1 Treason vs Sedition

2 Treason vs Rebellion
3 Treason vs Espionage
4 Piracy vs Mutiny
5 Trespass to dwelling vs Violation of Domicile
6 Rebellion vs Sedition
7 Rebellion vs Subversion
8 Political crime vs Common Crime
9 Arbitrary Detention vs Illegal Detention
10 Prohibition, Interruption and Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings vs Disturbance of Public Order
11 Inciting to Rebellion vs Proposal to Commit Rebellion
12 Illegal Association vs Illegal Assembly
13 Direct Assault vs Serious Disobedience
14 Quasi-Recidivism vs Reiteracion
15 Forgery vs Falsification
16 Use of fictitious name vs Concealing true name
17 Prevaricacion vs Bribery
18 Direct Bribery vs Indirect Bribery
19 Illegal Use of Public Funds vs Malversation
20 Malversation and Falsification vs Infidelity of Documents
21 Abandonment of Office or Position vs Dereliction of Duty
22 Abortion vs Infanticide
23 Physical Injuries vs Attempted or Frustrated Homicide
24 Seduction vs Abduction
25 Libel vs Slander vs Slander by Deed
26 Seduction vs Acts of Lasciviousness
27 Murder vs Homicide
28 Grave Coercion vs Grave Threats
29 Theft vs Robbery
30 Kidnapping and Failure to Return a Minor vs Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention
31 Exploitation of Minors vs Inducing a Minor to Abandon his Home
32 Qualified Trespass vs Other Forms of Trespass
33 Robbery with force upon things vs Robbery with violence against intimidation of persons
34 Brigandage vs Robbery in Band
35 Estafa with abuse of confidence vs Malversation
36 Acts of Lasciviousness vs Attempted Rape
37 Acts of Lasciviousness vs Grave Coercion
1. Treason vs Sedition:
Treason, in its more general sense, is the “violation by a subject of his allegiance to his
sovereign or liege, lord or to the supreme authority of the State.” Sedition, in its more
general sense, is “the raising of commotions or disturbances in the State.” (Pg. 106)
2. Treason vs Rebellion:
If the levying of war is merely a civil uprising, without any intention of helping an
external enemy, the crime is not treason. The offenders may be held liable for rebellion
under Article 135 in relation to Article 134 of this Code. (Pg. 6)
(a) The levying of war against the Government would constitute treason when
performed to aid the enemy. It would also constitute an adherence to the enemy,
giving him aid and comfort.

The levying of war against the Government during peace time for any of the
purposes mentioned in Article 134 is rebellion.

(b) Rebellion always involves taking up arms against the Government; treason may be
committed by mere adherence to the enemy giving him aid or comfort. (88)

3. Treason vs Espionage
Espionage is a crime not conditioned by the citizenship of the offender. This is also true
as regards treason, in view of the amendment to Article 14.
But treason is committed only in time of war, while espionage may be committed in
both time of peace and in time of war. Treason is limited in two ways of committing the
crime: levying war, and adhering to the enemy giving him aid or comfort; while espionage
may be committed in many ways. (Pg. 26)
4. Piracy vs Mutiny
In piracy, the persons who attack a vessel or seize its cargo are strangers to said vessels;
while in mutiny, they are members of the crew or passengers.
While the intent to gain is essential in the crime of piracy, in mutiny, the offenders may
only intend to ignore the ship’s officers or they may be prompted by a desire to commit
plunder. (Pg. 34)
5. Trespass to dwelling vs Violation of Domicile
1st element of Violation to Domicile: The offender must be a public officer or employee.
If the offender who enters the dwelling against the will of the owner thereof is a private
individual, the crime committed is trespass to dwelling. (Art 280) (Pg. 65)
6. Rebellion vs Sedition
Rebellion – Common Crime, cannot be complexed with any other crime; Sedition – Political
Crime, overthrow social and political disturbance.
7. Rebellion vs Subversion
Subversion (like treason) is a crime against national security. Rebellion is a crime against
public order.
8. Political crime vs Common Crime
Political crime refers to crimes committed or acts omitted that injure - or are
perceived as injuring - the state, the state's government, or the political system.
Some examples of severe political crime are treason, sedition and terrorism.

