Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
I. Article 320, 324, 326 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, PD 1613
Title 10: Crimes Against Property
Chapter 8: Arson and Other Crimes Involving Destruction
Note: The laws on arson in force today are PD 1613 and Article 320 as amended by RA 7659
Art. 320. Destructive arson. — The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum period
to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon any person who shall burn:
1. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or military powder or fireworks factory, ordinance,
storehouse, archives or general museum of the Government.chanrobles virtual law
library
2. Any passenger train or motor vehicle in motion or vessel out of port.chanrobles virtual
law library
3. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or factory of inflammable or explosive materials.
Article 324. Crimes involving destruction. - Any person who shall cause destruction by
means of explosion, discharge of electric current, inundation, sinking or stranding of a
vessel, intentional damaging of the engine of said vessel, taking up the rails from a
railway track, maliciously changing railway signals for the safety of moving trains,
destroying telegraph wires and telegraph posts, or those of any other system, and, in
general, by using any other agency or means of destruction as effective as those above
enumerated, shall be punished by reclusion temporal if the commission has endangered
the safety of any person, otherwise, the penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed.
Elements of crimes involving destruction:
1. The offender causes destruction.
2. Destruction is caused by any of the following means
a. explosion
b. discharge of electric current
c. inundation, sinking or stranding of a vessel, or intentional
damaging of the engine of said vessel
d. taking up the rails from a railway track
e. maliciously changing railway signals for the safety of moving trains
f. destroying telegraph wires and telegraph posts, or those of any other
system
g. using any other agency or means of destruction as effective as those
above enumerated
As Terrorism
Sowing and creating a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic
among the populace, if done with the intention to coerce the government to give in to
an unlawful demand shall be guilty of the crime of terrorism, and shall suffer the
penalty of forty (40) years of imprisonment, without the benefit of parole.
Article 324 - Intentional Felony; Primary Intention of the offender must be to destroy property
Article 326 and PD 1613
PD 1613, Section 4. Special Aggravating Circumstances in Arson.
1. If committed with intent to gain;
2. If committed for the benefit of another;
3. If the offender is motivated by spite or hatred towards the owner or
occupant of the property burned;
4. If committed by a syndicate.
Note: The offense is committed by a syndicate if it is planned or carried out by a
group of three (3) or more persons.
Arson - defined as the malicious destruction of property by fire
Kinds of Arson
1. Simple Arson [PD 1613, Sec. 1]
2. Destructive Arson [Art 320 as amended by RA 7659]
3. Other cases of Arson [PD 1613, Sec 3]
Simple Arson
● malicious burning of public and private structures, regardless of size, not included in
Art. 320, as amended by RA 7659, and classified as other cases of arson. These
include houses, dwellings, government buildings, farms, mills, plantations, railways,
bus stations, airports, wharves and other industrial establishments
● to prevent the high incidence of fires and other crimes involving destruction, protect
the national economy and preserve the social, economic and political stability of the
nation, PD 1613 tempers the penalty to be meted to offenders.
● This separate classification of Simple Arson recognizes the need to lessen the
severity of punishment commensurate to the act or acts committed,
depending on the particular facts and circumstances of each case.
● This contemplates crimes with less significant social, economic, political and
national security implications than Destructive Arson.
Burning of Houses, considered Simple Arson under PD 1613.
● houses, contemplating inhabited houses or dwellings under PD 1613
● The fact that the appellant’s act affected many families will not convert the crime to
destructive arson, since the appellant’s act does not appear to be heinous or
represents a greater degree of perversity and viciousness when compared to those
acts punished under Article 320 of the RPC
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
Attempted Frustrated Consummated

A person, intending to burn a wooden structure,
collects some rags, soaks them in gasoline and
places them beside the wooden wall of the building.
When he is about to light a match to set fire to the
rags, he is discovered by another who chases him away.
The crime committed is attempted arson, because the
offender commences the commission of the crime
directly by overt acts (placing the rags soaked in
gasoline beside the wooden wall of the building and
lighting a match) but he does not perform all the acts
of execution (the setting of fire to the rags) due to the
timely intervention of another who chases away the
offender.
If that person is able to light or set fire to the rags but the
fire was put out before any part of the building was
burned, it is frustrated.
But if before the fire was put out, it had burned a part of
the building, it is consummated.
Any charring of the wood of a building, whereby the fiber of
the wood is destroyed, is sufficient. It is not necessary that
the wood should be ablaze.
And the mere fact that a building is scorched or discolored
by heat is not sufficient to constitute consummated arson.
Setting fire to the contents of a building constitutes the
consummated crime of setting fire to a building, even if no part
of the building was burned.

Points to remember: Arson/Murder/Arson+Hoimicide

● In attempted Arson, it is not necessary that there be fire
● The presence of blaze does not necessarily lead to the crime of attempted
Arson Murder Homicide/Murder + Arson
arson.
● On the contrary, when there is fire, the Supreme Court has held invariably
the main objective is the when fire is used with the If the house was set on fire
that crime committed is either frustrated arson or consummated arson, never
burning of the building or intent to kill a particular after the victims therein
attempted.
edifice, but death results by person who may be in a were killed, fire would not
● setting fire to the contents of a building constitutes the consummated crime
reason or on the occasion of house and that objective is be a qualifying
of setting fire to a building, even if no part of the building was burned ( U.S. vs. arson, the crime is simply attained by burning the circumstance. The accused
Go Foo Suy, 25 Phil. 187) arson, and the resulting house would be liable for the
● if a part of the building commences to burn, the crime is consummated arson, homicide is absorbed separate offenses of murder
however small is the portion of the building burned. ( People vs. Hernandez, that killing committed by or homicide, as the case
54 Phil. 122) means of fire is murder, it may be, and arson.
intends that fire should be
Sec. 3, par. 2, P.D. No. 1613. purposely adopted as a if the objective is, likewise,
● If the property burned is an inhabited house or dwelling, it is not required means to that end to kill a particular person,
that the house be occupied by one or more persons and the offender knew it and in fact the offender has
when the house was burned. There can be no murder already done so, but fire is
without a design to take life. resorted to as a means to
cover up the killing, then
The main object of the there are two separate and
offender is to kill by distinct crimes committed '
means of fire, the offense is homicide/murder and
murder arson.
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
Note: There is no complex crime of arson with homicide. P.D. No. 1613 provides that if
by reason of or on the occasion of arson, death results, the penalty of reclusion
perpetua shall be imposed. The crime of homicide is absorbed. (in consideration of PD
9346)
Prima Facie Evidence of Arson
1. If the fire started simultaneously in more than one part of the building or
establishment.
2. If a substantial amount of flammable substances or materials are stored within the
building note necessary in the business of the offender nor for household use.
3. If gasoline, kerosene, petroleum or other flammable or combustible substances or
materials soaked therewith or containers thereof, or any mechanical, electrical,
chemical, or electronic contrivance designed to start a fire, or ashes or traces of any
of the foregoing are found in the ruins or premises of the burned building or
property.
4. If the building or property is insured for substantially more than its actual value at
the time of the issuance of the policy.
5. If during the lifetime of the corresponding fire insurance policy more than two fires
have occurred in the same or other premises owned or under the control of the
offender and/or insured.
6. If shortly before the fire, a substantial portion of the effects insured and stored in a
building or property had been withdrawn from the premises except in the ordinary
course of business.
7. If a demand for money or other valuable consideration was made before the fire in
exchange for the desistance of the offender or for the safety of the person or
property of the victim.
Note: Standing alone, unexplained or uncontradicted, any of the above circumstances is
sufficient to establish the fact of arson.
Title 10: Crimes Against Property
Chapter 9: Malicious Mischief
Malicious Mischief - willful damaging of another's property for the sake of causing
damage due to hate, revenge or other evil motive.
