Criminal Law Review Notes (Prosec. Victoria C. Garcia)

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW
Culled primarily from the lectures of Prosecutor Victoria C. Garcia
GENERAL PRINCIPLES process or giving him the opportunity to be

heard.
4. Penal laws enacted by Congress cannot impose
Criminal Law: Branch of public law that deals with
cruel or unusual punishment, or excessive
crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for their
fine.
penalties.
Characteristics of Criminal Law:
Whenever a person violates a public law, he commits:
(a) an injury against the State (social injury); and (2) a
Generality
personal injury against the private offended party
(personal injury).
Our penal laws shall be binding on all persons residing
in the Philippines whether he is a Filipino citizen or a
In case of the conviction of the accused, you will notice
foreigner, regardless of race, creed, color, religion, or
that in the judgment of the court, aside from the penalty
other personal circumstances. Therefore, whoever you
of imprisonment or fine, there’s also the imposition of
are, if you are in the Philippines, you have to comply
civil liability.
with Philippine penal laws. You are obligated, bound to
• The imprisonment or fine will answer for the
comply, to follow Philippine penal law. Otherwise, you
social disturbance, disturbance of public order,
can arrested, you can prosecuted, you can be punished.
the social injury.
• The award of civil indemnity against the
This characteristic is not absolute. It admits of
accused goes to the private offended party or to
exceptions:
the heirs of the private offended party.
(1) GENERALLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC
Civil liability is not a penalty because civil liability goes
INTERNATIONAL LAW
to the private offended party.
Chiefs of state, sovereigns, and other diplomatic
Crime: act committed or omitted in violation of the
representatives such as public ministers and
public law forbidding or compelling it. Crime is an
ambassadors are immune from the criminal jurisdiction
encompassing word. It includes:
of the country where they are assigned. While they are
1. Felony: an act or omission punished by the RPC
in the host country, they cannot be arrested,
(Art. 3).
prosecuted, nor punished for having violated the laws of
2. Offense: an act or omission punished by SPL.
the said country because they enjoy diplomatic
3. Infraction of the law: an act or omission
immunity from suit.
punished by the local ordinances as enacted by
the local sanggunian.
It is also settled that although a consul is a diplomatic
representative, a consul does not enjoy the same
In PH jurisdiction, it is Congress that has the power to
diplomatic immunity from suit as sovereigns and other
enact penal laws. Although Congress has such power,
heads of state. Therefore, a consul can be prosecuted
such power is not absolute. there are certain
before the courts of the host country the moment he
limitations on their power to enact penal laws:
commits a violation of the penal laws of said host
1. Penal laws enacted by Congress must be
country. EXCEPT: (1) when the act committed by said
general in application. Otherwise, it will be
consul is in the performance of his functions, and (2) if
violative of the equal protection clause of the
there is a treaty stipulation between the mother country
Constitution.
of the consul and the host country saying that this
2. Penal laws enacted by Congress must not
particular consul is immune from suit.
partake of the nature of ex-post facto law –
one which makes an act criminal which when
President of Country X was in Manila. He boarded
committed was not yet so.
his car and left the body guard. President was
3. Penal laws enacted by Congress must not
driving recklessly and hit and bumped a
partake of the nature of bill of attainder – a
pedestrian. The pedestrian suffered serious
law which punishes the Accused without due
Daverick Pacumio
UST Faculty of Civil Law
physical injuries. May he be prosecuted for reckless Art. 2. Application of its provisions. — Except as
imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries? provided in the treaties and laws of preferential
No. As a Chief of State, he enjoys blanket/absolute application, the provisions of this Code shall be
immunity from suit. Thus, he cannot be prosecuted enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago,
here. including its atmosphere, its interior waters and
maritime zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction,
What if he is only the consul of country X? And after against those who:
lunch, he hit and bumped a pedestrian? May he
now be prosecuted for reckless imprudence 1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship
resulting in serious physical injuries? or airship
Yes. Consuls enjoy immunity only insofar as those
relating to his official functions and if there was an 2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note
agreement between the host country and his country. of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities
His act of bumping the pedestrian is not related to his issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands;
functions.
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the
(2) LAWS OF PREFERENTIAL APPLICATION introduction into these islands of the obligations and
securities mentioned in the presiding number;
There are certain laws which exempt certain or
particular individuals from prosecution. Example of this 4. While being public officers or employees, should
is under Art. VI of the 1987 Constitution, where commit an offense in the exercise of their functions; or
members of Congress cannot be prosecuted for libel,
slander, defamation, for every speech or debate they 5. Should commit any of the crimes against national
made in the halls of Congress while Congress is in their security and the law of nations, defined in Title One of
regular or special session. In Political Law, this is known Book Two of this Code.
as the congressional privilege of speech and debate.
Prospectivity
So if, in a privileged speech, Sen. Lacson made
defamatory remarks against a well-known successful General Rule: Our penal laws shall only operate
and influential businessman, that businessman cannot prospectively. Our penal laws, as a rule, cannot be given
file against of libel, oral defamation, or slander against retroactive application. It shall only be applied at the
him because it is a law of preferential application, the time of its effectivity and thereafter.