9. Arbitrary Detention vs Illegal Detention

Public officers liable for arbitrary detention must be vested with authority to detain or order
the detention of persons accused of a crime, but when they detain a person they have no
legal grounds therefor. (Shorter ans: The offender in arbitrary detention is a public officer
or employee). If the offender is a private individual, the act of detaining another is illegal
detention(Art 267). (Pg. 43)
10. Prohibition, Interruption and Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings vs Disturbance of
Public Order
Only a public officer or employee can commit this crime [in Art 131]. If the offender is a
private individual, the crime is disturbance of public order defined in Article 153
[Disturbance of Public Order]. (Pg. 75)
11. Inciting to Rebellion vs Proposal to Commit Rebellion
Inciting to rebellion distinguished from proposal to commit rebellion.

1. In both crimes, the offender induces another to commit rebellion.

2. In proposal, the person who proposes has decided to commit rebellion; in inciting to rebellion,
it is not required that the offender has decided to commit rebellion.
3. In proposal, the person who proposes the execution of the crime uses secret means; in inciting
to rebellion, the act of inciting is done publicly.

12. Illegal Association vs Illegal Assembly

Illegal association distinguished from illegal assembly.

1. In illegal assembly, it is necessary that there is an actual meeting or assembly of armed

persons for the purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable under the Code, or of
individuals who, although not armed, are incited to the commission of treason, rebellion,
sedition, or assault upon a person in authority or his agent; in illegal association, it is not
necessary that there be an actual meeting.
2. In illegal assembly, it is the meeting and attendance at such meeting that are punished; in
illegal associations, it is the act of forming or organizing and membership in the association that
are punished.
3. In illegal assembly, the persons liable are: (1) the organizers or leaders of the meeting, and (2)
the persons present at meeting. In illegal association, the persons liable are: (1) the founders,
directors and president, and (2) the members.

13. Direct Assault vs Serious Disobedience

Direct assault distinguished from resistance or serious disobedience.

1. In direct assault, the person in authority or his agent must be engaged in the performance of
official duties or that he is assaulted by reason thereof; but in resistance, the person in authority
or his agent must be in actual performance of his duties.
2. Direct assault (2nd form) is committed in four ways: (a) by attacking, (b) by employing force,
(c) by seriously intimidating, and (d) by seriously resisting a person in authority or his agent;
resistance or serious disobedience is committed only by resisting or seriously disobeying a
person in authority or his agent.
3. In both direct assault by resisting an agent of a person in authority and resistance against an
agent of a person in authority, there is force employed, but the use of force in resistance is not so
serious, as there is no manifest intention to defy the law and the officers enforcing it. The attack
or employment of force which gives rise to the crime of direct assault must be serious and
deliberate; otherwise, even a case of simple resistance to an arrest, which always requires the use
of force of some kind, would constitute direct assault and the lesser offense of resistance or
disobedience in Art. 151 would entirely disappear.
(People vs. Cauan, CA-G.R. No. 540, Oct. 11, 1938)
But when the one resisted is a person in authority, the use of any kind or degree of force will
give rise to direct assault.
If no force is employed by the offender in resisting or disobeying a person in authority, the crime
committed is resistance or serious disobedience under the first paragraph of Art. 151.

14. Quasi-Recidivism vs Reiteracion

Quasi-recidivism, distinguished from reiteracion.

The aggravating circumstance of "reiteracion" requires that the offender against whom it is
considered shall have served out his sentences for the prior offenses. Here, all the accused were
yet serving their respective sentences at the time of the commission of the crime of murder. The
special aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism (Art. 160, R.P.C.) was correctly
considered against all the accused. (People vs. Layson, et al., L-25177, Oct. 31, 1969, 30 SCRA
93)

15. Forgery vs Falsification

Forgery and falsification, distinguished.

The term forgery as used in Art. 169 refers to the falsification and counterfeiting of treasury or
bank notes or any instruments payable to bearer or to order. Falsification is the commission of
any of the eight (8) acts mentioned in Art. 171 on legislative (only the act of making alteration),
public or official, commercial, or private documents, or wireless, or telegraph messages. See
Title Four, Chapter One, Section Four.

16. Use of fictitious name vs Concealing true name

Distinction between use of fictitious name and concealing true
name.

1. In use of fictitious name, the element of publicity must be present; in concealing true name
and other personal circumstances, that element is not necessary.
2. The purpose in use of fictitious name is any of those three enumerated (to conceal a crime, to
evade the execution of a judgment, or to cause damage); in concealing true name it is merely to
conceal identity.

17. Prevaricacion vs Bribery

Prevaricacion distinguished from bribery.