Crimes Classified as Malicious Mischief
1. Special Cases of malicious mischief [Art 328]
2. Other mischiefs [Art 329]
3. Damage and obstruction to means of communication [Art 330]
4. Destroying or damaging statues, public monuments or paintings [Art 331]
Article 327. Who are liable for malicious mischief. - Any person who shall deliberately
cause the property of another any damage not falling within the terms of the next
preceding chapter shall be guilty of malicious mischief.
Elements of malicious mischief:
1. That the offender deliberately caused damage to the property of another.
2. That such act does not constitute arson or other crimes involving
destruction.
3. That the act of damaging another's property be committed merely for the
sake of damaging it.
Note: This third element presupposes that the offender acted due to hate, revenge or
other evil motive.
“shall deliberately cause the property of another any damage”
● an offender should act under this impulse of a specific desire to inflict injury
to another.
● malicious mischief cannot be committed through negligence, since culpa
and malice are essentially incompatible.
Points to remember:
● Bumping a car of another due to anger and hate is malicious mischief [Taguinod v.
People - CRV, Vitara]
● Killing the cow of another as an act of revenge is malicious mischief.
● Malicious mischief embraces those attempts against another's property inspired
sometimes by hatred or a desire for revenge and sometimes by the mere pleasure
of destroying.
● If there is no malice in causing the damage, the obligation to repair or pay for
damages is only civil. (Art. 2176, C.C.)
● The crime of damage to property (malicious mischief) is not determined solely by
the mere act of inflicting injury upon the property of a third person, but it must be
shown that the act had for its object, the injury of the property merely for the sake
of damaging it
● Damage (in malicious mischief) - not only loss but also diminution of what is a
man's own. Thus, damage to another's house includes defacing it.
● If after damaging the property, the offender removes or makes use of the
fruits or objects of the damage, it is theft. (Art. 308, par. 2)
Article 328. Special cases of malicious mischief. - Any person who shall cause damage to
obstruct the performance of public functions, or using any poisonous or corrosive
substance; or spreading any infection or contagion among cattle; or who cause damage
to the property of the National Museum or National Library, or to any archive or registry,
waterworks, road, promenade, or any other thing used in common by the public, shall be
punished:
1. By prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, if the value of the damage
caused exceeds 1,000 pesos;
2. By arresto mayor, if such value does not exceed the above mentioned amount but it is
over 200 pesos; and
3. By arresto menor, in such value does not exceed 200 pesos.
Special cases of malicious mischief [Qualified Malicious Mischief]
1. Causing damage to obstruct the performance of public functions.
2. Using any poisonous or corrosive substance.
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
a. a poisonous substance may be used to kill large cattle or other
animals of the offended party.; corrosive substance may be used to cause
rust on a machine or to destroy property through the action of
chemicals.
3. Spreading any infection or contagion among cattle.
4. Causing damage to the property of the National Museum or National Library,
or to any archive or registry, waterworks, road, promenade, or any other thing
used in common by the public.
First case of qualified malicious mischief distinguished from sedition.
● The element of public and tumultuous uprising is not present in malicious
mischief
● Similar in that there is present in the commission of the offense, the intent to
obstruct the performance of public functions.
Article 329. Other mischiefs. - The mischiefs not included in the next preceding article
shall be punished:
1. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods, if the value of the damage
caused exceeds 1,000 pesos;
2. By arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if such value is over 200 pesos
but does not exceed 1,000 pesos; and
3. By arresto menor or fine of not less than the value of the damage caused and not
more than 200 pesos, if the amount involved does not exceed 200 pesos or cannot be
estimated.
Article 330. Damage and obstruction to means of communication. - The penalty of
prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon any
person who shall damage any railway, telegraph or telephone lines.
If the damage shall result in any derailment of cars, collision or other accident, the
penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed, without prejudice to the criminal liability of
the offender for the other consequences of his criminal act.
For the purpose of the provisions of the article, the electric wires, traction cables, signal
system and other things pertaining to railways, shall be deemed to constitute an integral
part of a railway system.
Points to remember:
● Damage and obstruction to means of communication is committed by
damaging any railway, telegraph or telephone lines.
● If the damage shall result in any derailment of cars, collision, or other accident, a
higher penalty shall be imposed. [Qualifying Circumstance]
● Art. 330 applies to persons who cut telegraph or telephone wires. But the
telegraph or telephone lines must pertain to a railway system. It would seem
that cutting the telephone wires or those for transmission of electric light or
power, not pertaining to railways, is not covered by Art. 330.
● Second paragraph connotes an accident
● When person/s are killed:
○ Art. 330 says "without prejudice to the criminal liability of the offender for
other consequences of his criminal act." If there is no intent to kill, it is
"damages to means of communication" with homicide because of the
first part of Art. 4 and Art. 48.
○ If there is intent to kill, and damaging the railways was the means to
accomplish the criminal purpose, it is murder.
Article 331. Destroying or damaging statues, public monuments or paintings. - Any
person who shall destroy or damage statues or any other useful or ornamental public
monument shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to prision
correccional in its minimum period.
Any person who shall destroy or damage any useful or ornamental painting of a public
nature shall suffer the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or
both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.
II. Article 217, 220, 222, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 308, 309, 310
Title 7: Crimes Committed by Public Officers
Chapter 4: Malversation of Public Funds or Property
Crimes:
1. Malversation by appropriating, misappropriating or permitting any other person
to take public funds or property. (Art. 217)
2. Failure of accountable officers to render accounts. (Art. 218)
3. Failure of a responsible public officer to render accounts before leaving the
country. (Art. 219)
4. Illegal use of public funds or property. (Art. 220)
5. Failure to make delivery of public funds or property. (Art. 221)
Article 217. Malversation of public funds or property; Presumption of malversation. - Any
public officer who, by reason of the duties of his office, is accountable for public funds or
property, shall appropriate the same or shall take or misappropriate or shall consent,
through abandonment or negligence, shall permit any other person to take such public
funds, or property, wholly or partially, or shall otherwise be guilty of the
misappropriation or malversation of such funds or property, shall suffer:
1. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if the amount
involved in the misappropriation or malversation does not exceed two hundred pesos.
2. The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if the amount
involved is more than two hundred pesos but does not exceed six thousand pesos.
3. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its
minimum period, if the amount involved is more than six thousand pesos but is less than
twelve thousand pesos.
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
4. The penalty of reclusion temporal, in its medium and maximum periods, if the amount
involved is more than twelve thousand pesos but is less than twenty-two thousand
pesos. If the amount exceeds the latter, the penalty shall be reclusion temporal in its
maximum period to reclusion perpetua.
In all cases, persons guilty of malversation shall also suffer the penalty of perpetual
special disqualification and a fine equal to the amount of the funds malversed or equal
to the total value of the property embezzled.
The failure of a public officer to have duly forthcoming any public funds or property with
which he is chargeable, upon demand by any duly authorized officer, shall be prima facie
evidence that he has put such missing funds or property to personal use. (As amended
by RA 1060).
Embezzlement -
Acts punishable in malversation.
1. By appropriating public funds or property.
2. By taking or misappropriating the same.
3. By consenting, or through abandonment or negligence, permitting any
other person to take such public funds or property.
4. By being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or malversation of such
funds or property.
Penalty: same whether committed with malice or through negligence or imprudence.
(exception to the provisions of Art. 67)
Elements:
1. That the offender be a public officer.
2. That he had the custody or control of funds or property by reason of the duties
of his office.
3. That those funds or property were public funds or property for which he was
accountable.
4. That he appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented or, through
abandonment or negligence, permitted another person to take them.