Constitution itself provides, said Senator cannot be
prosecuted. Exception:
Territoriality ART. 22: Penal laws shall be given retroactive

application if they favor the accused provided that the
Our penal laws shall have force and effect within the accused is not a habitual criminal.
Philippine archipelago including its atmosphere,
interior waters, and maritime zone. Therefore, for every If there is a new law amending the present law, this
act committed in the Philippine archipelago, our amendatory law shall be given retroactive application if
criminal laws apply. But, for acts committed outside the the said law would favor the accused or offender
territory of the Philippines, that offender cannot be provided the accused is not a habitual criminal.
prosecuted before Philippine courts.
What does the term penal law mean?
The exceptions to the territoriality principle of criminal It means that it must be a substantive law – these laws
law is provided for under Art. 2 (2) of the Revised Penal must define a crime and prescribe a penalty.
Code.
Is RA 10592, which reduces the convict’s sentence
based on the convict’s good behavior, a penal law?
Daverick Pacumio
Page 2 of 142
No. It is not a penal law because it does not define a

crime and prescribe a penalty. However, since it affects The emphasis of the law is on the offender and not on
the offender as it reduces his service of sentence, it may the offense; on the criminal and not on the crime. This
be given retroactive effect (see Inmates of New Bilibid v. takes into consideration the reason, the motive why the
De Lima). offender committed the act.
2 philosophies Mixed/Eclectic: If you mixed the characteristics of

both, we have the so-called mixed or eclectic
Classical/Juristic Philosophy: philosophy. Under this, crimes which are heinous in
nature shall be dealt with in the classical manner, and
The basis of criminal liability is the moral trait of the crimes which are considered social or economic in
offender. Man is a moral creature who understands right nature, shall be dealt with in the positivist or realistic
from wrong, good from evil. Hence, when he does a manner.
wrong willfully, voluntarily.
Theories/Doctrines in Criminal Law
The purpose of penalty is to exact retribution. This
revolves around the philosophy “an eye for an eye, a Pro Reo: In dubio pro reo. Penal laws shall always be
tooth for a tooth”. For every wrong done, there is a applied liberally, interpreted liberally in favor of the
commensurate penalty. accused and strictly against the state. In dubio pro reo.
In case of doubt, rule in favor of the accused. Reason,
The determination of penalty is done mechanically. The constitutional presumption of innocence. All accused
penalty imposed on the offender is always in direct under the Constitution are presumed innocent unless
proportion to the injury or damage caused to the victim. proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
So if the said offender kills the victim, the penalty to be
imposed to him will also be death Lenity Rule: whenever a penal provision is susceptible
of two interpretations, one is lenient to the accused and
The emphasis of the law is on the offense and not the the other is strict to the accused, the lenient
offender. The emphasis of the law is on the crime and interpretation shall prevail. Leniency towards the
not the criminal. The classical philosophy does not take accused. Same reason, constitutional presumption of
into consideration the reason why the offender innocence.
committed the crime. It suffices that he committed the
crime, violated the law, and for that he has to be Equipoise Rule: whenever the evidence of the
punished regardless of motive, regardless of reason for prosecution is equally balanced with the evidence of the
the commission. defense, the scale of justice shall be tilted in favor of the
accused. Again, the reason is the constitutional
Positivist/Realistic Philosophy: presumption of innocence, and another reason, in every
criminal action filed in court, it is the State, it is the
The basis of criminal liability is man’s social prosecution that has the burden of proving the guilt of
environment. All men are born good, no man is born the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction of
evil. What makes man do evil things is the association the accused would depend on the strength of the
that he has with his fellow beings, with his social evidence of the prosecution and not on the weakness of
environment. the evidence of the defense. If the evidence of the
prosecution is very weak, even if the defense of the
The purpose of penalty is rehabilitation. The positivist accused was that at the time he was at the commission
philosophy believes that an offender is a socially sick of the crime, he was at the moon, he will be acquitted
individual who must be rehabilitated, cured, and not because conviction depends on the evidence of the
punished. prosecution.
The determination of penalty is done individually, after Utilitarian/Protective Theory: the purpose of penalty
the offender has been examined and investigated. in criminal law is to protect society from actual and
Daverick Pacumio
Page 3 of 142
potential wrongdoers. Hence, courts should see to it Philippine courts would have jurisdiction. These are the
that in imposing the penalty, they are only imposed on exceptions to the territoriality characteristic of criminal
potential and actual wrongdoers. And, the SC said, even law.
in case of violation of SPL, wherein criminal intent is
immaterial, courts should see to it that penalties are Art. 2. Application of its provisions. — Except as
only imposed on actual or potential wrongdoers. The provided in the treaties and laws of preferential
basis of this so called utilitarian theory is the maxim application, the provisions of this Code shall be
actus non facet reum nisi men cit rea. The act is not enforced not only within the Philippine
criminal when the mind is not criminal. We have also Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior
nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege. There is no crime, waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its
when there is no law that punishes the act. jurisdiction, against those who:
The Philippines is a civil law country. In our jurisdiction, 1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine
no matter how obnoxious, immoral, perverted an act is, ship or airship
if there is no law that defines and punishes the said act, • A vessel is deemed to be in the PH if it is
the doer of the act cannot be prosecuted in court, unlike registered in the PH or licensed under PH laws.
