirements for the award thereof, NHA
demanded the group to vacate within ten (10)
days from notice the houses they occupied
and were still occupying. Despite the lapse of
the deadline, the group refused to vacate the
houses in question.
What is the criminal liability of the members of
the group, if any, for their actions? (5%)
VII
Robbie and Rannie are both inmates of the
National Penitentiary, serving the maximum
penalty for robbery which they committed
some years before and for which they have
been sentenced by final judgment. One day,
Robbie tried to collect money owed by
Rannie. Rannie insisted that he did not owe
Robbie anything, and after a shouting
episode, Rannie kicked Robbie in the
stomach. Robbie fell to the ground in pain,
and Rannie left him to go to the toilet to
relieve himself. As Rannie was opening the
door to the toilet and with his back turned
against Robbie, Robbie stabbed him in the
back with a bladed weapon that he had
concealed in his waist. Hurt, Rannie ran to the
nearest "kubol" where he fell. Robbie ran after
him· and, while Rannie was lying on the
ground, Robbie continued to stab him,
inflicting a total of 15 stab wounds. He died on
the spot. Robbie immediately surrendered to
the Chief Warden. When prosecuted for the
murder of Rannie, Robbie raised provocation
and voluntary surrender as mitigating
circumstances. The prosecution, on the other
hand, claimed that there was treachery in the
commission of the crime.
(a) Is Robbie a recidivist, or a quasi-
recidivist? (2.5%)
(b) Can the mitigating circumstances
raised by Robbie, if proven, lower the
penalty for the crime committed?
(2.5%)
VIII
Randy was prosecuted for forcible abduction
attended by the aggravating circumstance of
recidivism. After trial, the court held that the
prosecutor was able to prove the charge.
Nonetheless, it appreciated in favor of Randy,
on the basis of the defense's evidence, the
mitigating circumstances of voluntary
surrender, uncontrollable fear, and
provocation. Under Art. 342 of the Revised
Penal Code (RPC), the penalty for forcible
abduction is reclusion temporal.
Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law,
what penalty should be imposed on Randy?
(5%)
IX
Rashid asked Rene to lend him PhP50,000,
payable in six (6) months and, as payment for
the loan, Rashid issued a postdated check for
the said amount plus the agreed interest.
Rashid assured Rene that the account would
have sufficient funds on maturity date. On that
date, Rene presented the check to the drawee
bank for payment but it was dishonored for the
reason that it was drawn against insufficient
funds (DAIF).
Rene sent Rashid a timely notice of dishonor
of the check and demanded the latter to make
good the same within five (5) days from
notice. After the lapse of the five (5)-day
notice, Rene redeposited the check with the
drawee bank but it was again dishonored for
the same reason, i.e., DAIF. Rene thereafter
filed two (2) separate criminal actions against
Rashid: (1) Estafa under Art. 315(2)(d) of the
RPC, as amended by R.A. No.
4885, i.e, estafa committed by postdating a
check, or issuing a check in payment of an
obligation without sufficient funds in the bank;
and (2) Violation of B.P. 22 or the Bouncing
Checks Law.
(a) Can he be held liable under both
actions? (2.5%)
(b) If the check is presented for
payment after four (4) months, but
before it becomes stale, can the two
actions still proceed? (2.5%)
X
Rafa caught his wife, Rachel, in the act of
having sexual intercourse with Rocco in the
maid's room of their own house. Rafa shot
both lovers in the chest, but they survived.
Rafa charged Rachel and Rocco with
adultery, while Rachel and Rocco charged
Rafa with frustrated parricide and frustrated
homicide.
In the adultery case, Rachel and Rocco raised
the defense that Rafa and Rachel, prior to the
incident in question, executed a notarized
document whereby they agreed to live
separately and allowed each of them to get a
new partner and live with anyone of their
choice as husband and wife. This document
was executed after Rachel discovered that
Rafa was cohabiting with another woman.
Thus, they also raised the defense of in pari
delicto. In the frustrated parricide and
frustrated homicide cases, Rafa raised the
defense that, having caught them in flagrante
delicto, he has no criminal liability.
Assuming that all defenses have been
proven:
(a) Will the action for adultery
prosper? (2.5%)
(b) Will the actions for frustrated
parricide and frustrated homicide
prosper? (2.5%)
XI
Wielding loose firearms, Rene and Roan held
up a bank. After taking the bank's money, the
robbers ran towards their getaway car,
pursued by the bank security guards. As the
security guards were closing in on the
robbers, the two fired their firearms at the
pursuing security guards. As a result, one of
