Page |1

MODULE 2: Article 4 to Article 10

ART. 4 – CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Paragraph 1: (Article 4)

There are two clauses in Paragraph 1 of Article 4;

a. “by any person committing a felony (delito)”: (first clause)

 There is no doubt that if a person commits a felony, then he is
criminally liable;

b. “Although the wrongful act done be different from that which he

intended”
 This paragraph refers to felony by means of “dolo” because of
the use of the word “intended”

The elements of the second paragraph:

1. An intention felony was committed;
2. The wrong done (result) is the direct, natural and logical
consequence of the felony committed even though different from
that which was intended;

Meaning: the felony committed is the proximate cause of the

result.

QUESTION: What are the factors that affect intent and the
criminal liability of a person?
ANSWER: the following factors affect the criminal liability of a
person:
1. Mistake of Fact;
2. Aberration ictus;
3. Error in personae;
4. Prater intentionem;
5. Proximate cause ( the cause of the cause is the cause of the
evil caused);

Mistake of Fact
QUESTION: What is mistake of fact?
ANSWER: Mistake of fact is an absolutory cause for had the
fact been what the accused believed it to be, the act that he
did could be justified and will negate criminal liability;

QUESTION: what is the reason why in mistake of fact,

the act of person constitutes “absolutory cause?”
ANSWER: Because in Mistake of Fact, the person
have no criminal intent;

Analyze the case of People versus Ah Chong

1. Who is the victim in this case?
2. Does Ah Chong have the intent to kill the victim?
 Page |2

3. Despite several warnings the intruder, who turned to

be his friend, forced the door open;
4. Had Ah Chong’s belief that the victim is a member of the
group of “akyat bahay”, his act would have been justified
as “self defense”

LATIN MAXIM: Ignorantia Facti Excusat: Ignorance of

the fact excuses;

QUESTION: is “Mistake of Fact” the same with “mistake in

identity”?
ANSWER: No. in Mistake of identity, there is only an error
in the identity of the victim, hence, there is criminal
intent;

In mistake of fact, there is no criminal intent

PROBLEM:
A and B are police officers who served the
warrant of the most wanted person; believing that the
person who was sleeping is the criminal they were looking
for, A and B riddled him with bullets without verifying
who the person was; it turned out that the person
sleeping is not the person they were looking for; are A
and B criminally liable?

ANSWER: Yes. If the offender is negligent in ascertaining

the true state of facts, they may be free from dolo (as
they have no criminal intent), but they be held liable
for culpa;

Aberatio Ictus (mistake in the blow)

QUESTION: What is Aberatio Ictus (mistake in the blow)
ANSWER: here, the offender intends the injury directed
to one person, BUT the harm or injury fell on another;
Because the offender INTENDED the injury,
which was inflected on a wrong person (not his victim),
there is CLEAR criminal intent; the act is INTENTIONAL

QUESTION: How many persons are involved so that there

may be “Aberratio Ictus”?
ANSWER: there are three persons involved:
1. The offender;
2. The intended victim;
3. The actual victim;

PEDRO JOHN BOBOY

Offender Intended Victim Actual Victim
 Page |3

In the illustration, Pedro shot John; but the bullet hit

Boboy

QUESTION: What is the consequence if the person who is not

the Intended victim dies?
ANSWER: If the UNINTENDED victim dies, the crime is
Murder; Reason: the resultant felony was a result of
the original intent (criminal intent) against the intended
victim;

QUESTION: What is the consequence if the

UNINTENDED victim survives?
ANSWER: the crime is Physical Injuries because
there is lack of intent to kill the victim. Reason: the
victim is not the one against whom the intent to
kill was originally intended;

PROBLEM: A intends to kill B by means of a firearm

but because of poor precision, C a passerby was the
one hit by the bullet and died. Is A liable to C?
ANSWER:
YES. The death of C was a result of the felony
committed by A; If C dies, A is liable for murder; If
C survives A is liable for physical injuries;

Error in Personae
QUESTION: What is Error in Personae (mistake in identity)
ANSWER: error in personae involves only one offended
party, BUT the offender committed a mistake in
ascertaining the identity of the victim;
There are only two persons involved, the offender
and the actual but unintended victim;

BOBOY
VICTIM

PEDRO
 Page |4

OFFENDER

In the illustration:
1. Pedro waited for his INTENDED victim JOHN in a dark
alley;
2. When a man approached and convinced that it was
JOHN, Pedro fired at the man;
3. Pedro shot and killed the person who turned to be
BOBOY, not John;