Public Officer - every public servant from the highest to the lowest. [Art 203]
(a) Taking part in the performance of public functions in
Government, or Performing in said Government or in any of its branches
public duties as an employee, agent or subordinate official, of any
rank or class; and
(b) That his authority to take part in the performance of public functions or to
perform public duties must be — a. by direct provision of the law, or b.
by popular election, or c. by appointment by competent authority.
Points to remember:
● Nature of the duties of the public officer, not the name of office, is controlling.
● Funds or property must be received in official capacity.
● When a public officer had no authority to receive the money for the
Government and upon receipt of the same he misappropriated it, the crime
committed is estafa, not malversation.
● But when the public officer has (1) the official custody of public funds or
property or the duty to collect or receive funds due the government, and (2)
the obligation to account for them to the government, his
misappropriation of the same constitutes malversation.
● a private person conspiring with an accountable public officer in committing
malversation is also guilty of malversation.
● Government funds include revenue funds and trust funds.
● Private and public property may be involved in malversation
Art 217 are applicable to:
1. private individuals who, in any capacity whatsoever, have charge of national,
provincial or municipal funds, revenues or property, and to
2. any administrator or depository of funds or property attached, seized or
deposited by public authority. (Art. 222)
Different acts of malversation punished under Art. 217.
1. Appropriating public funds or property.
a. To appropriate public funds or property includes every attempt to
dispose of the same without right.
2. Taking or misappropriating public funds or property.
a. Misappropriating public funds or property was committed by the
treasurer of a municipality who spent for his personal benefit
certain amount of money which formed part of the funds under his
charge.
3. Consenting or permitting, through abandonment or negligence, any
other person to take public funds or property.
a. the negligence of the accountable public officer must be positively
and clearly shown to be inexcusable, approximating malice or fraud.
Negligence - the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided by those
considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or the
doing of something which a prudent and reasonable man would do.
Did the defendant in doing the alleged negligent act use that reasonable care and
the caution which an ordinary prudent person would have used in the same situation? If not,
he is guilty of negligence.
Points to remember:
● In malversation not committed through negligence, lack of criminal intent or good
faith is a defense.
● The return of the funds malversed is only mitigating, not exempting, circumstance.
(akin to voluntary surrender)
● When the shortage is paid by the public officer from his pocket, he is not liable
for malversation.
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
Article 220. Illegal use of public funds or property. - Any public officer who shall apply
any public fund or property under his administration to any public use other than for
which such fund or property were appropriated by law or ordinance shall suffer the
penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine ranging from one-half to
the total of the sum misapplied, if by reason of such misapplication, any damages or
embarrassment shall have resulted to the public service. In either case, the offender
shall also suffer the penalty of temporary special disqualification.
If no damage or embarrassment to the public service has resulted, the penalty shall be a
fine from 5 to 50 per cent of the sum misapplied.
Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer.
2. That there is a public fund or property under his administration.
3. That such public fund or property has been appropriated by law or
ordinance.
4. That he applies the same to a public use other than that for which such fund
or property has been appropriated by law or ordinance.
Points to remember:
● There is no technical malversation if there is no law or ordinance appropriating
public funds or property for a particular purpose.
● The public funds or property must be appropriated by law or ordinance for a
particular purpose.
● Criminal intent not an element of technical malversation
○ The law punishes the act of diverting public property earmarked by law or
ordinance for a particular public purpose to another public purpose
Article 222. Officers included in the preceding provisions. - The provisions of this chapter
shall apply to private individuals who in any capacity whatever, have charge of any
insular, provincial or municipal funds, revenues, or property and to any administrator or
depository of funds or property attached, seized or deposited by public authority, even if
such property belongs to a private individual.
Private individuals who may be liable under Arts. 217 to 221.
1. Private individuals who, in any capacity whatever, have charge of any
national, provincial or municipal funds, revenue, or property.
2. Administrator or depository of funds or property, attached, seized or
deposited by public authority, even if such property belongs to a private
individual.
Purpose: to extend the provisions of the Code on malversation to private individuals.
Points to remember:
● Sheriffs and receivers fall under the term "administrator."
● Judicial administrator not covered by this article.
○ He is not in charge of any property attached, impounded or placed
in deposit by public authority. Conversion of effects in his trust
makes him liable for estafa.
● Private property is included, provided it is (1) attached, (2) seized, or (3) deposited by
public authority.
○ as long as such funds or property are placed in the custody of
accountable public officers.

Illegal use of public funds or property distinguished from malversation under Title 10: Crimes Against Property
Art. 217. Chapter 1: Robbery in General

Illegal use of public funds or property. Malversation of public funds or property

[Technical Malversation] Art. 217
Article 293. Who are guilty of robbery. - Any person who, with intent to gain, shall take
any personal property belonging to another, by means of violence or intimidation of any
offenders are accountable public officers person, or using force upon anything shall be guilty of robbery.

Offender does not derive any personal the offender in certain cases profits from Robbery - taking of personal property, belonging to another, with intent to gain, by
gain or profit the proceeds of the crime. means of violence against, or intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything.

Classification of robbery:
the public fund or property is applied to the public fund or property is applied to 1. Robbery with violence against, or intimidation of persons. (Arts. 294, 297 and
another public use the personal use and benefit of the 298)
offender or of another person. 2. Robbery by the use of force upon things. (Arts. 299 and 302)

the public officer applies public funds
under his administration not for his or
another's personal use, but to a public
use other than that for which the fund
was appropriated by law or ordinance.
the offender misappropriates public Elements of robbery in general:
funds for his own personal use or 1. That there be (1) personal property; (2) belonging to another;
allows any other person to tale such 2. That there is (3) unlawful taking of that property;
public funds for the latter's personal use 3. That the taking must be (4) with intent to gain; and
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
4. That there is (5) violence against or intimidation of any person, or
force upon anything. (5) Violence or intimidation, as an element of robbery.
● must be against the person of the offended party, not upon the thing taken.
Points to remember: ● Intimidation need not be a threat of bodily harm.
● must be (1) personal property, for if real property is occupied or real right is ● The violence or intimidation must be present before the taking of personal
usurped by means of violence against or intimidation of a person, the crime is property is complete.
usurpation. (Art. 312) ○ Exception: But when the violence results in: (1) homicide, (2) rape,
(3) intentional mutilation, or (4) any of the serious physical injuries
(2) Belonging to another: penalized in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Art. 263, the taking of personal
● one who, by means of violence or intimidation, took his own property from property is robbery complexed with any of those crimes under Art.
the depositary is not guilty of robbery. 294, even if the taking was already complete when the violence
● a co-owner or a partner cannot commit robbery or theft with regard to the was used by the offender.
co-ownership or partnership property. ○ even if the violence resulting in homicide, rape, intentional mutilation,
● It is sufficient if the property is taken from him by means of threats and or serious physical injuries is used by the offender after the
violence, for the purpose of gain, on the part of the person appropriating it. taking of personal property belonging to another, the crime is still
● Robbery can be committed only by taking personal property of another against robbery complexed with any of those crimes.
the latter's will. ● But the taking of personal property need not be immediately after the
(3) Unlawful Taking intimidation.
● the unlawful taking of personal property is an essential part of the ● Robbery is also committed by using force upon anything in taking personal
crime of robbery property belonging to another with intent to gain but will not make the taking
● As to robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons. of personal property robbery, if the culprit never entered a house or
From the moment the offender gains possession of the thing, even if the building.
culprit has had no opportunity to dispose of the same, the unlawful taking is
complete. Distinctions between effects of employment of violence against or intimidation of
● As to robbery with force upon things. the thing must be taken out of the person and those of use of force upon things.
building to consummate the crime.