The third form of direct bribery (Art. 210) is committed by refraining from doing something
which pertains to the official duty of the officer. Prevaricacion (Art. 208) is committed in the
same way. In this regard, the two felonies are similar. But they differ in that in bribery, the
offender refrained from doing his official duty in consideration of a gift received or promised.
This element is not necessary in the crime of prevaricacion.
18. Direct Bribery vs Indirect Bribery
Direct bribery distinguished from indirect bribery.

1. In both crimes, the public officer receives gift.

2. While in direct bribery there is an agreement between the public officer and the giver of the
gift or present, in indirect bribery, usually, no such agreement exists.
3. In direct bribery, the offender agrees to perform or performs an act or refrains from doing
something, because of the gift or promise; in indirect bribery, it is not necessary that the officer
should do any particular act or even promise to do an act, as it is enough that he accepts gifts
offered to him by reason of his office, (cited in Pozar vs. Court of Appeals, 132 SCRA 729)

19. Illegal Use of Public Funds vs Malversation

Illegal use of public funds or property distinguished from
malversation under Art. 217.

1. The offenders are accountable public officers in both crimes.

2. The offender in illegal use of public funds or property does not derive any personal gain or
profit; in malversation, the offender in certain cases profits from the proceeds of the crime.
3. In illegal use, the public fund or property is applied to another public use; in malversation, the
public fund or property is applied to the personal use and benefit of the offender or of another
person.
20. Malversation and Falsification vs Infidelity of Documents
When the person received money orders, signed the signatures of the payees thereon, collected
and appropriated the respective amounts thereof, the person is guilty of Malversation and
falsification, the latter crime having been committed to conceal the Malversation.
But when the person receives the letters or envelopes containing money orders for transmission,
and the money orders are not sent to the addresses, the postmaster cashing the same for his
own benefit, he is guilty of infidelity in the custody of papers.

21. Abandonment of Office or position vs Dereliction of Duty

In Abandonment of office or position, the crime is committed by any public officer while in
dereliction of duty, the crime is committed only by public officers who have the duty to institute
prosecution for the punishment of violations of the law.
In abandonment of office or position, the public officer abandons his office to evade the
discharge of his duty while in dereliction of duty, the public officer does not abandon his office
but he fails to prosecute an offense by dereliction of duty or by malicious tolerance of the
commission of offenses.

22. Abortion vs Infanticide

If the fetus acquired human form but it did not have its own life, independently of the mother. It
could not subsist itself outside the maternal womb which results in the death of the fetus, the
crime is abortion.
If the fetus could sustain an independent life, after its separation from the maternal womb and
is killed the crime is infanticide.

23. Physical Injuries vs Attempted or Frustrated homicide

If there is no intent to kill on the part of the offender, he is liable for physical injuries.
If the offender have an intent to kill the victim, he is liable for attempted or frustrated homicide.

24. Seduction vs Abduction

In Seduction, it is to excite a woman to unlawful sexual intercourse by promise of marriage or
other means of persuasion without the use of force..
In Abduction, it is to take away a woman from her house or the place where she may be for the
purposes of carrying her to another place with intent to marry or to corrupt her.
In abduction, the taking away of the woman must be against her will and sexual intercourse is
not necessary.
In seduction, there is no use of force and sexual intercourse is necessary.
25. Libel vs Slander vs Slander by Deed
Libel is defamation committed by means of writing, printing, lithography, engraving, radio,
phonograph, painting or theatrical or cinematographic exhibition, or any other similar means
while Slander is oral defamation. Slander is libel committed by oral (spoken) means, instead of
writing.
Slander by deed involves an act while libel or slander involves words written or uttered.

26. Seduction vs Act of Lasciviousness

There must be sexual intercourse in seduction.
If there is no sexual intercourse and only acts of lewdness are performed, the crime is act of
lasciviousness.

27. Murder vs Homicide

Murder is the unlawful killing of any person which is not a parricide or infanticide provided any
of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Art 248 is present.
Homicide is the unlawful killing of any person which is neither parricide, murder nor infanticide
and is not attended by any of the circumstances of murder, parricide or infanticide.

28. Grave Coercion vs Grave Threats

In grave threats, the threat must be to inflict a wrong amounting to a crime upon the person,
honor, or property of the offended party or that of his family.
In grave coercions, it is committed by any person without authority to prevent or compel
another, by means of violence, threat, or intimidation to do something against his will, whether
it be right or wrong.
29. Theft vs. Robbery
Article 293 of the RPC defines robbery as a crime committed by “any person who, with
intent to gain, shall take any personal property belonging to another, by means of violence against
or intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything.”
Theft, on the other hand, is committed by any person who, with intent to gain but without
violence against or intimidation of persons nor force upon things, shall take the personal property
of another without the latter’s consent⁠.