Important points to note in Error in Personae:

a. If the intended crime and the actual crime committed
are of different gravity, Article 49 of the RPC must be
observed; here, the LOWER penalty must be imposed;

Article 49 RPC - The penalty to be imposed

upon the principals when the crime committed is
different from that intended. – IN cases in which the
felony committed is different from that which the
offender intended to commit, the following rules
shall be observed:

1. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed

is HIGHER than that corresponding to the
offense which the accused intended to commit,
the penalty corresponding to the latter shall be
imposed in its maximum period;

Example: the penalty for the crime actually

committed is Reclusion Perpetua, but the
accused only to commit a crime punishable by
reclusion temporal;

2. If the penalty prescribed for the felony

committed be LOWER than that corresponding
to the one which the accused intended to
commit, the penalty for the former shall be
imposed in its maximum period;

3. The rule established by the next preceding

paragraph shall not be applicable if the acts
committed by the guilty person shall also
constitute an attempt or frustration of another
crime, if the law prescribed a higher penalty for
the latter offenses, in which case the penalty for
the attempt or the frustrated crime shall be
imposed in the maximum period;

b. If the penalty for the felony the accused intended to

commit and the penalty for the felony actually
committed are of the SAME gravity or severity, the
penalty if not mitigated;

Example:
 Page |5

The penalty for the crime intended to be committed

is homicide; and the penalty for the crime actually
committed is also homicide, only that the victim is
different.

QUESTION: what is Praeter Intentionem (the offender intends

not to commit so grave a wrong as that
committed)?
ANSWER: the injury is on the intended victim BUT the
resulting injury or consequence is greater than that
intended.

“Sa parater intnetionem, ang naging resulta na naganap ay

mas seryoso o higit na napalabis sa intensyon o nais
mangyari ng salarin”

BUT:
1. if the means employed in committing a crime
would logically and naturally bring out the actual
felony committed, prater intentionem is not
appreciated;

Problem:
Juan hit Pedro with a 4 x 4 wood twice on
the latter’s nape which caused the latter’s death.
Can Juan claim that he intends not commit so
grave wrong as that committed (prater
inntentionem)?
Answer: _____________________________ ;

2. Prater intentionem does not apply to crimes

committed by “culpa”; intentionem denotes
“intent”)
Problem: Pedro drove his motorcycle
carelessly and bumped a pedestrian causing the
latter’s death; can Pedro advance prater
intentionem?
Answer. _________________________________;

3. QUESTION: (Take Note of this Question!!!!!)

In the hazing ceremony, A hit B with a paddle

which caused B to slip from the floor and as a
consequence, bumped his head on a big stone and
died. Is there prater intention?
Answer: NO. prater intentionem does not
apply to hazing; The Anti-hazing law expressly
disallows “prater intentionem”;

QUESTION: What is Proximate Cause?

 Page |6

ANSWER: Proximate cause is that cause which, in the

natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any
efficient intervening cause, produces the injury and
without which the result would not have occurred;

LATIN MAXIM: “El que es causa dela causa, es causa del

mal causado”
 “He who is the cause of the cause, is the cause
of the evil caused”

QUESTION: What are the Requisites of Proximate Cause?

ANSWER: That an INTENTIONAL FELONY be committed
(note that there is no intentional felony if the act or
omission is not punishable by the RPC or the act is covered
by Art 11 of the RPC; the act or omission must not also be
punishable by special law because in mala prohibita the
offender may or may not have Intention to commit offense);

The wrong done to the aggrieved party be the

direct, natural and logical consequence of the felony
committed;

If the result can be traced back to the original act,

then the doer of the original act can be held criminally
liable;

Paragraph 2: (Article 4)

a. “performing an act which would be an offense against persons or

property, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its
accomplishment or on account of the employment of
inadequate or ineffectual means”

This is what we call impossible crime

QUESTION: What is IMPOSSIBLE CRIME?

ANSWER: Impossible crime is also called as “CRIME OF
LAST RESORT”;
It involves acts which would be an offense against
PERSONS or PROPERTY were it not for the inherent
impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the
employment of inadequate or ineffectual means

QUESTION: What are the ELEMENTS of Impossible crime?