● "Taking," as an element of robbery, means depriving the offended party of
robbery with violence against or robbery with force upon things (inside
ownership of the thing taken with the character of permanency.
intimidation of any person (anywhere) dwelling ONLY)
(4) Intent to Gain
Whenever violence against or Robbery only if the force is used either
● Intent to gain is presumed from the unlawful taking of personal
intimidation of any person is used, the to enter the building or to break
property.
taking of personal property belonging to doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other
● The taking of personal property belonging to another should not be under another is always robbery. kind of locked or sealed furniture or
claim of ownership. receptacle inside the building or to force
● Absence of intent to gain will make the taking of personal property grave Can be committed anywhere them open outside after taking the
coercion if there is violence used. same from the building. (Arts. 299 and
302)
Note: The element of "personal property belonging to another" and that of "intent to gain"
must concur. Inhabited Place:
The penalty depends (a) on the result of the penalty is based (a) on the value of
If the accused, with intent to gain, took from another, personal property which the violence used, as when homicide, the property taken and (b) on whether
turned out to be his own property, the property not belonging to another, he rape, intentional mutilation or any of the or not the offenders carry arms;
cannot be held liable for robbery, even if in taking it, the accused used violence serious physical injuries resulted, or when
against or intimidation of person, or force upon anything. less serious or slight physical injuries Uninhabited Place:
were inflicted, which are only evidence The penalty is based only on the value
If he took personal property from another, believing that it was his own property, but of simple violence, and (b) on the of the property taken.
existence of intimidation only.
in reality it belonged to the offended party, there being no intent to gain, he cannot
be held liable for robbery, even if the accused used violence against or intimidation of
person, or force upon anything.
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
Classification of robbery when both violence or intimidation and force upon things
are present.
it is now settled that where robbery, though committed in an inhabited house, is
characterized by intimidation, this factor "supplies the controlling qualification," so that
the law to apply is Article 294 and not Article 299 of the Revised Penal Code. This is
on the theory that "robbery which is characterized by violence or intimidation against
the person is evidently graver than ordinary robbery committed by force upon things,
because where violence or intimidation against the person is present, there is
greater disturbance to the order of society and the security of the individual."
Republic Act No. 6539, approved August 26, 1972, is the law applicable when the
property taken in robbery is a motor vehicle.
"Carnapping" - the taking, with intent to gain, of motor vehicle belonging to another
without the latter's consent, or by means of violence against or intimidation of persons,
or by using force upon things.
Article 294. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons; Penalties. - Any
person guilty of robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of any person
shall suffer:
1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death, when by reason or on occasion of the
robbery, the crime of homicide shall have been committed.
2. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion perpetua when
the robbery shall have been accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation, or if by
reason or on occasion of such robbery, any of the physical injuries penalized in
subdivision 1 of Article 263 shall have been inflicted; Provided, however, that when the
robbery accompanied with rape is committed with a use of a deadly weapon or by two or
more persons, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death (As amended by PD No.
767).
3. The penalty of reclusion temporal, when by reason or on occasion of the robbery, any
of the physical injuries penalized in subdivision 2 of the article mentioned in the next
preceding paragraph, shall have been inflicted.
4. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its
medium period, if the violence or intimidation employed in the commission of the
robbery shall have been carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for the commission of
the crime, or when the course of its execution, the offender shall have inflicted upon any
person not responsible for its commission any of the physical injuries covered by
subdivisions 3 and 4 of said Article 23.
5. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its
medium period in other cases. (As amended by R. A. 18).
Acts punished as robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons:
1. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery (taking of personal property
belonging to another with intent to gain), the crime of homicide is
committed;
2. When the robbery is accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation or arson;
3. When by reason or on occasion of such robbery, any of the physical injuries
resulting in insanity, imbecility, impotency or blindness is inflicted;
4. When by reason or on occasion of robbery, any of the physical injuries resulting
in the loss of the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or the loss
of an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg or the loss of the use of any such
member or incapacity for the work in which the injured person is theretofore
habitually engaged is inflicted;
5. If the violence or intimidation employed in the commission of the robbery
is carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for the commission of the crime;
6. When in the course of its execution, the offender shall have inflicted upon
any person not responsible for the commission of the robbery any of the
physical injuries in consequence of which the person injured becomes
deformed or loses any other member of his body or loses the use thereof or
becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of the work in which he is
habitually engaged for more than 90 days or the person injured becomes ill
or incapacitated for labor for more than 30 days;
7. If the violence employed by the offender does not cause any of the
serious physical injuries defined in Art. 263, or if the offender employs
intimidation only.
Points to remember:
● Article 48 does not apply to Art. 294. The crimes defined in this article are special
complex crimes. Art. 294 already provides a specific penalty for each.
● “On the occasion” or “by reason” of the robbery mean that the homicide or serious
physical injuries defined must be committed in the course or because of the
robbery.
● A conviction for robbery with homicide requires certitude that the robbery was the
main purpose and objective of the criminals and that the killing was merely
incidental.
Paragraph 1: Robbery with Homicide
This is a special complex crime, punished as a single crime, although robbery and
homicide are committed by the offender. Penalty is the one prescribed by the Code
● Main objective/intent is to rob but someone dies before during or after the robbery
● “Homicide” is to be understood in its generic sense as to include parricide and
murder.
● All the homicides or murders are merged in the composite, integrated whole that is
robbery with homicide so long as all the killings were perpetrated by reason or on
the occasion of the robbery.
● If robbery with homicide is committed by a band, the offense would still be robbery
with homicide. The circumstance of the band is not an element of the crime and is
merely a generic aggravating circumstance which may be offset by mitigating
circumstances.
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
● No such crime as robbery with murder. Treachery must be considered as a generic
aggravating circumstance and not qualifying.
● Is it necessary that a robbery has actually taken place first, and the homicide is
committed on the occasion or by reason thereof? No, it is not required; however, the
intent to take personal property belonging to another with intent to gain must
precede the killing.
● Homicide may precede the robbery. Killing the first victim and then afterwards
taking the money is robbery with homicide. But the offender must have the intent
to take personal property before the killing.
● “By reason” covers homicide committed before or after the taking of personal
property as long as the motive of the offender in killing a person is to deprive the
victim of his personal property.
● Homicide to eliminate an obstacle to the commission of robbery and homicide
committed to remove opposition or to suppress evidence are all robbery with
homicide. Also, killing a person to escape after the commission of robbery is robbery
with homicide – even if the person killed was an innocent bystander or a robber
himself.
● Is it robbery with homicide even if the death of a person is supervened by mere
accident? It is enough that a homicide resulted by reason or on the occasion of the
robbery.
● When homicide is not proved, the crime is only robbery.
● When robbery is not proved, the crime is only homicide.
● All those who took part as principals in the robbery would also be held liable as
principals of robbery with homicide although they did not actually take part in the
killing, unless it clearly appears that they endeavored to prevent the same (nothing
short of a clear showing that they prevented the killing themselves).
● All other crimes are deemed absorbed with Robbery with Homicide; additional
killings, physical injuries, etc. regardless of number. Whoever who killed or was killed
Paragraph 2: Robbery with Rape
● The offender must have the intent to take personal property belonging to another
with intent to gain, and such intent must precede the rape.
● It is not necessary the rape be prior to or simultaneous with the robbery. So the law
says, in the definition of the crime, that when the robbery is accompanied by rape or
mutilation, etc.
● But if the rape is committed against a woman in a house other than that where the
robbery is committed, the rape should be considered a separate offense.
● Even if the rape was committed before the taking of property, the accused were
guilty of robbery with rape. Rape was not their primary objective.
● No such crime as robbery with attempted rape. Both crimes cannot be the result of
a single act contemplated in Art. 48.
● Additional rapes will not increase the penalty. Also, there is no law providing that the
additional rape/s or homicide/s should be considered as aggravating circumstances.