in common law countries. In some European countries, Therefore, it is the registration of the vessel
if an act is immoral, through the passage of time, it which is material. Ownership is immaterial.
becomes an illegal criminal act. That will not happen • Refers to a circumstance where the PH vessel is
here in the Philippines because here, laws are enacted. outside the PH territory but not yet in the
So for an act to be considered as criminal and territory of another country.
punishable, there must be a law that defines it and • MV Maranao is licensed under PH laws. It is
punishes it. bound to go to Malaysia. There were
passengers on board. While it was sailing in
This is first used by the SC in Magno v. CA. the high seas between PH and Malaysia, X, a
Filipino, stabbed Y, a Malaysian. X is
THE REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE brought back to the PH and tried before PH
courts. X’s argument: PH has no jurisdiction
Minucher v. Scalzo: Diplomatic agent: One who over him because the PH vessel was already
represents his country on political matters. Scalzo is not out of PH territory. Is his argument
a diplomatic agent but he is a representative of the US meritorious?
here. Therefore, pursuant to the doctrine of State No. Although the vessel is outside PH territory,
Immunity, he may invoke immunity form suit. PH has jurisdiction because the vessel is not yet
in the territory of another country and it is
The RPC took effect on 01 January 1932. registered/licensed under PH laws, making it a
Philippine ship. Therefore, the extra-territorial
Art. 2 provides for the scope of application of the RPC. application of the RPC applies.
Intra-territorial application of the RPC: penal laws What if MV Maranao has already reached Malaysia
are applicable on all acts committed within the and while the passengers were disembarking, X
Philippine archipelago, except as provided in treaties stabbed Y?
and laws of preferential application, therefore, if the X may be tried in Malaysian courts. Since the vessel, at
Philippines entered into a treaty which is not in the time the crime was committed was already in
compliance with the RPC, the said treaty shall prevail. If Malaysia, it is Malaysia which has jurisdiction.
based on the said treaty said persons will be exempt
from the RPC, the said treaty shall prevail. 2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency
note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and
Extra-territorial application of the RPC: these are securities issued by the Government of the
instances where even if the act was committed outside Philippine Islands;
the Philippine territory, the RPC would still apply,
Daverick Pacumio
Page 4 of 142
• What if A, B, C, D, and E went to Hong Kong, As a secretary she has access to the office of
and there in HK they counterfeited the consul. Here comes Y, who is an OFW,
Philippine 10 peso coins. They are Filipino went to the Secretary and was making a
citizens. They placed it inside a big case. follow-up of the document that need the
They are now on board the plane going back signature of the consul but X told Y that it is
to the Philippines. At the NAIA, the said not yet signed. X saw that Y was so sad, Y
case filled with 10 peso coins was said, come with me. They went to a coffee
intercepted. Can they be prosecuted before shop. X demanded from Y 200 dollars so she
Philippine courts? Their argument: if they can make sure that the signing of the
committed a crime, they committed it in document gets prioritized by the consul. Y
Hong Kong, outside the territory of the gave the 200 dollars. True enough, it was
Philippines. Does their argument bear any signed, and X gave the document to Y. But
merit? this came to the knowledge of DFA
The argument has no merit. The extra- Secretary Locsin. He was so mad. He asked
territorial application of the RPC applies. X to go back to the Philippines and an
Although they counterfeited the PH peso coins investigation was conducted. Thereafter, X
in a foreign country, they can be prosecuted was charged with direct bribery. X argued
before the Philippine courts. Moreso, they did that she can only be prosecuted before the
not only counterfeit, they are also bringing it to courts of Japan because she committed the
the Philippines in order to alter it in the same outside the office. Is this meritorious?
Philippines (Art. 2 par . 3, RPC). No. What is material is that the crime she
committed is connected with her functions.
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the
introduction into these islands of the obligations 5. Should commit any of the crimes against national
and securities mentioned in the preceding number; security and the law of nations, defined in Title One
of Book Two of this Code.
4. While being public officers or employees, should • So if the offender committed the crime of
commit an offense in the exercise of their functions; treason, conspiracy to commit treason, proposal
or to commit treason, misprision of treason,
• These are public officers/employees of the PH espionage, inciting to war and giving motives
government assigned to work in a foreign for reprisals, violation of neutrality,
country who commit crimes. If the crime they correspondence with hostile country, or
committed is related to the exercise of their attempt to flee, he can be charged before the
functions, they can be charged before PH Philippine Courts. OR if he commits any of the
courts. However, if the crime they committed is crimes against the law of nations: piracy,
not connected to the performance of their qualified piracy, mutiny, qualified mutiny, he
functions, they cannot be charged here. shall be tried before the Philippine courts. The
• X is a long-time DFA employee in the PH extraterritorial application of the RPC applies.
consulate in Japan. In order to earn more
money, she started selling jewelries after The first part of Art. 2 provides for the territoriality
office hours. Unfortunately, one day, she characteristic of the RPC. The second part of Art. 2
was called and informed that the jewelries provides for the extra-territorial characteristic of the
she sold were fake. May X be prosecuted RPC.
here?