ANSWER: PEIRpc
a. act performed would be an offense against Person or
Property
b. act was done with Evil intent;
c. that its accomplishment is Inherently impossible or
that the Means employed is either ineffectual or
inadequate;
 Page |7

Inadequate – means insufficient ( eg small quantity of

poison)

Ineffectual - the means employed did not produce the

result expected eg: pressing the trigger of the gun not
knowing that it has o bullet
d. that the act committed does not constitute a violation
of another provision of the revised penal code

QUESTION: What is the purpose of the law in punishing

impossible crime?
ANSWER: The purpose of the law in punishing impossible
crime is to suppress criminal propensities or tendencies

Penalty: arresto mayor or fine of PHP 200.00 to 500.00 (Art

59 of the RPC)

QUESTION: What are the Kinds of Impossibility in

Impossible Crime?
ANSWER: INHERENT IMPOSSIBILITY OF ITS
ACCOMPLISHMENT, may be:
1. LEGAL IMPOSSIBILITY- when the intended act even if
completed would not result to a crime

Example: stealing a property which turned out to

belong to the stealer;

2. PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY- this occurs when

extraneous circumstances unknown to the actor or
beyond his control prevent the consummation of the
intended crime

Example: commit murder to a corpse.

IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES:

QUESTION: What are the Important Things to remember in

impossible crime (part 2):
ANSWER: it is important to remember that:
1. To be IMPOSSIBLRE CRIME – there must be NO felony against
person or property, otherwise, the offender would be liable
for that felony and there is no impossible crime to
speak of;

Felonies against Persons: MHPI- DRAP

1. Murder - Art 248
2. Homicide – Art 249
3. Parricide – Art 246
4. Infanticide – Art 255
5. Duel
6. Rape (Art 266-A)
7. Abortion
 Page |8

8. Physical Injuries

Felonies Against Property: BRUCT-SCAM

1. Brigandage
2. Robbery
3. Usurpation
4. Culpable Insolvency
5. Theft
6. Swindling and other deceits
7. Chattel Mortgage
8. Arson and other crimes involving destruction
9. Malicious Mischief

2. There is no attempted or frustrated stage in impossible

crimes. It is always consummated and applies only to grave
or less grave felonies

3. Penalty for impossible crime is arresto mayor or fine from

200 to 500 pesos, Art 59

What is an INDETERMINATE OFFENSE: an indeterminate o

offense is one where the purpose of the offender in performing the
act is not certain

ART. 5 –
DUTY OF COURTS:

1. If the act charged is not punished by law which the Court deems proper to
repress;
2. In case of excessive penalty.

APPLICABLE PRINCIPLE: “Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege”

Common law Crimes- those crimes that originated from (those) body
of principles and rules of action relating to the government and security of
persons and property, these crimes (law) derive their authority solely form
USAGES and CUSTOMS of immemorial antiquity, or from judgments and
decrees of the Courts, affirming, and enforcing such usages and customs;

We have no common law crimes in the Philippines;

What is the Duty of the Courts if an act is not punishable by law and
which Courts finds it proper to repress?
The Court must:
Report to the Chief Executive, through the Department of Justice
the reasons which induce the Court to believe that the said act
should be a subject of legislation;

QUESTION:
 Page |9

A, a drunk person boarded a jeepney; there is no law that

punishes a drunk person who rides a public vehicle. What must
the court do”

Answer: if the court deems it proper to repress, it must report

the act to the chief executive through the Department of Justice;

The Court can not punish A; “Nullum crimen, nulla poena

sine lege”

ART. 6
– STAGES IN THE COMMISSION OF FELONY:

QUESTION: What are the stages in the development of the crime?

ANSWER:
1. INTERNAL ACT - is that stage in the development of crimes
which refers to the inception of the intention to commit a
certain crime in the mind of the person, which inherently is not
punishable by law;
A person who intends to commit a crime first entertains
the IDEA of committing the crime he intends to commit in
the mind; if the idea remains to be a mere idea in the mind,
the same is not punishable.

LATIN MAXIM:
“COGITATIONIS POENAM NEMO EMERET” No
man can be punished for his thought

“Mere imagination no matter how immoral is not

punished”

2. EXTERNAL ACT : it is the “outward” manifestation of

what is in the mind (internal act)

QUESTION: What are the two parts or stages of

“external act”?
ANSWER: The two stages of external acts are:
a. PREPARATORY ACTS
b. ACTS OF EXECUTION

QUESTION: What is PREPARATORY ACTS?