the security guards was hit on the head
causing his immediate death.
For the taking of the bank's money and killing
of the security guard with the use of loose
firearms, the robbers were charged in court in
two separate informations, one for robbery
with homicide attended by the aggravating
circumstance of use of loose firearms, and the
other for illegal possession of firearms.
Are the indictments correct? (5%)
XII
Orphaned when still an infant, Rocky lived
under the care of his grandmother Rosario.
Now 18, Rocky entered Rosario's bedroom
who was then outside doing her daily
marketing. He ransacked the bedroom and
took Rosario's money and valuables
amounting to PhP100,000.
When Rosario came home, she found her
room in disarray, and her money and
valuables gone. She confronted Rocky, who
confessed to taking the money and valuables
in order to pay his debts.
(a) What crime, if any, did Rocky
commit? (2.5%)
(b) Does he incur criminal and/or civil
liability? (2.5%)
XIII
The brothers Roberto and Ricardo Ratute,
both Filipino citizens, led a group of armed
men in seizing a southern island in the
Philippines, and declaring war against the duly
constituted government of the country. The
Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), led by
its Chief of Staff, General Riturban, responded
and a full scale war ensued between the AFP
and the armed men led by the brothers. The
armed conflict raged for months.
When the brothers-led armed men were
running out of supplies, Ricalde, also a
Filipino, and a good friend and supporter of
the Ratute brothers, was tasked to leave for
abroad in order to solicit arms and funding for
the cash-strapped brothers. He was able to
travel to Rwanda, and there he met with
Riboli, a citizen and resident of Rwanda, who
agreed to help the brothers by raising funds
internationally, and to send them to the Ratute
brothers in order to aid them in their armed
struggle against the Philippine government.
Before Ricalde and Riboli could complete their
fund-raising activities for the brothers, the AFP
was able to reclaim- the island and defeat the
Ratute-led uprising.
Ricalde and Riboli were charged with
conspiracy to commit treason. During the
hearing of the two cases, the government only
presented as witness, General Riturban, who
testified on the activities of the Ratute
brothers, Ricalde, and Riboli.
(a) Can Ricalde and Riboli be
convicted of the crime of conspiracy to
commit treason? (2.5%)
(b) Will the testimony of General
Riturban, assuming he can testify on
acts within his personal knowledge, be
sufficient to convict the Ratute
brothers, Ricalde, and Riboli? (2.5%)
XIV
Robin and Rowell are best friends and have
been classmates since grade school. When
the boys graduated from high school, their
parents gifted them with a trip to Amsterdam,
all expenses paid. At age 16, this was their
first European trip. Thrilled with a sense of
freedom, they decided to try what Amsterdam
was known for. One night, they scampered
out of their hotel room, went to the De Wallen,
better known as the Red-light District of
Amsterdam. There, they went to a "coffee
shop" which sells only drinks and various
items made from opium poppy, cannabis, and
marijuana, all of which are legal in
Amsterdam. They represented themselves to
be of age, and were served, and took shots of,
cannabis and marijuana products. They
indulged in these products the whole night,
even if it was their first time to try them.
Before returning to Manila, they bought a
dozen lollipops laced with cannabis, as
souvenir and "pasalubong" for their friends.
They were accosted at the Manila
International Airport and were charged with
importation of dangerous drugs under the
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002. They were also charged with use of
dangerous drugs after pictures of them in the
"coffee shop" in Amsterdam were posted on
Facebook, showing them smoking and taking
shots of a whole menu of cannabis and
marijuana products. Their own captions on
their Facebook posts clearly admitted that
they were using the dangerous products. The
pictures were posted by them through Private
Messenger (PM) only for their close friends,
but Roccino, the older brother of one of their
best friends, was able to get hold of his
younger brother's password, and without
authority from his brother, accessed his PM
and shared Robin and Rowell's Amsterdam
photos on Facebook.
(a) Can Robin and Rowell be
prosecuted for use of dangerous
drugs for their one-night use of these
products in Amsterdam? (2.5%)
(b) Can they be prosecuted for
importation of dangerous drugs?
(2.5%)
(c) If found liable under either (a) or
(b) above, what is the penalty that
may be imposed on them? (2.5%)
(d) Can Roccino be prosecuted for the
act of accessing and sharing on
Facebook the private pictures sent by
PM to his brother? If yes, for what