No. The crime committed by X is not connected In People v. Tin and People v. Lol-lo, the SC held that
with her functions because it was committed piracy is a crime against mankind and humanity. Hence,
after office hours. Thus, X can only be the offender can be prosecuted here in the PH, viz:
prosecuted before the courts of Japan.
• X is a DFA employee who was assigned to be Pirates are in law hostes humani generis. Piracy is a
a secretary to a Philippine consul in Japan. crime not against any particular state but against all
Daverick Pacumio
Page 5 of 142
mankind. It may be punished in the competent tribunal

of any country where the offender may be found or into Two kinds of criminal intent:
which he may be carried. The jurisdiction of piracy
unlike all other crimes has no territorial limits. As it is 1. General Criminal Intent: Presumed by law from the
against all so may it be punished by all. Nor does it mere doing of an act. Requires no proof because the law
matter that the crime was committed within the presumes its presence.
jurisdictional 3-mile limit of a foreign state, "for those
limits, though neutral to war, are not neutral to crimes." 2. Specific Criminal Intent: never presumed --- must
be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Art. 3. Definitions. — Acts and omissions
punishable by law are felonies (delitos). In the course of a fight, X pulled a knife and tried
to stab Y. X hit Y on the shoulder. Y was brought to
Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit the hospital. It was a shallow wound. Y filed a case
(dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa). for attempted homicide against X.
Thus, it is incumbent upon the State to prove intent to
There is deceit when the act is performed with kill on the part of X. if there is failure to do so, X can
deliberate intent and there is fault when the only be convicted of less serious physical injuries.
wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence,
lack of foresight, or lack of skill. What if Y avoided the knife but the knife hit the
head of Y. X is prosecuted for homicide. Is intent
Two (2) kinds of felonies: material?
Since the crime charged against X is homicide, intent to
1. Intentional Felonies: one which is committed with kill becomes a general criminal intent which is
deliberate intent. presumed by the law because the victim is already dead.
The best evidence of the intent to kill is the death of the
The elements are: victim.
(1) Criminal intent on the part of the offender – The use
of a means to achieve the desired result. It is established In the case of Rivera v. People, insofar as intent to kill is
by means used by the offender in committing the crime, concerned, there are several factors which must be
or the overt acts performed by him to consummate the looked into in order to establish intent to kill:
crime. 1. Evidence of motive;
2. Nature and number of weapons used by the
Intent: An important element of an intentional felony offender;
is criminal intent. Intent is the use of a particular 3. The nature and number and location of wounds
means to achieve the desired result. It is an internal inflicted on the victim;
state of the mind, therefore it cannot be seen. 4. Manner of committing the crime; and
5. The acts or statements made by the accused
How is intent established? before, after, or during the commission of the
It is established by the overt acts performed by the crime.
offender in the commission of the crime, or by the
means employed by him to consummate the crime. So The Supreme Court said these factors would establish
if an offender, in attacking the victim, makes use of a the present of absence of intent to kill.
lethal or bladed weapon, he makes use of a knife, a
gun—it reveals his intent to kill. Motive
If the offender opens the bag of another, without
opening the permission of the owner of the bag, it Motive is the moving power which impels a person to
reveals intent to gain. Here, intent is established by the do an act to achieve the desired result. Motive always
overt acts performed by the offender in the commission comes ahead of intent, because motive is the moving
of the crime or the means employed by him in order to factor in order to accomplish the intent of the offender.
consummate the crime. Therefore, motive is always ahead of intent. While
Daverick Pacumio
Page 6 of 142
intent is necessary to determine the offender’s criminal (2) Freedom of action in doing the act
liability, motive as a rule is not. (3) Intelligence of the offender
WHEN MOTIVE IS NOT MATERIAL: 2. Culpable Felonies:

1. Motive is not material when the identity of the
accused is established. The elements are:
2. Motive is not material when the offender admits (1) Criminal negligence
the commission of the crime. (2) Freedom of action
3. Motive is not material when there is direct (3) Intelligence of the offender
evidence or eyewitness to the commission of the
crime. Both intentional and culpable felonies have the same
4. Motive is not material if the act committed if the elements except as to the first element. As to the first,
act committed is culpable. we have criminal intent, as to the second, we have
5. Motive is not material in acts mala prohibita. criminal negligence. Both intentional and culpable
felonies are voluntary acts. An intentional felony is a
WHEN MOTIVE BECOMES MATERIAL: voluntary act obviously by its definition—it is
1. When the act of the offender would result to committed with deliberate intent therefore the offender
variant crimes committed the act knowingly, willfully, voluntarily.
