MIDTERM EXAMINATION

INSTRUCTIONS: Answer the questions with honesty above your desire to pass. Remember,
what you learn through your reading is the subject of this assessment, hence it is incumbent
that you test your understanding by exercising utmost honesty. Further, I can easily identify if
one copied from the different references of the subject. Make your answer direct supported by
justification based on the law. EACH SUBQUESTION MUST BE ANSWERED SEPARATELY
INDICATING THE NUMBER-LETTER. May the force be with you.
1. Polano is the Municipal Mayor of Raccoon, a fourth class municipality in the province of
Lanao del Sur. Upon the onslaught of the Covid-19 Pandemic, Polano was looked upon
by the people for answers and solutions as restrictions were tightened. A staunch
believer of the “Conspiracy Theory” as the culprit behind the rapid rise of cases in the
country, he believed that the Covid virus was a ghost disease hiding under the cloak of
lethality and misinformation to dissuade the people from living there ordinary and usual
lives intended for a greater objective. In line with this belief, he issued an Executive
Order, the essence of which is the continuation of daily activities without hiatus. A
trusted leader, his constituents followed the wisdom of the mayor. This, however, led to
catastrophic consequences. More than five thousand residents were infected with
almost two thousand mortalities. The NBI upon investigation concluded that liability
should fall unto the Mayor and that he should be indicted for the thousands of deaths.

a. Is Polano criminally liable for the deaths of his constituents? Explain.

b. If Polano contended that he was merely fulfilling his duty and that his decision was
embedded in the Justifying circumstance of lawful exercise of a right in view of the
principle of necessity considering that the municipality cannot sustain lockdowns as it is
in no position, financially to feed the people, and that the only way to avert a greater
disaster is to let the people continue with their employments or livelihoods, will he be
exonerated? Explain.
c. Given the narrative of Polano, invoking necessity and aversion of greater injury, can
Polano invoke fifth and sixth exempting circumstances under Article 12 on” under
compulsion of irresistible force and under the impulse of uncontrollable fear of an equal
or greater injury.” To elaborate, if Polano invoked that if he did not decide for
continuance, people would have taken the law into their hands if they have no food to
eat. This would eventually lead to anarchy, and this is an irresistible fact that compelled
him stick to his decision. Otherwise, deaths and chaos would have reigned, and the evil
sought to be avoided- the Covid 19 virus, would be incomparable in damage and loss of
lives. Decide.

2. Pogi is the Chief of Police of the City of Marawi. As a measure, the city through an
ordinance, prohibited any form of social gatherings. A group of gamblers engaged in
cockfighting surreptitiously arranged sessions of cockfights. At first, they were not
noticed, however a tipster informed the police of the session. On the second session,
the police prepared a raid. Alas, they caught red-handed the bettors and owners of the
cock fighters. As a result, all were arrested. Pogi while trying to catch one of the fighters,
was struck in the wrist by the blade attached to the fighter. Incessant bleeding ensued

4
 causing loss of consciousness. Brought to the hospital, Pogi was declared dead on
arrival.

a. Is the cock who struck the Chief criminally liable? Explain.

b. Atty. Suba, a PAO lawyer, who was consulted by the police opined that given the
extraordinary and complicated facts of the case, no one is criminally liable.
Accordingly, the owners and bettors are all liable but their liability is confined in the
ordinance that they have violated. Other than that, no liability befalls anyone
because no criminal or deliberate intent on the part of the participants can be
ascertained. Infact, the chicken is the sole culprit. Is the contention of Suba,
feasible? Explain.
c. Pros. Polano on the other hand, advance the notion that all of the participants are
liable. Their liability rests upon their being complicit on the consequence of their act
of violating the ordinance. When they all agreed to break the law prohibiting
gatherings, they have become co-conspirators. Hence, the liability shall not be
attributed to a particular person, but shall be borne by all participants, bettors and
owners alike. Decide on the merit of the contention.
d. Pros. Polana offers a different perspective. According to her, the owner of the cock
who struck Pogi, the Chief shall be solely liable for the resulting consequences. Is this
contention correct? Decide.