crime? (2.5%)
XV
During the presentation of the prosecution's
evidence, Reichter was called to the witness
stand with the stated purpose that he would
testify that his wife Rima had shot him in the
stomach with a .38 caliber pistol, resulting in
near fatal injuries. Upon objection of the
defense on the ground of the marital
disqualification rule, the presiding judge
(Judge Rossano) disallowed Reichter from
testifying in the case. Its motion for
reconsideration having been denied, the
People of the Philippines went up
on certiorari to the Court of Appeals (CA)
questioning Judge Rossano's ruling.
After due proceedings, the CA rendered
judgment declaring Judge Rossano's ruling
void ab initio for having been made with grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction, and directing Judge
Rossano to allow Reichter to testify in the
criminal case for the stated purpose. This is
based on the fact that the marital privilege rule
does not apply where a spouse committed the
crime against the other.
As the CA decision became final and
executory, the criminal case before the RTC
was calendared for trial. At the scheduled trial,
the prosecution called Reichter to the witness
stand in order to testify on the same matter it
earlier announced. The defense objected on
the ground that the CA erred in its disposition
of the certiorari case. Judge Rossano
sustained the objection and again disallowed
Reichter from testifying in the criminal case.
Repeated pleas from the prosecution for
Judge Rossano to reconsider his ruling and to
allow Reichter to testify fell on deaf ears.
May Judge Rossano be convicted of a crime?
If yes, what crime did he commit? (5%)
XVI
For the past five years, Ruben and Rorie had
been living together as husband and wife
without the benefit of marriage. Initially, they
had a happy relationship which was blessed
with a daughter, Rona, who was born on
March 1, 2014. However, the partners'
relationship became sour when Ruben began
indulging in vices, such as women and
alcohol, causing frequent arguments between
them. Their relationship got worse when, even
for slight mistakes, Ruben would lay his hands
on Rorie. One day, a tipsy Ruben barged into
their house and, for no reason, repeatedly
punched Rorie in the stomach. To avoid
further harm, Rorie ran out of the house. But
Ruben pursued her and stripped her naked in
full view of their neighbors; and then he
vanished.
Ten days later, Ruben came back to Rorie
and pleaded for forgiveness. However, Rorie
expressed her wish to live separately from
Ruben and asked him to continue providing
financial support for their daughter Rona. At
that time, Ruben was earning enough to
support a family. He threatened to withdraw
the support he was giving to Rona unless
Rorie would agree to live with him again. But
Rorie was steadfast in refusing to live with
Ruben again, and insisted on her demand for
support for Rona. As the ex-lovers could not
reach an agreement, no further support was
given by Ruben.
What crimes did Ruben commit:
(a) For beating and humiliating Rorie?
(2.5%)
(b) For withdrawing support for Rona?
(2.5%)
XVII
Robina bought from Ramsey a seaside
property located in Romblon. At that time, she
was in the process of returning to the
Philippines as a returning resident, after
retiring from her work in Russia, and was
planning to set up a diving school in the area.
In a non-notarized "Kasunduan ng Pagbibili,"
Ramsey represented the property as alienable
and disposable, and that he had a valid title to
the property. When the sale was completed,
and as she was applying for permits and
licenses for her school, she found out that the
property was a public non-alienable and non-
disposable land which Ramsey had bought
from someone who only had a foreshore lease
over the same. As she was bent on setting up
the diving school in the area, having made all
the preparations and having already bought all
the equipment, she filed a Miscellaneous
Lease Application (MLA) with the Department
of Environment and Natural Resources
(DENR) at the Community Environment and
Natural Resources Office in Romblon. In her
application, she stated that she was a Filipino
citizen, although she was still a naturalized
Russian citizen at that time. It was only six
months after she filed the MLA that she filed
her petition for dual citizenship under R.A. No.
9225. When DENR discovered that, at the
time of filing the MLA, she was still a Russian
citizen, her application was denied and she
was charged with falsification of a public
document for misrepresenting herself as a
Filipino citizen. Infuriated, Robina also filed
charges against Ramsey for falsification of a
private document for stating in their
"Kasunduan" that the property was alienable performed her duty as a teacher to discipline
and disposable. erring pupils.