2. When there is doubt on the identity of the Insofar as culpable felonies are concerned, they are
offender also voluntary acts. Because in culpable felonies, the
3. When there is only circumstantial evidence to wrong was also done by the offender although without
prove the commission of the crime—no intent or malice.
eyewitness, no direct evidence.
More than that, insofar as criminal law is concerned,
Mayor X and his family heard mass. When X was voluntariness of an intentional felony is the
about to board the van, a motorcycle stopped and concurrence of intent, freedom, and intelligence, and
W repeatedly stabbed Mayor X. In order to voluntariness of a culpable felony is the concurrence of
determine W’s criminal liability, is it necessary to negligence, freedom, and intelligence.
prove motive?
Yes. W’s act of stabbing and killing the Mayor would Common elements of intentional and culpable
result to variant crimes because the Mayor is a person in felonies:
authority and at the time of the assault, he was not 1. Freedom of action – when the offender performs the
engaged in his official functions. If W killed the Mayor act on his own free will without force, duress,
because of the latter’s past performance of duty as a uncontrollable fear. He knowingly and wilfully performs
Mayor, W should be charged with qualified direct the act on his own free will.
assault with murder. But if W killed the Mayor because So, if the offender performs the criminal act but he did
of a personal reason, not connected with the so under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear, there is
performance of the Mayor’s functions, then he should no criminal liability. This is an exempting circumstance
be prosecuted of murder. Since the act of W would under Article 12 of the RPC because there is no freedom
result to variant crimes, you have to know motive on his of action, an element of voluntariness.
part.
2. Intelligence – the mental capacity of a person to
In Fernandez v. People, there was doubt on the identity know wrong from right and to appreciate the
of accused Fernandez. He and the victim did not know consequences of one’s act. If the person acted without
each other – he was only identified by the friend of the intelligence, there is no criminal liability.
victim. Since they did not know each other, there could
not be any motive for Fernandez to shoot the victim. So if the criminal act has been committed by an insane,
Motive became material because there was doubt on the imbecile or a minor 15 years of age or under, the said
identity of the accused. offender is exempted from criminal liability under
Daverick Pacumio
Page 7 of 142
Article 12 because he acted without intelligence. There fact is not a defense in culpable felony. This is
is no criminal liability. because in culpable felonies, there is criminal
negligence. And it is an element that the
A common element of intentional and culpable felony is mistake must be without negligence.
freedom of action. The offender is said to have acted
with freedom of action when he performs the act on his A woman shouted “magnanakaw!” police officers
own free will, without force, without duress, without riding their car saw a man running with the bag of
uncontrollable fear. Therefore, if an offender is the woman. The snatcher ran inside an eskinita.
prosecuted in court and it was proven that he performed When W saw that police officers were following
the criminal act because of an uncontrollable fear, him, he turned around and shot the police officers.
because of an irresistible force employed on him, he W began running again. Though wounded, the
shall be exempted from criminal liability. It is an officers continued the chase. W turned right. The
exempting circumstance. Why? Because there is no police officers also turned right. When they turned,
freedom of action, an element of voluntariness. Without there was a man who looked like W and the man
voluntariness, there is no intentional felony, there is no immediately shouted “Bang, Bang Bang patay
culpable felony. kayo!” the police officers fired at the man and the
man died. The people in the neighborhood
Another common element of intentional or culpable revealed that the man shot was mental retardate.
felony is intelligence. It is necessary that the offender The police officers were charged with homicide.
who performs the act must have the intelligence to do Their defense: mistake of fact. Is it tenable?
it. Therefore, if the said criminal act is done by an Yes. First element: That the act done would have been
imbecile, by an insane, by a minor (15 and below), he is lawful and justifiable had the facts been as the accused
exempted from criminal liability because insofar as believed them to be – had it been true that the man was
criminal law is concerned, he has no intelligence. the snatcher, the act done by the officers would have
Without intelligence, there is no voluntariness, there is been lawful because the snatcher was a dangerous man.
neither intentional nor culpable felonies. Self-defense. Second element: That the intention of the
offender in performing the act must be lawful – the
Mistake of Fact: misapprehension of facts on the part intention of the police was to preserve their lives. Third
of the person who caused injury to another. If a person element: That mistake must be without fault, mistake,
acted under mistake of fact, he is absolved of criminal carelessness, negligence on the part of the offender –
liability. It is an absolutory cause because the offender there was no fault on their part – it happened in the spur
acted without criminal intent. of the moment. They had no time to reflect as to
whether the man was the snatcher or not.
Elements of mistake of fact:
1. That the act done would have been lawful and There are certain crimes which can be committed
justifiable had the facts been as the accused even if there is no intent:
believed them to be – granting for the sake of 1. Culpable felonies: Because what is present is
argument that the facts are what they accused criminal negligence;
believed them to be, the said act will be justified. 2. Acts mala prohibita: Does not require
2. That the intention of the offender in performing criminal intent.
the act must be lawful – he must be guided by a
lawful, legitimate, justified intent. Mala prohibita crimes: crimes where criminal intent
3. That mistake must be without fault, mistake, is immaterial. These are acts which are made criminal
carelessness, negligence on the part of the because there is a law defining and punishing them.
offender – it is necessary that the offender must Therefore, in case of malum prohibitum, the only
have exercised diligence in ascertaining the true question asked is “did the offender commit the
facts of the case. He cannot have acted with prohibited act?” if yes, he is liable regardless of criminal
negligence and at the same time invoke mistake intent.
of fact. Therefore, mistake of fact can only be
a defense in intentional felonies. Mistake of
Daverick Pacumio
Page 8 of 142
Mala in se crimes: crimes where criminal intent is foreign currency in violation of the same renders the
material. These are crimes which are wrong by itself. person or offender criminally liable.