ANSWER: Preparatory acts are those acts of a person
who has conceived the idea of committing a crime BUT
which cannot by themselves logically and necessarily
ripen into an offense.

REASON: Preparatory acts are NOT yet overt acts

(“Ang kilos gawain ng isang tao na naghahanda pa

lamang sa pagsasagawa ng isang krimen, subalit ang
 P a g e | 10

kanyang mga kilos ay wala pang malinaw na palatandaan

kung anong krimen ang kanyang ninanais na gawin”)

Example:
a. buying a poison is preparatory act ( for poisoning
somebody); it is not punishable because a poison
may be of some lawful use, like killing rats;
b. buying or securing a weapon to commit a crime;
c. conspiracy or proposal to commit a crime;

QUESTION: What is the rule in preparatory acts?

ANSWER: As a general rule, preparatory acts is
NOT punishable by law; the law regards
preparatory acts as innocent acts or permissible
acts;

QUESTION: Is there any exception to the

General Rule?
ANSWER: IF the law punishes even mere
preparatory act or the act itself constitutes
an offense;

Example:
a. Conspiracy or Proposal to commit Treason,
Rebellion or Sedition (TRS); though the
general rule says conspiracy and proposal as
preparatory acts is not punishable, yet in case
of TRS, same is already punishable under the
RPC;
b. Possession of Picklocks: are already punishable
under Article 229 and 302 of the RPC; hence,
even if possession of picklock may be considered
a mere preparatory act for the crime of robbery,
same is an exemption to the general rule;
c. Possessing an unlicensed firearm:
Possession of a firearm may be considered as
preparatory act which would not have been
punishable as a rule;
But if the possessor of the gun has no license to
possess the same, such is the cause why it is
made punishable;
Not for being a preparatory act, but for
being a violation of PD 1866, as amended by
RA 10591;

QUESTION: What is an OVERT ACT?

ANSWER:
An overt act is some physical activity or deed,
`indicating the intention to commit a particular
crime;

It is more than a mere planning or

preparation, which if carried to its complete
 P a g e | 11

termination following its natural course, without being

frustrated by external obstacles nor by the voluntary
desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and
necessarily ripen into a concrete offense.

NOTE:
1. the existence of an overt act is important only in the
attempted stage of the acts of execution; Overt act is no
longer necessary in the Frustrated and Consummated
stage of execution because here, the offender had
performed already all acts of execution and
therefore, the offender has done more than an
overt act;

2. Overt acts – tells us what particular felony the offender

intends to commit, DEPENDING ON WHAT IS BEING
MANIFESTED OR IMPLICATED BY THE OVERT ACTS OF
THE OFFENDER;

QUESTION: What is ACTS OF EXECUTION?

ANSWER: - refers to the stage of the commission of the crime-
attempted, frustrated consummated made punishable under the
Article 6 of the RPC;

Attempted Felony:
There is an attempt when the offender commence of the
crime directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the
acts of execution which would produce the felony by reason
of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous
desistance

QUESTION: What are the Elements of attempted stage?:

ONSA
1. Offender commences the commission of the felony
directly by overt acts;
2. Does not perform all acts of execution which would
produce the felony as a consequence;
3. The act of the offender is not stopped by his own
spontaneous desistance
4. The non-performance of all the acts of execution was
due to accident or causes other than his own
spontaneous desistance;

“Overt act” – as already discussed above is

important only in attempted stage because overt
act is the start of criminal liability;

“directly by overt acts” – the offender shall be

liable for the attempted stage of the felony that is
“directly linked” to the OVERT act, IRRESPECTIVE
of the intention of the offender;
 P a g e | 12

Problem 1:
Alyas Juan Akyat, with the intention to commit
robbery, forced open the window of Maria’s 7/11 and ½
convenience store but before Alyas Juan Akyat could
enter the store, PO1 Kidlat suddenly arrived and arrested
Alyas Juan Akyat; the latter admitted that he intends to
commit robbery. Can Alyas Juan Akyat be charged of
attempted robbery?