In the case for falsification of a public Richard's parents ask your advice on what
document, Robina's defense was that, at the actions can be instituted against Mrs.
time she filed the MLA, she had every Robinson for acts committed on their minor
intention to reacquire Philippine citizenship, as child.
in fact she filed for dual citizenship six months
thereafter, and that she had no intent to gain (a) May Mrs. Robinson be charged
or to injure the Philippine government since with child abuse OR slight physical
she expected that her application for dual injuries? (2.5%)
citizenship would be approved before the MLA
could be approved. On the other hand, she (b) May Mrs. Robinson be charged
claimed in the action against Ramsey that with child abuse AND slight physical
intent to gain was present since he received
the purchase price as a result of his
injuries? (2.5%)
misrepresentation. Ramsey's defense was
that he had a valid Transfer Certificate of Title
in his name, and he had a right to rely on his XIX
title.
Ricky was driving his car when he was
(a) Will the case for falsification of flagged down by a traffic enforcer for
public document filed against Robina overspeeding. Realizing his undoing, but in a
prosper? (2.5%) hurry for a meeting, Ricky shoved a PhP500
bill in the traffic enforcer's pocket and
whispered to the latter to refrain from issuing
(b) Will the case for falsification of
him a traffic violation receipt. The traffic
private document filed against
enforcer still issued him a ticket, and returned
Ramsey prosper? (2.5%)
his money.
XVIII
What crime, if any, was committed by Ricky?
(5%)
Mrs. Robinson is a teacher at an elementary
school. In one of her classes, she found, to
her consternation, that an 8-year old Richard
was always the cause of distraction, as he
was fond of bullying classmates smaller in
size than him.