● If rape was the primary objective of the accused, and his taking of the jewels of the
victim was not with intent to gain but just to have some tokens of her supposed
consent to the coition, the accused committed two distinct crimes of rape and
unjust vexation.
● When rape and homicide co­‐exist in the commission of robbery, the rape is to be
considered as an aggravating circumstance. The crime is still designated as robbery
with homicide.
● All other sexual offenses are absorbed
Paragraph 4: Robbery with Unnecessary Violence and Intimidation (Art. 294 paragraph
4)
● Example: Tying the victim after wounding him and leaving him tied to the trunk of a
tree.
● The violence need not result in serious physical injuries. All that par. 4 of Art. 294
requires that the violence be unnecessary for the commission of the robbery.
● When the violence or intimidation is necessary, par. 4 of Art. 294 is not applicable. Ex:
It appears that the beating was for the purpose of compelling him to show the place
where he kept his money.
● What if in the course of the execution of the crime of robbery, one of the offenders
inflicted upon another robber, physical injuries which resulted in the latter’s
deformity, is the crime robbery with serious physical injuries? The wording of the law
as regards this question is “upon any person not responsible for its commission.” It
would seem that the penalty in paragraph 4 of Art. 294 should not be applied. The
offender would be liable for two crimes, namely: (1) robbery, and (2) serious physical
injuries under 263, paragraph 3.
● The serious physical injuries defined in subdivisions 3 and 4 of Art. 263 must be
inflicted “in the course of its execution.” If they were inflicted after the taking of the
personal property had been complete, the serious physical injuries mentioned
should be considered as separate offenses.
Requisites of Robbery under the second case of par. 4 of 294
1. That any of the physical injuries defined in paragraphs 3 and 4 of Art. 263 was
inflicted in the course of the robbery.
2. That any of them was inflicted upon any person not responsible for the commission
of the robbery.
Robbery with the use of Violence Against or Intimidation of any person under
paragraph 5 of Art. 294
The robbery under this paragraph is known as simple robbery because the use of violence
against any person does not result in homicide, rape, intentional mutilation, or any of the
serious physical injuries defined in Art. 263, which may give rise to a special complex crime.
When the injury inflicted upon the offended party on the occasion of robbery can be
qualified only as less serious physical injuries or slight physical injuries, the crime is defined
and penalized in par. 5 of Art. 294.
Violence or intimidation may enter at any time before the owner is finally deprived of
his property.
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
Robbery with Violence or Intimidation “in other cases” referred to in par. 5 is committed
by:
1. Snatching money from the hands of the victim and pushing her to prevent her from
recovering the seized property. (U.S. v. Samonte)
2. Grabbing a pawn ticket from the hands of another and intimidating him. (U.S. v.
Blanco)
In Robbery with intimidation, there must be acts done by the accused, which, either, by their
own nature or by reason of the circumstances under which they are executed, inspire fear in
the person against whom they are directed. The intimidation consists in causing or creating a
fear in the mind of a person or in bringing in a sense of mental distress in view of a rise or evil
that may be impending really or in imagination.
Article 295. Robbery with physical injuries, committed in an uninhabited place and by a
band, or with the use of firearm on a street, road or alley. - If the offenses mentioned in
subdivisions three, four, and five of the next preceding article shall have been committed
in an uninhabited place or by a band, or by attacking a moving train, street car, motor
vehicle or airship, or by entering the passenger's compartments in a train or, in any
manner, taking the passengers thereof by surprise in the respective conveyances, or on
a street, road, highway, or alley, and the intimidation is made with the use of a firearm,
the offender shall be punished by the maximum period of the proper penalties.
In the same cases, the penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon the leader of
the band.

Comparison: If any of the offense defined in subdivision 3, 4 and 5 of Article 294 is committed:
1. in an uninhabited place
2. by a band
Robbery w/ violence Grave threats Grave coercion
3. attacking a moving train, street car, motor vehicle, or airship or
4. by entering the passengers’ compartment in a train or in any manner taking the
Intent to gain No intent to gain None
passengers thereof by surprise in the respective conveyances
5. on a street, road, highway or alley and the intimidation is made with the use of
Immediate harm Intimidation; promises Intimidation (effect) is
firearms.
some future harm or injury immediate and offended
The offender shall be punished by the maximum period of the proper penalties in Art. 294
party is compelled to do
something against his will
(w/n right or wrong) Points to remember:
● These five qualifying circumstances must be alleged in the information and proved
during trial.
● Being qualifying, it cannot be offset by a generic mitigating circumstance. Ex: If
Robbery Bribery
robbery by a band is committed in an uninhabited place, “by a band” is qualifying
and “uninhabited place” would be a generic aggravating circumstance only.
The victim did not commit a crime and he The victim has committed a crime and
● This article does not apply:
is intimidated with arrest and/or gives money or gift to avoid arrest or
prosecution to deprive him of his personal prosecution ○ when by reason or on occasion of the robbery, the crime of homicide is
property committed (subdivision 1, Art. 294)
○ When the robbery is accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation, or
The victim is deprived of his money or He parts with his money or property in a arson (subdivision 2, Art. 294)
property by force or intimidation. sense voluntarily. ○ If by reason or on occasion of robbery, any of the serious physical injuries in
insanity, imbecility, impotency or blindness is inflicted (subdivision 2, Art.
294)
● The reason is that this article mentions subdivision 3, 4, and 5 of Art. 294, omitting
subdivision 1 and 2.
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
Article 296. Definition of a band and penalty incurred by the members thereof. - When
more than three armed malefactors take part in the commission of a robbery, it shall be
deemed to have been committed by a band. When any of the arms used in the
commission of the offense be an unlicensed firearm, the penalty to be imposed upon all
the malefactors shall be the maximum of the corresponding penalty provided by law,
without prejudice of the criminal liability for illegal possession of such unlicensed
firearms.
Any member of a band who is present at the commission of a robbery by the band, shall
be punished as principal of any of the assaults committed by the band, unless it be
shown that he attempted to prevent the same.
Outline of the provisions:
1. When at least four armed malefactors take part in the commission of a robbery, it is
deemed committed by a band.
2. When any of the arms used in the commission of the robbery is not licensed, the
penalty upon all malefactors shall be the maximum of the corresponding penalty
provided by law, without prejudice to the criminal liability for illegal possession of
such firearms.
3. Any member of the band who was present at the commission of a robbery by a
band, shall be punished as principal of any of the assaults committed by the band,
unless it be shown that he attempted to prevent the same.
Requisites for liability for the acts of the other members of the band:
A member of the band is liable for any of the assaults committed by the other members
thereof, when the following requisites concur:
a. He was a member of the band
b. He was present at the commission of a robbery by that band
c. The other members committed an assault
d. He did not attempt to prevent the assault.
Points to remember:
● There must be proof that he made an endeavor to prevent the assault committed by
another member of the band, in order that he may not be held liable for such
assault.
● When is the robbery deemed committed by a band? At least four armed
● persons must take part in the commission of robbery.
● When the robbery was not by a band and homicide was not determined by the
accused when they plotted the crime, the one who did not participate in the killing
is liable for robbery only.
● But when there is conspiracy to commit homicide and robbery, all the conspirators,
even if less than four armed men, are liable for the special complex crime of robbery
with homicide.
● Art. 296 is not applicable to principal by induction, who was not present at the
commission of the robbery, if the agreement was only to commit robbery. But the
principal by induction would be liable for the homicide or other crimes that might
have resulted, if he also ordered the killing of a particular person or any one who
would resist the robbery, or the commission of other crimes.
● Conspiracy was for robbery only but homicide was also committed on the occasion
thereof – all members of the band are liable for robbery with homicide unless they
can show that they endeavored to prevent the homicide.