Answer: No. Even if the intention of Alyas Juan

Akyat is to commit robbery, the overt acts upon
which the charge could be based is insufficient to hold
liable for the said offense; though, he admitted of his
intention, still, the charged will be based on the overt acts
of the offender;

Problem 2:
Pedro was accosted by a group of patrolling
policemen near the house of Juan at 2:00 O’clock in the
morning; seized from Pedro is a licensed .45 cal; when
investigated, Pedro admitted that he was waiting for Juan
to come out of his house as he intends to kill him. Is
Pedro liable for attempted homicide/murder?
Answer: ______________________

(in answering the question, you may also consider

“COGITATIONIS POENAM NEMO EMERET”)

Problem 3:
Angry of John, Enzo drew his pistol which is
tucked in his waist and had it cocked and pointed to
John; Boy Paspas who was quick enough to save John,
held the wrist of Enzo and disarmed the latter. Is Enzo
liable for attempted homicide?
Answer: _______________________

Problem 4
A raised his bolo as if to strike B; C came and
pacified A at this point B was able to run for his life; is
A liable for attempted homicide/murder?
Answer: ___________________________

“in attempted stage” the overt act must be an

external one (note the difference with “internal act”)
which has a direct connection with the felony, it being
necessary to prove that the said beginning of execution,
if carried to its complete termination, following its natural
course without being frustrated by external obstacles or
 P a g e | 13

by the voluntary desistance of the offender, will logically

and necessarily ripen to a concrete offense;

QUESTION: What is “spontaneous desistance”?

ANSWER: SPONTANEOUS DESISTENCE (kusang loob
na pagtalikod o pag-atras) - it means that the offender
“backed out” from continuing in the commission of the
crime, before the attempted stage;

To understand spontaneous desistance, the

following is important to note:

Subjective Phase – it is the portion of the acts

constituting the crime starting from the point where the

1. offender begins the commission of the crime to

the point where,
2. he has still control over his acts, including
their natural course.

The subjective phase is that period between

the point where he BEGINS with the overt acts and
the point where he can still VOLUNTARILY DESIST
or CONTINUE

Between those two points, if the offender is

stopped by reason of any cause, NOT OF HIS
OWN VOLUNTARY DESISTAENCE, the subjective
phase has not yet been passed and it is
merely an attempt.

Objective Phase; if the offender is NOT STOPPED, but

continues until performs his last act, but the crime was
NOT PRODUCED, it is FURSTRATED and has already
reached the Objective Phase;

Or, or if after doing the last act and the crime was
produced, the crime is CONSUMMATED and has already
reached the Objective Phase;

QUESTION: what is the effect of the voluntary

SPONTANEOUS DESISTANCE of the accused?
ANSWER: spontaneous desistance is
Exculpatory (nagpapawalang sala), if:

PROBLEM 5:
Boy Putok, with intention to kill, fired his gun at
Juan Paawa but did hit the latter; Juan Paawa raised his
arms on the air and cried loudly; Boy Putok had a
change of heart and desisted from further shooting at
Juan Paawa; Is Boy Putok liable for attempted
homicide?
 P a g e | 14

ANSWER: No. Boy Putok only commenced the

commission of the crime by overt acts but, he desisted from
his acts without performing all acts of execution;

PROBLEM 6:
Boy Putok shot Juan Paawa who was hit on his
chest; Juan Paawa ran for his life and was able to
hide in a bush nearby; Boy Putok followed and looked for
Juan Paawa, however, Boy Putok left when could not find
Juan Paawa; Juan Paawa managed to go to a hospital
but lost consciousness the moment he arrived there; Dr.
Tiong Go Kho, an expert in internal medicine
immediately operated Juan Paawa and saved the latter
from death;
Is there voluntary deistance?
Is Boy Putok liable for an offense?
What stage of execution?\
Answer: ________________________________

Again, analyze the problems in Paragraph B above;

Frustrated Felony: A felony is frustrated when the offender

performs all the acts of execution, which would produce the
felony as a consequence, but, which, nevertheless, do not produce
it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.

QUESTION: What are the requisites of the frustrated

stage?
ANSWER: the elements of the frustrated stage of the
crime are:
a. Offender performs ALL ACTS of execution;
b. All acts performed would PRODUCE the felony as
a consequence;
c. The felony was NOT PRODUCED;
d. Because of some causes INDEPENDENT OF THE
WILL of the perpetrator;

Consummated Felony: A Felony is consummated when all

the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
present.