3. Polano, the Captain of MV Catalina, was stabbed by Pogi, a petty officer, while resting at
his quarter. The captain equipped with the necessary training was able to dodge a fatal
blow directed at his chest. He was hit at the stomach instead. With timely medical
intervention, after seven days he was recovering. When the ship was docking at the
Manila Port, Polano while standing at the edge of the ship, was pushed by Marco, the
navigator of the ship. He fell and was saved, however after seven days he died. The
medical findings revealed that the cause of the death was tetanus. In charging
culpability of the death of the captain, multiple opinion emerged.
a. Prosecutor A averred that the death of the captain is attributable to the act of
stabbing committed by Pogi. He argued that the wound sustained by Polano in the
stabbing was the proximate cause that was the primary reason that lead to the
development of tetanus. Accordingly, the mere act of pushing does not tantamount
to criminal liability. Such being the case, he was of the opinion, that criminal liability
for the death of the captain must be based on the direct consequence of the act of
stabbing. Decide the merit of the arguments of Prosecutor A.
b. Prosecutor B differed. For him, the act of stabbing has already been superseded by
an efficient intervening cause. With the intervening cause, the stabbing incident
serves only as a remote cause. The remote cause, will not give rise to criminal
liability on the resulting felony but only insofar as the extent of the crime
committed. The immediate cause, he argued, the act of Marco shall determine
criminal liability as to the death. Decide the merit of his argument.
c. Atty. Ambog, a renowned criminal law jurist opined a peculiar argument. According
to him, criminal liability should be based on the individual acts of the perpetrators.
Polano should be criminally liable for his act of stabbing while Marco should not be
criminally liable. In thrusting this notion, he argued that the death, was not traceable
to the act of Polano in view of the fact that full recovery was already evident at the
time of the act of pushing. This is established by the fact that Polano can already

4
 walk aside from the fact that the injury he suffered was not fatal so as to produce
death. On the aspect of pushing, no inference of criminal intent can be established.
When no criminal intent can be inferred directly, the principle of pro reo should
apply. Decide the merit of his argument.
d. Can you offer or establish a different argument in ascertaining criminal liability
insofar as the death is concerned?

4. Polano is madly in love with Polana. His affection has a long history. It started when they
were still in the middle school. However, this affection was one way. For years, he was
constantly refused. This refusal only rages fire on the resolve of Polano to persist with a
firm believe that true love conquers all. This beacon of hope was gradually shifting to
desperation as refusal mounts as time passes by. This was compounded when he saw
Polana dating Pogi, a known womanizer in the town. Finally, after fifteen years of hard-
work and perseverance, Polana agreed to a date. Polano, with a bedrock belief that
Polana must be saved from Pogi designed a scheme. This scheme involves the
administration of a love potion to Polana’s drink that would abruptly enhance her sexual
desire. The plan was to make love to Polana to short cut the process that would
inevitably result to marriage. On the designated day, he bought the potion to an
apothecary, however, unknown to him, the pharmacist had mistakenly given an arsenic
poison. Alas, when Polana was in the comfort room, he was able to mix the potion to his
drink. Surprisingly Polana was unaffected. As it turned out, she was immune to arsenic
poison.
a. Prosecutor A assessment of the facts entails the following argument. Criminal
liability of Polano is based on Impossible Crime. This can be based on the second
way of committing impossible crime, when the means employed in the offense are
either inadequate or ineffectual. In the facts, a mistake was committed in the
substance administered and as it turned out, the supposed victim was immune from
the poison. This physical impossibility of consummating the intended crime, without
doubt falls on impossible crime. Decide the merit of the argument.
b. Prosecutor B opined that criminal liability would be based on the stages of
commission of the felony. For him, the criminal liability hinges on the frustrated
stage. The facts of the case suffice to meet the requirements of frustrated stage.
Accordingly, the offender has performed all the acts of execution which are
necessary to commit the crime, however the crime did not result as a consequence
due to some cause beyond the control of the perpetrator. Decide the veracity of the
argument.
c. Prosecutor C, on the other hand has a different opinion. For him, it should be on the
attempted stage of committing a felony. He argued that given the facts, when
Polano begins the commission of a felony by overt acts, his acts of purchasing the
potion and pouring the same on the drink of Polana, provided a direct connection on
the felony intended to be committed. This connection would have produced the
felony intended had it not for some cause or accident, attributable to the mistake of
the pharmacist and the immunity of Polana, other than his spontaneous desistance.
Decide the merit of the argument.
d. Atty. Ambog assessment is unique. He argued that no criminal liability should attach
to Polana’s act because no felony was committed. A love potion is not a prohibited
classification of drug. Infact, according to him, this is common among partners who
have lost taste of sexual desires. This potion would not affect the logical thinking of a
person to whom it was administered or would render the person unconscious. The

4
 fact that what he administered was arsenic poison is not attributable to him as well.
He cannot be faulted of the mistake of others. Decide the merit of his argument.
e. Is the pharmacist criminally liable? If yes, can he invoke any circumstances in articles
11, 12, and 13? Explain.

5. Polano and Pogi are brother-in-laws. One night they had an altercation. This lead to a
heated argument. Armed with an airsoft gun, Polano shot Pogi. The plastic bullet
penetrated the stomach. Immediately thereafter, Polano assisted Pogi and helped him
lie in the bed. He then called for help in the neighboring houses. When Pogi saw the
wound and the loss of blood, he stood up and got a knife in the kitchen. He then slit his
throat and died as a consequence. Upon post mortem examination, it was revealed that
the injury sustained was only superficial, however same is a bleeder.
a. Is Polano criminally liable for the death of Pogi? Explain.
b. Identify mitigating circumstances, if there is/are any?

NOTHING FOLLOWS!!!