● Proof of conspiracy is not necessary when four or more armed persons committed
robbery.
● Where in the course of the robbery by a band. The offended woman was taken by
one of the accused to a place away from the house, where the robbery was
committed, and there he raped her without the knowledge of his companions, he
alone is guilty of robbery with rape.
● The use of unlicensed firearm is not a special aggravating circumstance In robbery
with rape or intentional mutilation, and in robbery with physical injuries defined in
subdivision 1 of Article 263.
● In robbery defined in any of the paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 of Art. 294, perpetrated by a
band using unlicensed firearms, the penalty is the maximum of the maximum
period of the proper penalty. It is not an aggravating circumstance.
Article 297. Attempted and frustrated robbery committed under certain circumstances. -
When by reason or on occasion of an attempted or frustrated robbery a homicide is
committed, the person guilty of such offenses shall be punished by reclusion temporal in
its maximum period to reclusion perpetua, unless the homicide committed shall deserve
a higher penalty under the provisions of this Code.
Points to remember:
● the term “homicide” in Art. 297 is used in a generic sense. Hence, it includes multiple
homicides, murder, parricide, or even infanticide.
● As long as homicide is committed by reason or on occasion of an attempted or
frustrated robbery, the penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum period to
reclusion perpetua shall be imposed.
● If in an attempted or frustrated robbery, the killing of the victim is qualified by
treachery or relationship, the proper penalty for murder or parricide shall be
imposed because it is more severe.
● Attempted or Frustrated Robbery with homicide are special complex crimes not
governed by Art. 48, but by the special provisions of Arts. 294 and 297, respectively.
● When is Art. 48 applicable in robbery? If attempted or frustrated robbery with
serious physical injuries, Art. 48 is applicable, since the felony would fall neither
under Art. 294 which covers consummated robbery with homicide nor under Art.
297 which covers attempted or frustrated robbery with homicide.
● There is only one crime of attempted robbery with homicide even if slight physical
injuries were inflicted on other persons on the occasion or by reason of the robbery.
Section Two. - Robbery by the use of force upon things
Article 299. Robbery in an inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to
worship. - Any armed person who shall commit robbery in an inhabited house or public
building or edifice devoted to religious worship, shall be punished by reclusion temporal,
if the value of the property taken shall exceed 250 pesos, and if:
(a) The malefactors shall enter the house or building in which the robbery was
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
Points to Remember:
committed, by any of the following means:
1. Through a opening not intended for entrance or egress.
2. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or breaking any door or window.
3. By using false keys, picklocks or similar tools.
4. By using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of public authority.
Or if -
(b) The robbery be committed under any of the following circumstances:
1. By the breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other kind of locked or sealed
furniture or receptacle;
2. By taking such furniture or objects to be broken or forced open outside the place of
the robbery.
When the offenders do not carry arms, and the value of the property taken exceeds 250
pesos, the penalty next lower in degree shall be imposed.
The same rule shall be applied when the offenders are armed, but the value of the
property taken does not exceed 250 pesos.
When said offenders do not carry arms and the value of the property taken does not
exceed 250 pesos, they shall suffer the penalty prescribed in the two next preceding
paragraphs, in its minimum period.
If the robbery be committed in one of the dependencies of an inhabited house, public
building, or building dedicated to religious worship, the penalties next lower in degree
than those prescribed in this article shall be imposed.
Robbery with force upon things under Subdivision A:
Elements:
1. That the offender entered (a) an inhabited place, or (b) public building, or (c)edifice
devoted to religious worship.
2. That the entrance was effected by any of the following means:
a. Through an opening not intended for entrance or egress
b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor, or breaking any door or window
c. By using false keys, picklocks or similar tools
d. By using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of public authority
3. That once inside the building, the offender took personal property belonging to
another with intent to gain.
● The offender must “enter the house or building”. If the offender merely inserted his
hand through an opening in the wall or used a pole to get the clothes inside the
room, the crime is theft, not robbery.
● The facts must show that the accused entered the dwelling house or building by
any of the means enumerated in Subdivision A of Art. 299. The reason for this ruling
is that one of the elements of robbery under art. 299 states that the entrance is
effected by any of the means described in Subdivision A.
● Where the manner of entrance was not proven, the crime is theft and not robbery.
This ruling applies where both the outside door and window are open, so that it is
possible that the accused might have passed through the door.
● In entering the building, the offender must have an intention to take personal
property. If there is no evidence to show that the intention of the accused was to
commit robbery, the crime committed is attempted trespass to dwelling.
● The place entered must be a house or building. An automobile is not a house or a
building.
● Inhabited house is any shelter, ship, or vessel constituting the dwelling of one or
more persons even though the inhabitants thereof are temporarily absent when the
robbery is committed.
● Public building is every building owned by the Government or belonging to a
private person but used or rented by the Government, although temporarily
unoccupied by the same. What makes a building public is not its inauguration but
the fact the State or any of its agencies having title thereto.
● Any of the four means described in Subdivision A of Art. 299 must be resorted to by
the offender to enter a house or building, not to get out.
○ Through an opening not intended for entrance or egress
■ The window or a hole through the wall already in existence is not
intended for entrance or egress. If the culprit enters through such
opening and once inside he takes personal property belonging to
the occupants therein, the crime is robbery.
■ The whole body of the culprit must be inside the building to
constitute entering. When only his hand is introduced, there is no
robbery.
○ By breaking any wall, roof, or floor, or breaking any door or window
■ The force used must be actual.
■ The wall must be an outside wall and not a wall between rooms
because the breaking must be for the purpose of entering the
house or building.
■ The outside door must be broken. Where the door itself was
intact, and entered by removing the hinges or hooks, the crime
was simple theft. Where the entrance is effected through a means
intended for entrance or egress, there must be an actual breaking
or smashing.
■ “Door” refers to an outside door. It can be no other than the main
or back door
○ By using false keys, picklocks, or similar tools
■ False keys are genuine keys stolen from the owner or any keys
other than those intended by the owner for use in the lock forcibly
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
opened by the offender. Picklocks are those specially adapted to
the commission of the crime of robbery.
■ The genuine key must be stolen, not taken by force or with
intimidation. Where the offenders intimidated the inmates, the
crime was robbery with intimidation of persons.
■ The false key or pick lock must be used to enter the building and
not open a trunk or open the drawer of a cabinet.
■ It is only theft when the false key is used to open wardrobe or
locked receptacle or drawer or inside door
○ The use of fictitious name or the act of pretending to exercise authority
must be to enter the building
■ Ex: When robbers represented themselves as detectives by
displaying metal badges and once inside, took the money of the
offended party. Using fictitious names must be the efficient cause
of the opening by the offended party of the door of his house to
the accused.
Robbery with force upon things under Subdivision B
Elements:
1. That the offender is inside a dwelling house, public building, or edifice devoted to
religious worship, regardless of the circumstances under which he entered.
2. That the offender takes personal property belonging to another, with intent to gain,
under any of the following circumstances:
a. by the breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other kind of locked or
sealed furniture or receptacle; or
b. by taking such furniture or objects away to be broken or forced open
outside the place of the robbery.
Points to remember:
● Each subdivision is independent of the other. Hence, it is not necessary that the
offender entered the building by any of the means mention in Subdivision A. Thus, a
guest in the house of the offended party may be guilty of this kind of robbery if he
breaks open a locked wardrobe or chest inside that house or if he takes it outside to
be broken and once broken, takes the personal property.
● Breaking or destroying the keyhole of the door of an aparador is virtually destroying
a “locked furniture”.
● A person who carries away a sealed box for the purpose of breaking the same and
taking out its contents outside the place of robbery is guilty of consummated
robbery even though he does not succeed in opening the box.