QUESTION: What are the elements of the frustrated

stage?
ANSWER: Elements:
a. Offender performed ALL ACTS of execution;
b. Nothing more is left to be done;
c. The crime was produced;
 P a g e | 15

QUESTION: What are the points to consider in order to determine

the correct stage of execution, whether consummated, frustrated
or attempted;
ANSWER: The following must be considered:
a. Nature of the crime;
 material crimes (with three stages);
MATERIAL CRIMES - these are the crimes
which involves the three stages of execution
being discussed in Article 6; Consummated,
Frustrated and Attempted

 formal crimes-
Formal crime: crimes that are consummated in
one instant and the act can not be split into
parts to constitute attempted or frustrated;

Formal Crimes: is also called as Crimes of

Effect;
- these are felonies which by single
act of the accused consummates the offense
as a matter of law. Example: physical
injuries; acts of lasciviousness; attempted
flight to enemy country, coercion,
lsander by deed, illegal exaction

 crime with no frustrated stage;

CRIMES WHICH HAVE NO FRUSTRATED STAGE:

1. Rape
The gravemen for the crime of rape is
carnal knowledge, hence, no matter how
slight the penetration, the felony is
consummated;
2. Libel
3. Physical Injuries
4. Sale of marijuana and other prohibited drugs
5. Impossible crimes
6. Indirect bribery - the moment the gift is
accepted, the crime is consummated
7. Direct bribery
8. Corruption of public officials
9. Adultery-
10, theft

 crimes which are consummated in one instant;

Problem:
Pedro was about to set a building on fire but
was apprehded before any portion of the building
was burned; what crime was committed?
Answer: attempted arson;
 P a g e | 16

Question: when some clothes soaked with

gasoline had been place near the building when
the offender was apprehended?
Answer: frustrated arson;

Question: what is a portion of the building

has been burned>?
Answer: consummated arson;

Problem:
Pedro took the cellphone of Maria and has
taken the cellphone Into his possession. What
crime was committed?
Answer: Consumated theft; ones the
offender gets hold or has in his possession of
the object with intent to gain, theft is
consummated;

Problem:
Pedro had untied the carabao from the
tree and has pulled the rope for some meters
away, with intent to gain. What crime was
committed?
Answer: qualified theft. He need not be
able to carry it away (Valenzuela versus
People 2007)

 crimes that are consummated by mere

attempt, by mere proposal or by mere overt act
Problem:
John, a Filipino citizen attempted to go
to China, despite the order from the authorities
not to go to China there being a war between
Philippines and China, What crime is
committed?
Answer: Flight to enemy country; mere
attempt is punished;

Problem:
Boy a BJMP officer proposed and
solicited from Jane, a daughter of a detained
person, for some sexual favor. Did Boy commit
a crime?
Answer: Abuses against chastity. Mere
proposal or solicitation is consummated

b. The elements constituting the offense;

c. The manner of committing the crime

QUESTION: What is an indeterminate offense?

 P a g e | 17

ANSWER: It is one where the purpose of the offender in performing

an act is not certain. Acts which are susceptible of double
interpretation, that is in favor as well as against the accused,
and which show an innocent as well as punishable act, must
not and can not furnish grounds by themselves for attempted
crime. (Peoples V. Lamahang. 61 Phil. 707)

PROBLEM: the accused entered the store of Maria by

destroying the wooden panel; before he could enter
the store, he was apprehended by the barangay tanods;
the police officers charged him of frustrated robbery.
Is the charge correct?
ANSWER: wrong. The purpose of the accused in
committing the act if destroying the wooden
panel is uncertain. It is an indeterminate offense

ARTICLE 7 –
WHEN LIGHT FELONIES ARE PUNISHABLE:
QUESTION: What are Light felonies?
ANSWER: are those infractions of law for the commission of which
the penalty of arresto menor or a fine exceeding 200 pesos, or
both, is provided.

QUESTION: when are light felonies punishable?

ANSWER: light felonies are punishable only if they are
consummated;
REASON: they only involved so light, insignificant
injuries that public conscience is satisfied with light
penalty for their consummation;
If not consummated, their effect is so light that
there is no need to provide for a penalty at all;

EXCEPTION: if the offense is an offense against

persons or property, they are punishable even if
attempted or frustrated only.