MALUM IN SE MALA PROHIBITA Garcia v. CA: The act of decreasing a political

Acts which are inherently Acts which are only candidate’s vote is malum in se. it is inherently wrong.
evil or wrong. Wrong per wrong because there is a If it is malum in se, how come Garcia was convicted
se, wrong by their very law that defines and when she argued that she was so tired then? SC: Even if
nature. punishes the act. she acted without criminal intent, there was negligence
Good faith or lack of Good faith or lack of on her part. Her duty of being the head of the BOC
criminal intent is a valid criminal intent is not a requires that she exercise extraordinary due diligence in
defense. valid defense unless the canvassing of a political candidate’s vote.
otherwise provided.
Modifying circumstances No modifying Art. 4. Criminal liability – Criminal liability shall be
such as mitigating and circumstances may be incurred:
aggravating appreciated by the court 1. By any person committing a felony (delito)
circumstances are unless otherwise although the wrongful act done be different
considered by the court expressly provided. from that which he intended.
in imposing the penalty. 2. By any person performing an act which
The stage in the It must always be an act would be an offense against persons or
commission of the crime done hence, always in the property, were it not for the inherent
whether the crime is in consummated stage. No impossibility of its accomplishment or an
the attempted, frustrated, no attempted account of the employment of inadequate or
frustrated, or stages, unless provided ineffectual means.
consummated stage is by law.
considered by the court Proximate Cause
in imposing the said
penalty. Under Art. 4(1), criminal liability shall be incurred by
The degree of There is no degree any person committed by any person committing a
participation of an considered. All felony although the wrongful act done be different from
offender whether he is a perpetrators are that which he intended.
principal, accomplice, or punished to the same
an accessory is extent. No principal, no This provision is otherwise known as the proximate
considered in imposing accomplice, no cause doctrine. Its elements are:
the penalty. accessory. 1. That the person is performing a felonious act;
2. That the resulting act is a felony; and
Loney v. People: an act mala in se such as reckless 3. The resulting felony is the direct, natural and
imprudence causing damage to property cannot absorb logical consequence of the felonious act of the
mala prohibita like violation of the mining act, etc. SC offender.
said, what makes an act malum in se is the presence of
criminal intent or negligence on the part of the offender, Under the proximate cause doctrine, an offender
whereas, what makes an act malum prohibitum is the becomes criminally liable of the resulting felony
presence of a special penal law that defines and although that is not his intended felony.
punishes the act. Therefore, one cannot absorb the
other. Efficient Intervening Cause: An efficient intervening
cause is an active force which is a distinct act or fact
In Padilla v. Dizon, Alex Padilla filed an administrative absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the offender.
case against Judge Dizon for acquitting an Accused for
violating a CB circular for lack of criminal intent. SC: CB A bus was passing by the zigzag road of Quezon. 4
circular is malum prohibitum. Therefore, criminal armed men announced a hold up. Anyone who
intent does not matter. The mere act of bringing the refuses will be shot, they said. W heard it. He
Daverick Pacumio
Page 9 of 142
became terrified, opened the window and jumped thus, the victims performed acts which brought tetanus
out and down on the ravine. He died. Are the hold- germs on their wounds. The stabbing were thus remote
uppers liable for W’s death under the proximate causes. The tetanus poisoning was an efficient
cause doctrine? intervening cause. in Urbano, the accued was not liable
Yes. First element: the intended act felonious – robbery; because there was a settlement on the civil aspect of the
Second element: the resulting act is a felony – the death case. in Villacorta, the accused was liable only for slight
of W; Third element: the resulting felony is the direct, physical injuries qualified by treachery.
natural and logical consequence of the felonious act of
the offender – the death of W is the direct and logical There was a party at McDo. One of the parents went
consequence of the announcement of the hold-up. to the party was X. X brought her 6-month-old son.
Were it not for the fear, W would not have jumped. Everyone was taking pictures with the Birdie. The
mother wanted a photo of Birdie and her son alone.