One morning, Reymart, a 7-year old pupil,

cried loudly and complained to Mrs. Robinson
that Richard had boxed him on the ear.
Confronted by Mrs. Robinson about Reymart's
accusation, Richard sheepishly admitted the
same. Because of this, Mrs. Robinson ordered
Richard to lie face down on a desk during
class. After Richard obliged, Mrs. Robinson hit
him ten (10) times on the legs with a ruler and
pinched his ears. Richard ran home and
reported to his mother what he had suffered at
the hands of Mrs. Robinson. When Richard's
parents went to Mrs. Robinson to complain,
she interposed the defense that she merely
2017 BAR EXAMINATIONS
CRIMINAL LAW
I.
Tonito, an 8-year-old boy, was watching a free
concert at the Luneta Park with his father
Tony. The child stood on a chair to be able to
see the performers on the stage. Juanito, a
10-year-old boy, who was also watching the
concert, could not see much of the
performance on the stage because Tonito was
blocking his line of sight by standing on the
chair. Using his elbow, Juanito strongly
shoved Tonito to get a good view of the stage.
The shove caused Tonito to fall to the ground.
Seeing this, Tony struck Juanito on the head
with his hand and caused the boy to fall and to
hit his head on a chair. Tony also wanted to
strangle Juanito but the latter's aunt prevented
him from doing so. Juanito sustained a
lacerated wound on the head that required
medical attendance for 10 days.
Tony was charged with child abuse in violation
of Sec. 10(a), in relation to Sec. 3(b)(2), of
R.A. No. 7610 (Child Abuse Law) for allegedly
doing an "act by deeds or words
which debases, degrades or demeans the
intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a
human being." In his defense, Tony
contended that he had no intention to maltreat
Juanito, much less to degrade his intrinsic
worth and dignity as a human being.
(a) Distinguish crimes mala in se from
crimes mala prohibita. (3%)
(b) Was Tony criminally liable for child
abuse under R.A. No. 7610? Explain
your answer. (3%)
II.
Sixteen year old Aliswan prodded Amethyst,
his girlfriend, to remove her clothing while they
were secretly together in her bedroom late
one evening. Failing to get a positive
response from her, he forcibly undressed her.
Apprehensive about rousing the attention of
the household who did not know of his
presence inside her room, she resisted him
with minimal strength, but she was really
sobbing in a muffled manner. He then
undressed himself while blocking- the door.
Yet, the image of a hapless and sobbing
Amethyst soon brought him to his senses, and
impelled him to leave her room naked. He did
not notice in his hurry that Amante, the father
of Amethyst, who was then sitting alone on a
sofa in the sala, saw him leave his daughter's
room naked.
Outside the house, the now-clothed Aliswan
spotted Allesso, Amethyst's former suitor.
Knowing how Allesso had aggressively
pursued Amethyst, Aliswan fatally stabbed
Allesso. Aliswan immediately went into hiding
afterwards.
Upon learning from Amethyst about what
Aliswan had done to her, an enraged Amante
wanted to teach Aliswan a lesson he would
never forget. Amante set out the next day to
look for Aliswan in his school. There, Amante
found a young man who looked very much like
Aliswan. Amante immediately rushed and
knocked the young man unconscious on the
pavement, and then draped his body with a
prepared tarpaulin reading RAPIST AKO
HUWAG TULARAN. Everyone else in the
school was shocked upon witnessing what
had just transpired, unable to believe that the
timid and quiet Alisto, Aliswan's identical twin
brother, had committed rape.
(a) A criminal complaint for attempted
rape with homicide was brought
against Aliswan in the Prosecutor's
Office. However, after preliminary
investigation, the Investigating
Prosecutor recommended the filing of
two separate informations - one
for attempted rape and the other
for homicide. Do you agree with the
recommendation? Explain your
answer. (3%)
(b) Before the trial court, Aliswan
moved that the cases should be
dismissed because he was entitled to
the exempting circumstance of
minority. Is his motion correct? Explain
your answer. (3%)
 (c) After receiving medical attendance
for 10 days, Alisto consulted you
about filing the proper criminal
complaint against Amante. What
crimes, if any, will you charge Amante
with? Explain your answer. (3%)
(d) Answering the criminal complaint
filed by Alisto, Amante contended that
he had incurred no criminal liability for
lack of criminal intent on his part, his
intended victim being Aliswan, not
Alisto. What is this defense of Amante,
and explain if the same will prosper?
(3%)
III.
Overjoyed by the award to his firm of a multi-
billion government contract for the
development of an economic and tourism hub
in the Province of Blank, Mr. Gangnam
allotted the amount of P100 Million to serve as
gifts for certain persons instrumental in his
firm's winning the award. He gave 50% of that
amount to Governor Datu, the official who had
signed the contract with the proper
authorization from the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan; 25% to Bokal Diva, the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan member who had
lobbied for the award of the project in the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan; and 25% to
Mayor Dolor of the Municipality where the