● A person who opens by force a certain locked receptacle which has been confided
into his custody and takes the money therein, is guilty of Estafa and not robbery,
because the accused does not commit the act in the house of the offended party or
does not take the receptacle out from the house of its owner.
● The penalty for robbery with force upon things in inhabited houses, public buildings,
or edifices devoted to religious worship depends on the value of property taken and
on whether or not the offender carries arms.
○ The arm carried must not be used to intimidate.
○ The liability for carrying arms while robbing an inhabited house is extended
to each of the offenders who take part in the robbery, even if some of them
do not carry arms.
○ The reason why a heavier penalty is imposed for robbery in a dwelling
house is that the inhabitants might suffer bodily harm during the
commission of the robbery.
Article 300. Robbery in an uninhabited place and by a band. - The robbery mentioned in
the next preceding article, if committed in an uninhabited place and by a band, shall be
punished by the maximum period of the penalty provided therefor.
Points to remember:
● Robbery in an inhabited house, public building or edifice devoted to religious
worship is qualified when committed by a band and in an uninhabited place.
● The inhabited house, public building, or edifice devoted to religious worship must be
located in an uninhabited place.
● Robbery with force upon things (Art. 299), in order to be qualified, must be
committed in an uninhabited place and by a band (Art. 300); while robbery with
violence against or intimidation of persons must be committed in an uninhabited
place or by a band. (Art. 295).
Article 301. What is an inhabited house, public building or building dedicated to religious
worship and their dependencies. - Inhabited house means any shelter, ship or vessel
constituting the dwelling of one or more persons, even though the inhabitants thereof
shall temporarily be absent therefrom when the robbery is committed.
All interior courts, corrals, waterhouses, granaries, barns, coach-houses, stables or other
departments or inclosed places contiguous to the building or edifice, having an interior
entrance connected therewith, and which form part of the whole, shall be deemed
dependencies of an inhabited house, public building or building dedicated to religious
worship.
Orchards and other lands used for cultivation or production are not included in the
terms of the next preceding paragraph, even if closed, contiguous to the building and
having direct connection therewith.
The term "public building" includes every building owned by the Government or
belonging to a private person not included used or rented by the Government, although
temporarily unoccupied by the same.
Points to remember:
● Notwithstanding the fact that for a period of almost a month, the house
● was actually uninhabited, it is still robbery in an inhabited house because the
building in question was ordinarily inhabited and intended as a dwelling.
● “Dependencies” are all interior courts, corrals, warehouses, granaries or inclosed
places contiguous to the building or edifice, having an interior entrance connected
therewith, and which form part of the whole. (Art. 301 par. 2). Three requisites:
○ Must be contiguous to the building;
○ Must have an interior entrance connected therewith
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
○ Must form part of the whole
● If the information alleges that the robbery was committed in a garage, that
allegation is not equivalent to a charge that the robbery was committed in a
dependency of an inhabited house for a garage may or may not be a dependency of
the house. It will only be a dependency if the three requisites mentioned are
present.
● Ex: A small store located on the ground floor of the house, belonging to the owner of
the store
● Orchards and lands used for cultivation, not dependencies
Article 302. Robbery is an uninhabited place or in a private building. - Any robbery
committed in an uninhabited place or in a building other than those mentioned in the
first paragraph of Article 299, if the value of the property taken exceeds 250 pesos, shall
be punished by prision correccional if any of the following circumstances is present:
1. If the entrance has been effected through any opening not intended for entrance or
egress.
2. If any wall, roof, flour or outside door or window has been broken.
3. If the entrance has been effected through the use of false keys, picklocks or other
similar tools.
4. If any dorm, wardrobe, chest or by sealed or closed furniture or receptacle has been
broken.
5. If any closed or sealed receptacle, as mentioned in the preceding paragraph, has been
removed even if the same to broken open elsewhere.
When the value of the property takes does not exceed 250 pesos, the penalty next lower
in degree shall be imposed.
In the cases specified in Articles 294, 295, 297, 299, 300, and 302 of this Code, when the
property taken is mail matter or large cattle, the offender shall suffer the penalties next
higher in degree than those provided in said articles.
Elements:
1. That the offender entered an uninhabited place or a building which was not a
dwelling house, not a public building, or not an edifice devoted to religious worship.
2. That any of the following circumstances was present:
a. The entrance was effected through an opening not intended for entrance
or egress;
b. A wall, roof, floor, or outside door or window was broken;
c. The entrance was effected through the use of false keys, picklocks or other
similar tools;
d. A door, wardrobe, chest, or any sealed or closed furniture or receptacle was
broken;
e. A closed or sealed receptacle was removed, even if the same be broken
open elsewhere.
3. That with intent to gain, the offender took therefrom personal property belonging to
another.
Points to remember:
● The “uninhabited place” mentioned in Art. 302 is a building. A warehouse is
considered an uninhabited place.
● “Building other than those mentioned in the first paragraph of Art.299” means that
the place where the robbery is committed is not an inhabited house or public
building or edifice devoted to religious worship.
● “Building” includes any kind of structure used for storage or safekeeping of personal
property, such as (a) freight car and (b) warehouse.
● Paragraphs Nos. 4 and 5 of Art. 302 do not require that the offender must have
entered the uninhabited building through an opening not intended for entrance or
egress, or after breaking a wall, roof, floor, door, or window, or through the use of
false keys, picklocks, or other similar tools.
● Receptacle must be “closed” or “sealed”.
● Is the mere removal of a closed or sealed receptacle sufficient under par. 5 of Art.
302? No. This kind of robbery requires at least an intention to open it by force.
● The penalty is based only on the value of property taken. The offender being armed
is not important under this article for the reason that there is no person who can be
injured or killed.
Article 303. Robbery of cereals, fruits, or firewood in an uninhabited place or private
building. - In the cases enumerated in Articles 299 and 302, when the robbery consists in
the taking of cereals, fruits, or firewood, the culprit shall suffer the penalty next lower in
degree than that prescribed in said articles.
Points to remember:
● When the robbery described in Art. 299 and 302 consists in the taking of cereals,
fruits or firewood, the penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed in the
articles shall be imposed.
● Next lower in degree only when the robbery is committed by the use of force upon
things, without violence against or intimidation of any person, in an inhabited
house, public building, or edifice devoted to religious worship (Art. 299) or in an
uninhabited place or private building.
● Even if the offender took from the camarin about 15 sacks of palay, since the robbery
committed with force upon things was accompanied with violence against or
intimidation of persons, Art. 303 is not applicable. The offender should be punished
under Art. 294.
Article 304. Possession of picklocks or similar tools. - Any person who shall without
lawful cause have in his possession picklocks or similar tools especially adopted to the
commission of the crime of robbery, shall be punished by arresto mayor in its maximum
period to prision correccional in its minimum period.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any person who shall make such tools. If the
offender be a locksmith, he shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its medium
and maximum periods.
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
Elements of illegal possession of picklocks or similar tools:
1. That the offender has in his possession picklocks or similar tools.
2. That such picklocks or similar tools are specially adapted to the commission of
robbery.
3. That the offender does not have lawful cause for such possession.
Points to remember:
● Actual use of picklocks or similar tools, not necessary in illegal possession thereof.
● If the person who makes such tools is a locksmith, the penalty is higher.
Title 10: Crimes Against Property
Chapter 3: Theft
Article 308. Who are liable for theft. - Theft is committed by any person who, with intent
to gain but without violence against or intimidation of persons nor force upon things,
shall take personal property of another without the latter's consent.
Theft is likewise committed by:
1. Any person who, having found lost property, shall fail to deliver the same to the local
authorities or to its owner;
2. Any person who, after having maliciously damaged the property of another, shall remove or
make use of the fruits or object of the damage caused by him; and
3. Any person who shall enter an enclosed estate or a field where trespass is forbidden or
which belongs to another and without the consent of its owner, shall hunt or fish upon
the same or shall gather cereals, or other forest or farm products.