30. Kidnapping and Failure to Return a Minor vs. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention
Article 270 of the RPC or Kidnapping and Failure to Return a Minor as amended by Sec.
5 of RA No. 18, punishes the deliberate failure by the person having the custody of the minor to
restore such minor to his parents or guardian.
Under Article 267 or Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention, the kidnapping of a minor
is also punished. While under Art. 270, the offender is entrusted with the custody of the minor, in
Article 267, the offender is not entrusted with the custody of the victim.

31. Exploitation of Minors vs. Inducing a Minor to Abandon his Home

If the purpose of inducing the minor to abandon his home is to follow any person engaged
in any of the callings of being an acrobat, gymnast, rope-walker, diver, wild-animal tamer or circus
manager or to accompany any habitual vagrant or beggar, it is exploitation of minors; if there is
no such purpose, it is including a minor to abandon his home under Art. 271
In inducing a minor to abandon his home under Art. 271, the victim is a minor under 18
years of age; in exploitation of minors, he must be under 16 years of age.

32. Qualified Trespass vs. Other Forms of Trespass

In qualified trespass, the offender is a private person; in other forms of trespass, the
offender is any person
In qualified trespass, the offender enters a dwelling house; in other forms of trespass, the
offender enters closed premises or fenced estate.
In qualified trespass, the place entered is inhabited; in the second, the place entered is
uninhabited.
In qualified trespass, the act constituting the crime is dwelling against the will of the owner,
in other forms of trespass, it is entering the closed premises or the fenced estate without securing
the permission of the owner or caretaker thereof.
 In qualified trespass, the prohibition to enter is express or implied; in other forms of
trespass, the prohibition to enter must be manifest.

33. Robbery with Force Around Things vs. Robbery with Violence Against Intimidation of
Persons.
Robbery with force upon things must be committed in an inhabited place and by a band;
while robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons must be committed in an
uninhabited place or by a band.

34. Brigandage vs. Robbery in Band

Both brigandage and robbery in band require that the offenders form a band of robbers.
In brigandage, the purpose of the offenders is any of the following: (1) to commit robbery
in the highway; or (2) to kidnap persons for the purpose of extortion or to obtain ransom; or (3)
for any other purpose to be attained by means of force and violence, in robbery in band, the purpose
of the offenders is only to commit robbery, not necessarily in the highway.
In brigandage, the mere formation of a band for any of the purposes mentioned in the law
is sufficient, as it would not be necessary to show that the band actually committed robbery in the
highway, etc.; in robbery in band, it is necessary to prove that the band actually committed robbery,
as a mere conspiracy to commit robbery is not punishable.

35. Estafa with Abuse of Confidence vs. Malversation

In estafa with abuse of confidence, the crime is committed by misappropriating, converting
or denying having received money, goods or other personal property; in malversation, the crime
is committed by appropriating, taking or misappropriating or consenting, or, through abandonment
or negligence, permitting any other person to take the public funds or property.

36. Acts of Lasciviousness vs. Attempted Rape

The difference between attempted rape and acts of lasciviousness lies in the intent of the
perpetrator as deduced from his external acts. The intent referred to is the intent to lie with a
woman. Attempted rape is committed when the touching of the vagina by the penis is coupled with
the intent to penetrate; otherwise, there can only be acts of lasciviousness. Inasmuch as the
touching of the victim's organ by the penis of accused was but a mere incident of the "rubbing
against or between the victim's thighs" which in no way manifests an act preliminary to sexual
intercourse, accused-appellant should only be convicted of acts of lasciviousness.
37. Acts of Lasciviousness vs. Grave Coercion
If a victim was taken from her house against her will, slapped and maltreated, her drawers
taken off and her hands and feet bound by the accused to compel her to admit that she stole the
shoes of a certain person, the crime was grave coercion. (People vs. Fernando et al., 8 A.C. Rep
219)
In this Bailoses case, the compulsion by beating the girl is included in the constructive
element of force in the crime of act of lasciviousness. In the Fernando case, the compulsion is the
very act constituting the offense of grave coercion (compelling the offended party to admit the
theft).