project would be implemented. Governor Datu
received his share through his wife, Provincial
First Lady Dee, who then deposited the
amount in her personal bank account.
Previously, upon facilitation by Bokal Diva, Mr.
Gangnam concluded an agreement with
Mayor Dolor for the construction of the Blank
Sports Arena worth ₱800 Million. The project
was highly overpriced because it could be
undertaken and completed for not more than
₱400 Million. For this project, Mayor Dolor
received from Mr. Gangnam a gift of ₱10
Million, while Bokal Diva got ₱25 Million.
In both instances, Bokal Diva had her
monetary gifts deposited in the name of her
secretary, Terry, who personally maintained a
bank account for Bokal Diva's share in
government projects.
(a) May each of the above-named
individuals be held liable
for plunder? Explain your answer.
(4%)
(b) Define wheel conspiracy and chain
conspiracy. Is either or both kinds
existent herein? Explain your answer.
(4%)
(c) What provisions of R.A. No.
3019 (Anti-Graft & Corrupt Practices
Act), if any, were violated by any of
the above-named individuals,
specifying the persons liable therefor?
Explain your answer. (4%)
(d) What crimes under the Revised
Penal Code, if any, were committed,
specifying the persons liable therefor?
Explain your answer. (4%)
IV
Maita was the object of Solito's avid sexual
desires. Solito had attempted many times to
entice Maita to a date in bed with him but
Maita had consistently refused. Fed up with all
her rejections, Solito abducted Maita around 7
p.m. one night. With his cohorts, Solito forced
Maita into a Toyota lnnova and drove off with
her to a green-painted house situated in a
desolate part of the town. There, Solito
succeeded in having carnal knowledge of
Maita against her will.
Meanwhile, the police authorities were tipped
off that at 11:30 p.m. on that same night Solito
would be selling marijuana outside the green-
painted house. Acting on the tip, the PNP
station of the town formed a buy-bust team
with PO2 Masahol being designated the
poseur buyer. During the buy-bust operation,
Solito opened the trunk of the Toyota lnnova
to retrieve the bag of marijuana to be sold to
PO2 Masahol. To cut the laces that he had
tied the bag with, Solito took out a Swiss knife,
but his doing so prompted PO2 Masahol to
effect his immediate arrest out of fear that he
would attack him with the knife. PO2 Masahol
then confiscated the bag of marijuana as well
as the Toyota lnnova.
(a) Two informations were filed
against Solito in the RTC - one
for forcible abduction with rape, raffled
to Branch 8 of the RTC; the other
for illegal sale of drugs, assigned to
Branch 29 of the RTC. Was Solito
charged with the proper offenses
based on the circumstances? Explain
your answer. (5%)
(b) While the Prosecution was
presenting its evidence in Branch 29,
Branch 8 convicted Solito.
Immediately after the judgment of
conviction was promulgated, Solito
filed in both Branches a motion for the
release of the Toyota lnnova. He
argued and proved that he had only
borrowed the vehicle from his brother,
the registered owner. Branch 8
granted the motion but Branch 29
denied it. Were the two courts correct
in their rulings? Explain your answer.
(5%)
V
To aid in the rebuilding and revival of
Tacloban City and the surrounding areas that
had been devastated by the strongest
typhoon. to hit the country in decades, the
Government and other sectors, including
NGOs, banded together in the effort. Among
the NGOs was Ba..,gon Waray, Inc. (BaWI),
headed by Mr. Jose Ma. Gulang, its President
and CEO. BaWI operated mainly as a social
amelioration and charitable institution. For its
activities in the typhoon-stricken parts of Leyte
Province, BaWI received funds from all
sources, local and foreign, including
substantial amounts from legislators, local
government officials and the EU. After several
months, complaints were heard about the very
slow distribution of relief goods and needed
social services by BaWI.
The COA reported the results of its audit to
the effect that at least P10 Million worth of
funds coming from public sources channeled
to BaWI were not yet properly accounted for.
The COA demanded reimbursement but BaWI
did not respond.
Hence, Mr. Gulang was criminally charged in
the Office of the Ombudsman
with malversation of public funds and failure of
accountable officer to render accounts as
respectively defined and punished by Art. 217
and Art. 218 of the Revised Penal Code. He
was also· charged with violation of Sec. 3(e)
of R.A. No. 3019 for causing undue injury to
the Government.
In his defense, Mr. Gulang mainly contended
that he could not be held 1iable under the
various· charges because he was not a public
officer.
(a) Who is a public officer? (2%)
(b) Discuss whether the crimes
charged against Mr. Gulang are
proper. Explain your answer. (3%)
VI
Answer with brief explanations the following
queries:
(a) If the slightest penetration of the
female genitalia consummates rape by
carnal knowledge, how does the
accused commit attempted rape by
carnal knowledge? (2%)
(b) What crime is committed by
a capataz who enrolls two fictitious
names in the payroll and collects their
supposed daily wages every payday?
(2%)
(c) What is now the age of doli
incapax in the Philippines? (2%)
(d) Why is there no crime of frustrated
serious physical injuries? (2%)