2 friends were drinking. While they were drinking, The mother gave the child to Birdie. Thinking that
they were discussing politics. There were Birdie was already holding her son, she let go of her
arguments between them. X boxed his friend Y. Y son and the son fell. The baby sustained injuries.
retaliated and punched his friend X. X pulled out The man behind the mascot and McDo were
his fan knife and stabbed Y. X left. It was a shallow charged. Is the man liable under the proximate
wound. While walking towards home, Y passed by a cause doctrine?
house where there was a feast. The celebrant No. First element: That the person is performing a
showed a pistol and fired shots in the air. One of felonious act – The mascot was not doing a felonious
the stray bullets hit Y in the head and Y died. X was act. It was the mother’s negligence which brought the
charged with homicide. Is X liable for homicide? injury to her own son. It is negligent for the mother to
No. First element: Intended act is felonious – the intent leave her son to a mascot. Since it is the mother who was
of X was to injure or stab Y. Second element: The negligent and not the man behind the mascot, there is
resulting act is a felony – the resulting act is the death no damages and they are not held liable. Thus, since the
of Y. Third element: the resulting felony is the direct, first element is absent, the proximate cause doctrine
natural and logical consequence of the felonious act of cannot apply to make the man behind the mascot and
the offender – death of Y is not the result of the stabbing McDonalds criminally liable.
of X. The proximate cause is the efficient intervening
cause (the stray bullet from the pistol fired by the Three situations wherein a person becomes
celebrant), which is totally foreign to the act of stabbing. criminally liable for the resulting felony although
X can only be liable for physical injuries, but not Y’s different from that which he intended:
death. Therefore, the third element is absent and the
proximate cause doctrine does not apply. 1. Aberratio ictus/mistake in the blow: when the
offender directed the blow to the intended victim and
In Urbano v. IAC, because of the flooding of the field, because of poor aim, the blow landed on another
Urbano hacked Javier and Javier was hit on the palm. person. 2 felonies result: (a) the felony against the
Javier was brought to the hospital and allowed to go intended victim; and (b) the felony against the actual
home. 21 days after, Javier showed signs of poisoning. victim.
The following day, he died. In People v. Villacorta, the
victim was suddenly stabbed at the left side with a If these 2 resulting felonies are grave or less grave
bamboo stick. The victim was brought to the hospital. felonies, you apply Art. 48. Aberratio ictus somehow
21 days after, the victim Cruz suddenly showed signs of benefits the accused because instead of being
tetanus poisoning. When brought to San Lazaro, the prosecuted for 2 crimes, he is prosecuted for 1 crime. But
following day, he died. Almost the same as in Urbano. the penalty for the more serious crime is imposed in its
In both cases, the SC held that the accused is not liable maximum period.
for the death of the victim. The SC believed that tetanus
poisoning has an incubation period of 14 days. if the X has a grudge vs. Y. He found Y drinking with 5
hack wound/stab wound has tetanus germs at the time men. X aimed the pistol at Y intending to kill Y.
of infiction, the victims should have died within 14 days. However, because of poor aim, the bullet hit Z
Daverick Pacumio
Page 10 of 142
instead. Z was hit on the head and died. What was up, he stabbed the person next to him he
crime/s are committed? thought was X. the person Y stabbed was his father
A: Insofar as Y is concerned: attempted murder; insofar who came to Y’s aid. The father died. What crime/s
as Z is concerned: murder – in People v. Flora and People was/were committed?
v. Adriano, the treachery attendant in firing at the A: Parricide – the crime Y actually committed. In case of
intended victim is present and may be appreciated on conviction, however, Art. 49 applies, therefore, the
the actual victim. Since they are the product of a single lesser of the 2 penalties between the intended felony
act of firing, Art. 48 applies and only 1 Information may (homicide – reclusion temporal) and the actual felony
be filed, i.e. murder with attempted murder. (parricide – reclusion perpetua) is imposed. Thus, even
if Y is convicted, he can only be imposed the penalty of
Same problem. The bullet hit Z. Z was hit on the reclusion temporal.
chest and sustained a fatal wound. But thanks to
the operation, Z survived. What crime/s is/are X was informed that Y stabbed X’s 10-year-old son,
committed? slapped the son, and took the bag of the son. X was
Y – attempted murder. Z – serious physical injuries. very mad. X went to Y’s workplace. He saw Y and hit
Even if the wound sustained by Z were fatal, X can only Y repeatedly. Y was bleeding. X stopped when he
be held liable for SPI because there was, on the part of saw that Y is already seriously injured. He had no
X, no intent to kill insofar as Z is concerned. Art. 48 intent to kill. X left. As X was leaving, he saw Y
likewise applies. getting inside the construction site. He turned to
the man he beat up and X realized the person he
Same problem. The bullet hit Z. Z was hit on the beat up was the identical twin brother of Y. the twin
forearm. It was a shallow wound and would heal brother of Y filed serious physical injuries against
within 3-5 days (slight physical injuries). What X. X invoked error in personae and argued he
crime/s is/are committed? should not be held criminally liable.
Y – attempted murder. Z – slight physical injuries. Since A: His defense is not meritorious. Error in personae is
one of the resulting felonies happens to be a light felony, not an absolutory cause. Moreover, since there is no
Art. 48 does not apply. Art. 48 applies only when a single variance between the intended and resulting penalty,
act results in 2 or more grave or less grave felonies. Thus, Art. 49 does not apply and error in personae is not a
X may be charged in 2 Informations: attempted murder mitigating circumstance.
and slight physical injuries
3. Praeter intentionem: The consequence went
2. Error in personae: Offender directed the blow at beyond the intention. When the offender directed a
another thinking such person is his intended victim but blow at his intended victim but the injurious result is far
the intended victim is not at the scene of the crime and greater than the means employed. Always a mitigating
the actual victim was mistaken to be the intended circumstance (see Art. 13, 3rd par.)
victim.