Felonies against Persons: MHPI- DRAP

1. Murder - Art 248
2. Homicide – Art 249
3. Parricide – Art 246
4. Infanticide – Art 255
5. Duel
6. Rape (Art 266-A)
7. Abortion
8. Physical Injuries

Felonies Against Property: BRUCT-SCAM

1. Brigandage
2. Robbery
3. Usurpation
4. Culpable Insolvency
5. Theft
 P a g e | 18

6. Swindling and other deceits

7. Chattel Mortgage
8. Arson and other crimes involving destruction
9. Malicious Mischief

ARTICLE 8 –
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT A CRIME:

Be sure to Memorize Article 8!

Article 8 - Conspiracy exists when two or more persons

come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and
decide to commit it.
There is proposal when the person who had decided to
commit a felony proposes its execution to some other person or
persons

QUESTION: Is conspiracy and/or proposal to commit a felony

punishable?
ANSWER: as a GENERAL RULE, No it is not punishablesince
conspiracy and proposal are only at preparatory stage;

QUESTION: is there an instance when conspiracy and

proposal punishable?
ANSWER: Yes. This is the Exception.
Mere conspiracy or mere proposal is punishable in those
cases provided by law.
Thus, in the following cases:

Mere Conspiracy is already punishable: C R I T S M

a. Coup d’etat: Art 136
b. Rebellion : Art 136
c. Insurrection : Art 136
d. Treason : Art 115
e. Sedition : Art 141
f. Monopolies and combinations in Restraint of
Trade : Art 186

Under Special Laws mere conspiracy is also punishable:

SHITAE
a. Selected Acts committed under Dangerous Drugs
Act
b. Highway Robbery
c. Illegal Association
d. Terrorism (Human Security Act)
e. Arson
f. Espionage

Mere Proposal is already punishable: RTS

a. Proposal to commit Treason;
b. Proposal to commit Rebellion or Insurrection;
 P a g e | 19

c. Proposal to commit Sedition;

CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL to commit conspiracy are

punishable only in the cases in which the law specifically provides
a penalty therefor.

Kinds:
1. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony as a crime in itself
. Example: Conspiracy to and proposal to commit rebellion,
treason and sedition.

Article 115 RPC – Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit

Treason
Article 136- Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit Coup
D’etat, Rebellion or Insurrection

2. Conspiracy and Proposal to commit felony as a manner of

incurring criminal liability. (The act of one is the act of all)

QUESTION: What are the Requisites of Conspiracy as means to

commit a crime under Article 8 of the RPC?
ANSWER: the following are the requisites:
a. That two or more persons come to an agreement;
b. The agreement pertains to the commission of a felony;
c. The execution of the felony was decided upon;

QUESTION: what is the liability of those who participated in the

conspiracy?
ANSWER: In conspiracy, all who participated therein are equally
liable irrespective of the quantity or quality of his participation
and whether or not the conspiracy is Pre-planned or
instantaneous;

QUESTION: is there an exception to the rule mentioned

above?
ANSWER: Yes, UNLESS, one or some of the conspirators
committed some other crime which is not part of the
INTENDED act or crime in the conspiracy;

QUESTION: What is the doctrine of IMPLIED CONSPIRACY?

ANSWER: DOCTRINE OF IMPLIED CONSPIRACY: Conspiracy
may be inferred if it is proven that two or more persons aimed
their acts toward the accomplishment of the same unlawful
object, each doing a part so that their acts although
apparently independent were in fact connected and
cooperative, thus indicating a closeness of personal association
and a concurrence of sentiments;

NOTE: there is no need for a DIRECT PROOF to prove

conspiracy; meaning to say, conspiracy may be established
BEFORE, DURING or AFTER the commission of the crime
charged.
 P a g e | 20

It is enough that the accused acted in UNISON or IN

COMMON ACCORD;

QUESTION: What is the Case of People versus Bula, June 8, 2005?

ANSWER: In that case, it was held that: “it is not necessary that
all the conspirators actually hit and killed the victim; what is
primordial is that all the participants performed specific acts
with such closeness and coordination as to indicate a
common purpose or design to bring out the victim’s death (People
vs Bula, June 08, 2005)

QUESTION: What is the Case of People vs Bello. May 13, 2004

ANSWER: In that case it was held that: CONSPIRACY is a state of
mind as it involves a meeting of the minds and intent of the
malefactors. The existence of the assent of minds of the co-
conspirators may be inferred from proof of facts and
circumstances, which taken together, indicates that they are
parts of the complete plan to commit the crime. ( People vs
Bello. May 13, 2004)

QUESTION: What is Proposal?