VII
Bernardo was enraged by his conviction
for robbery by Judge Samsonite despite
insufficient evidence. Pending his appeal,
Bernardo escaped in order to get even with
Judge Samsonite. Bernardo learned that the
judge regularly slept in his mistress' house
every weekend. Thus, he waited for the judge
to arrive on Saturday evening at the house of
his mistress. It was about 8:00 p.m. when
Bernardo entered the house of the mistress.
He found the judge and his mistress having
coffee in the kitchen and engaging in small
talk. Without warning, Bernardo stabbed the
judge at least 20 times. The judge instantly
died.
Prosecuted and tried, Bernardo was convicted
of direct assault with murder. Rule with
reasons whether or not the conviction
for direct assault with murder was justified,
and whether or not the trial court should
appreciate the following aggravating
circumstances against Bernardo, to wit: (1)
disregard of rank and age of the victim, who
was 68 years old; (2) dwelling; (3) nighttime;
(4) cruelty; and (5) quasi-recidivism. (10%)
VIII
Porthos made a sudden turn on a dark street,
and his Rolls-Royce SUV bumped the rear of
a parked Cadillac Sedan inside which Aramis
was then taking a nap. Angered by the violent
Impact, Aramis alighted and confronted
Porthos who had also alighted. Aramis angrily
and repeatedly shouted at Porthos: Putang
Ina mo! Porthos, displaying fearlessness,
aggressively shouted back at Aramis: Wag
kang magtapang-tapangan dyan,
papatayin kita! Without saying anything more,
Aramis drew his gun from his waist and shot
Porthos in the leg. Porthos' wound was not life
threatening.
(a) What are the kinds of unlawful
aggression, and which kind was
displayed in this case? Explain your
answer. (3%)
(b) Standing trial for
frustrated murder, Aramis pleaded
self-defense. The Prosecution's
contention was that the plea of self-
defense applied only to consummated
killings. Rule, with explanations, on
the tenability of Aramis' claim of self-
defense, and on the Prosecution's
contention. (3%)
(c) Porthos insisted that the element of
treachery was present. To rule out
treachery, Aramis asserted that both
he and Porthos were then facing and
confronting each other when he fired
the shot. Rule, with reasons, on the
respective contentions. (3%)
IX
During the nationwide transport strike to
protest the phase out of old public utility
vehicles, striking jeepney drivers Percy,
Pablo, Pater and Sencio, each armed with
guns, hailed several MMDA buses then
providing free transport to the stranded public
to stop them from plying their routes. They
later on commandeered one of the buses
without allowing any of the passengers to
alight, and told the driver to bring the bus to
Tanay, Rizal.
Upon reaching a remote area in Tanay, Percy,
Pablo, Pater and Sencio forcibly divested the
passengers of their cash and valuables. They
ordered the passengers to leave thereafter.
Then, they burned the bus. When a tanod of
the barangay of the area came around to
Intervene, Pater fired at him, instantly killing
him.
After Percy, Pablo, Pater and Sencio were
arrested, the police authorities recommended
them to be charged with the following crimes,
to wit: (1) carnapping; (2) robbery, (3) direct
assault with homicide; (4) kidnapping; and
(5) arson.
State your legal opinion on the
recommendation of the police authorities on
the criminal liabilities incurred by Percy,
Pablo, Pater and Sencio. (10%)
X.
Sammy Peke was convicted of a violation of
R.A. No. 123456 for selling fake books. The
law prescribes the penalty of prision
correccional, a divisible penalty whose
minimum period is six months and one day to
two years and four months; medium period is
two years, four months and one day to four
years and two months; and maximum period
is four years, two months and one day to six
years.
(a) Interruption of religious worship as
defined and punished under Art. 132
of the Revised Penal Code; and/or
(b) Offending the religious feelings as
defined and punished under Art. 133
of the Revised Penal Code.
Explain fully your answers. (8%)

At arraignment, Sammy Peke pleads guilty to

the crime charged.

(a) Explain how the Indeterminate

Sentence Law is applied in crimes
punished by special laws. (3%)

(b) Supposing the trial judge imposes

a straight penalty of imprisonment for
one year, is the penalty correct in the
context of the Indeterminate Sentence
Law? Explain your answer. (3%)

XI.

In his homily, Fr. Chris loudly denounced the

many extrajudicial killings committed by the
men in uniform. Policeman Stone, then
attending the mass, was peeved by the
denunciations of Fr. Chris. He immediately
approached the priest during the homily,
openly displayed his firearm tucked in his
waist, and menacingly uttered at the
priest: Father, may kalalagyan kayo kung
hindi kayo tumigil. His brazenness terrified the
priest, who cut short his homily then and
there. The celebration of the mass was
disrupted, and the congregation left the
church in disgust over the actuations of
Policeman Stone, a co-parishioner.

Policeman Stone was subsequently charged.

The Office of the Provincial Prosecutor is now

about to resolve the case, and is mulling on
what to charge Policeman Stone with.

May Policeman Stone be properly charged

with either or both of the following crimes, or,
if not, with what proper crime?