Elements of theft:
a. That there be taking of personal property
b. That said property belongs to another
c. That the taking be done with intent to gain
d. That the taking be done without the consent of the owner
e. That the taking be accomplished without the use of violence against or intimidation
of persons or use of force upon things.
Points to remember:
● What distinguishes theft from robbery is that in theft, the offender does not use
violence or intimidation or does not enter a house or building through any of the
means in Art. 299 or Art. 302 in taking personal property of another with intent to
gain.
● It is not an indispensable element of theft that the thief carry, more or less far away,
the thing taken by him from its owner.
● The theft is consummated when the offender is able to:
○ Place the thing taken under his control and in such a situation as he could
dispose of it at once; or
○ From the moment the offender had full possession of the things, even if he
did not have an opportunity to dispose of the same.
● “Taking” in theft must have the character of permanency. By gain is meant not only
the acquisition of a thing useful to the purposes of life but also the benefit which in
any other sense may be derived or expected from the act which is performed
(People v. Fernandez). The element of “taking” means the act of depriving another of
the possession and dominion of a movable thing coupled with the intention, at the
time of the “taking”, of withholding it with the character of permanency (People v.
Galang)
● The offender must have the intention of placing the property taken under
● his control and of making himself the owner thereof
● If there is no taking of personal property, the crime of theft is not committed.
● Personal Property includes electricity and gas because electricity is valuable
merchandise bought and sold like other personal property and is capable of
appropriation by another.
● Intent to gain is presumed from the unlawful taking of personal property belonging
to another. But if a person takes personal property from another believing it to be
his own, presumption of intent to gain is rebutted and, therefore, he is not guilty of
theft.
● It is not necessary that there was real or actual gain. It is enough that the accused,
on taking them, was actuated by the desire or intent to gain.
● There is no theft when the taking of personal property is with the consent of its
owner.
● For robbery to exist, it is necessary that there should be a taking against the will of
the owner; and for theft, it sufficed that consent on the part of the owner is lacking.
● The taking must be accomplished without violence against or intimidation of
persons.
● Unless the force upon things is employed to enter a building, the taking of the
personal property belonging to another with intent ti gain is theft and not robbery.
● When a person has in possession, part of the recently stolen property, he is
presumed to be the thief of all, in the absence of satisfactory explanation of his
possession. But this rule applies only when all the goods were lost at the same time,
in the same place, and on the same occasion.
Paragraph No.1, Art. 308: Finder of lost property
a. “Lost property” embraces loss by stealing
b. How to prove this kind of theft:
i. The time of the seizure of the thing;
ii. That it was a lost property belonging to another;
iii. That the accused having had the opportunity to return or deliver the lost
property to its owner or to local authorities, refrained from doing so.
c. This is not limited to actual finder. Ex: A found a purse containing money and jewelry
left by a passenger. A delivered it to B, a policeman, with a request to give it to C, the
owner thereof. B did not give it to C and appropriated it. B is liable for theft, because
although B is not a finder in fact, he is a finder in law.
d. The law does not require knowledge of the owner of the lost property.
e. Intent to gain is inferred from deliberate failure to deliver the lost property to the
proper person.
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
Paragraph No.2, Art. 308: Removing or making use of fruits or object of property
maliciously damaged
a. Ex: A defendant who shot, killed and slaughtered the cattle of another, which had
destroyed defendant’s plantation, and distributed the meat among himself and his
neighbors
Paragraph No.3, Art. 308: Hunting, fishing, or gathering fruits, etc., in enclosed estate
Elements:
a. There is an enclosed estate or a field where trespass is forbidden or which belongs to
another;
b. The offender enters the same
c. The offender hunts or fishes upon the same or gathers fruits, cereals, or other forest
or farm products in the estate or field; and
d. The hunting or fishing or gathering of products is without the consent of the owner.
If the fish is taken from the fishpond or fishery, it is qualified theft.
Article 309. Penalties. - Any person guilty of theft shall be punished by:
1. The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if the value of the
thing stolen is more than 12,000 pesos but does not exceed 22,000 pesos, but if the value
of the thing stolen exceeds the latter amount the penalty shall be the maximum period
of the one prescribed in this paragraph, and one year for each additional ten thousand
pesos, but the total of the penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed twenty years.
In such cases, and in connection with the accessory penalties which may be imposed
and for the purpose of the other provisions of this Code, the penalty shall be termed
prision mayor or reclusion temporal, as the case may be.
2. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if the value of
the thing stolen is more than 6,000 pesos but does not exceed 12,000 pesos.
3. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, if the value of
the property stolen is more than 200 pesos but does not exceed 6,000 pesos.
4. Arresto mayor in its medium period to prision correccional in its minimum period, if
the value of the property stolen is over 50 pesos but does not exceed 200 pesos.
5. Arresto mayor to its full extent, if such value is over 5 pesos but does not exceed 50
pesos.
6. Arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if such value does not exceed 5
pesos.
7. Arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, if the theft is committed under the
circumstances enumerated in paragraph 3 of the next preceding article and the value of
the thing stolen does not exceed 5 pesos. If such value exceeds said amount, the
provision of any of the five preceding subdivisions shall be made applicable.
8. Arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine not exceeding 50 pesos, when the value
of the thing stolen is not over 5 pesos, and the offender shall have acted under the
impulse of hunger, poverty, or the difficulty of earning a livelihood for the support of
himself or his family.
Basis of penalty in theft:
1. The value of the thing stolen and in some cases
2. The value and also the nature of the property taken, or
3. The circumstances or causes that impelled the culprit to commit the crime
Criminal Law II: ASSIGNMENT 4 | 18 February 2021
Article 310. Qualified theft. - The crime of theft shall be punished by the penalties next
higher by two degrees than those respectively specified in the next preceding article, if
committed by a domestic servant, or with grave abuse of confidence, or if the property
stolen is motor vehicle, mail matter or large cattle or consists of coconuts taken from the
premises of the plantation or fish taken from a fishpond or fishery, or if property is taken
on the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any other calamity,
vehicular accident or civil disturbance. (As amended by R.A. 120 and B.P. Blg. 71. May 1,
1980).
Theft is qualified when:
1. If committed by a domestic servant
2. If committed with grave abuse of confidence
3. If the property stolen is a (a) motor vehicle, (b) mail matter, or (c) large cattle
4. If the property stolen consists of coconuts taken from the premises of a plantation
5. If the property stolen is fish taken from a fishpond or fishery
6. If property is taken on the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon volcanic eruption, or
any other calamity, vehicular accident or civil disturbance.
Points to remember:
● When the offender is a domestic servant, it is not necessary to show that he
committed the crime with grave abuse of confidence.
● In the second kind of qualified theft, there must be allegation in the information and
proof of a relation, by reason of dependence, guardianship or vigilance, between the
accused and the offended party, that has created a high degree of confidence
between them, which the accused abused.
● Theft by housemates is not always qualified. The abuse of confidence here is not
necessarily grave.
● The confidence gravely abused must be that existing between the offended party
and the offender.
● The term “motor vehicle” includes all vehicles propelled by power, other than
muscular power.
● When the purpose of taking the car is to destroy it by burning it, the crime is arson.
● Theft of a motor vehicle is punished under Rep. Act No.6539 or the Anti-­‐
Carnapping Act of 1992. This law now covers the unlawful taking of motor vehicles.
● What makes the theft of mail matter qualified is the fact that the subject thereof is
mail matter, regardless of whether the offender is a postal employee or a private
individual.
● The word “cattle” is defined as including horses, asses, mules, sheep, goats and
swine.