ANSWER: There is a proposal when the person who has decided
to commit felony proposes it execution to some other person or
persons.

QUESTION: What are the Requisites of proposal?

ANSWER:
1. a person has decided to commit a felony; and
2. after such decision, he proposes the execution of the felony to
some other person or persons.

QUESTION: Is mere proposal to commit a crime, a crime?

ANSWER: No. mere proposal to commit a crime is not a crime. It is
only part of preparatory stage

QUESTION: What are the crime wherein mere proposal is already

considered as a “crime in itself?
ANSWER: mere proposal to commit a crime is a crime in itself
in the following cases:
1. rebellion
2. sedition
3. treason

Example: Juan de la Cruz proposed to Juan that they will

commit ROBBERY; mere proposal is not a crime because
robbery is not among the exceptions: RST

ART. 9 –
 P a g e | 21

CLASSIFICATION FELONIES ACCORDING TO GRAVITY:

1. Grave felonies – those which the law attaches a capital

punishment or a penalty which is afflictive in any its periods in
accordance with Article 25 of the RPC:
a. Reclusion Perpetua 20 yrs + 1 day to 40 yrs
b. Reclusion Temporal 12 yrs + 1 day to 20 yrs
c. Perp or Temp Absolute Disqual 6 yrs + 1 day to 12 yrs
d. Perp or Temp Special Disqual 6 yrs + 1 day to 12 yrs
e. Prision Mayor 6 yrs + 1 day to 12 yrs
f. Fines more than PHP 6,000.00

2. Less Grave Felonies – those in which the penalties in their

maximum period are correctional;
a. Prision Correctional 6 mos + 1 day to 6 yrs
b. Arresto Mayor 1 mo + 1 day to 6 mos
c. Suspension 6 mos + 1 day to 6 yrs
d. Destierro 6 mos + 1 day to 6 yrs
e. Fines PHP 200.00 to less than PHP 6,000.00

3. Light Felonies – those infractions of law in which the penalty of

arresto menor or a fine of not exceeding P200.00 or both.
a. Arresto menor 1 day to 30 days
b. Public censure (indivisible penalty)

ACCESORY PENALTIES

Perpetual or Temporary Absolute Disqualification

Perpetual or Temporary Special Disqualification
Suspension from Public office, the right to vote or to be voted upon
Civil Interdiction (marital and property authority)
Indemnification
Forfeiture or confiscation of instrument and proceeds of the offense
Payment of Cost

QUESTION: What is the importance of knowing that a crime is

grave, less grave or light felony?
ANSWER: the following are the reasons:
1. To know if there is a possibility of complex crimes;
o Article 48 on complex crimes: only grave or less grave
offenses may be complexed;
o Light felony can not be complexed with grave or less
grave felony;

2. In Article 125 of the RPC: the period of detention depends on

the gravity of the offense committed;
3. In Article 90 and 92 of the RPC, the prescription of the
offense also depends on the gravity of the offense committed
 P a g e | 22

ART. 10 –
OFFENSES NOT SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THE REVISED PENAL CODE:

QUESTION: Is the Revised Penal Code applicable to special laws?

ANSWER: NO. But the RPC may be Suppletory in Nature –
Offenses which are or in the future may be punishable under
special laws This Code shall be supplementary to such laws,
unless the latter should especially provide the contrary.

QUESTION: how did the special laws evolved?

ANSWER:
1. 1901 – 1935: special laws are called “ACTS” which are
enacted by the Philippine Assembly; ie. “Act No 123”

2. 1935-1946: special laws are called “COMMONWEALTH ACT”; ie

“Commonwealth Act No 123”

3. 1979 – 1985: special laws are called “Batas Pambansa” ie.

“Batas Pambansa (BP) No 123”

4. 1972-1986 : special laws are called “Presidential Decrees” ie

“PD 123”
There are 2,034 Presidential Decrees enacted

5. 1987 onwards: Republic Acts ie “Republic Act No 123”

More than 9,000 RA enacted already

QUESTION: What are special laws?

ANSWER: special laws are penal laws which are enacted by the
congress to punish acts or omission which relates to special or
particular thing, person or class;
Special laws are not part of the Revised Penal Code;

QUESTION: Technically, what are the difference in meaning

between: felonies, offense, infractions and crime?
ANSWER:
Felonies – violation of RPC
Offense – violation of special laws
Infraction – violation of municipal ordinance
Crime – act or omission punishable by law