• Effect: It depends. If you apply Art. 49, in case Elements of praeter intentionem:
of error in personae, if the intended felony is 1. Felony has been committed;
different from the felony actually committed, 2. Notable disparity between the means employed
the lesser penalty shall be imposed in its and the resulting felony.
maximum period. Thus, error in personae may
be a mitigating circumstance. But if there is no In People v. Sales, the trial court considered in favor of
variance between the intended felony and the the father Noel Sales the mitigating circumstance of
actual felony, error in personae has no effect on praeter intentionem. The trial court held that the father
the criminal liability of the offender. did not intend to kill his son. The SC held that the trial
court is wrong. The elements do not apply. There was
X boxed Y and hit Y’s chest 2 times. It was a strong no notable disparity between the means employed by
punch and Y was shaken and down in the ground the father (repeatedly beating the frail body of the 9-
and was suffering from severe pain. X left. Y tried year-old son while tied in a tree) and the death of the
to stand up and opened a fan knife. The moment he son.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 11 of 142
No. The first element is immediately absent because the

Husband and wife were fighting in the bedroom. As crime of adultery is a crime against chastity, not a crime
the wife was going downstairs, the husband against persons or property. Therefore, impossible
slapped the wife twice. Because of this, the wife lost crime does not lie.
balance and fell from the topmost portion of the
stairs down. It was a bad fall. The wife died. The X was mad at his master. One time, X saw the
husband was convicted of parricide. Should the master lying on the bench in the garden. The helper
husband be given the benefit of praeter tiptoed going to the master and realized the master
intentionem? was fast asleep. The helper went back to the house,
Yes. No one could have foreseen that out of slapping, sharpened a bolo, and repeatedly hacked his
death would result. There was a notable disparity. master. An autopsy was conducted and it was
discovered that even before the helper hacked his
Impossible Crime Doctrine: where the act done, had master, the master had died 2 hours ago. What
it been accomplished, would have amounted to a crime crime/s is/are committed?
against person/property, but was not accomplished Impossible crime of murder. First, the act done would
because of its inherent impossibility. It is not in reality have amounted to murder, a crime against person. there
a crime. It did not ripen into a crime. However, because was evil intent – to kill. Act was not accomplished
of the offender’s criminal propensity, he is punished and because of inherent impossibility – you cannot kill a
the crime charged is impossible crime. person already dead (legal impossibility). The said act
does not fall under any provisions of the RPC.
The elements of an impossible crime are:
1. The act done would have amounted to a crime X and Y were on board a jeepney. They were seated
against persons or property; beside each other. Y was fast asleep. X noticed Y’s
2. The act was done with evil intent; big bag. X placed his hand inside the bag and
3. The act was not accomplished because of its wanted to get Y’s belongings. But the bag was
inherent impossibility or the means employed empty. Hence, X was unable to take anything. What
are ineffectual or inadequate; and crime is committed?
4. The act does not fall under any other provision Impossible crime of theft. Act done would have
of the RPC – impossible crime is a crime of last amounted to theft. It was done with evil intent – intent
resort. to gain. It was not accomplished because of its inherent
impossibility – you cannot take anything from an empty
Inherent impossibility: Under any and all bag (factual impossibility). X did not know that the bag
circumstances, the act does not result to a crime. was empty.
There are two (2) kinds of inherent impossibility (Intod
v. CA): Y was walking and busy texting. X threatened to
1. Legal impossibility – when all the intended acts, stab Y if Y would not give his cellphone. Turns out,
even if accomplished, does not amount to a the phone Y was using was X’s own phone lost 2
crime weeks ago. An impossible crime of robbery was
2. Factual impossibility – extraneous field against X. should the charge prosper?
circumstances unknown to the offender No. The act done would have amounted to simple
prevented the consummation of the crime. robbery (crime against property). The act was done with
evil intent. The act was not accomplished because of
X arrived home. He caught his wife having sex with legal impossibility – robbery cannot be consummated
another man. He filed a case of adultery against his because the thing he took belongs to him. However, the
wife and her paramour. The public prosecutor last element is not present – the act of X of pointing a
found that the wife was actually born a man, but bladed weapon on Y amounts to grave coercion
had her sex changed to a woman. Thus, adultery (compulsive coercion) by compelling another by threat
does not lie against her. The prosecutor filed to do an act against his will, whether it be right or
against the wife a crime of impossible crime of wrong. The charge should be grave coercion. Impossible
adultery. Is the prosecutor correct? crime is a crime of last resort.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 12 of 142
Art. 5. Duty of the court in connection with acts A felony is consummated when all the elements
which should be repressed but which are not necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
covered by the law, and in cases of excessive present; and it is frustrated when the offender
penalties. — Whenever a court has knowledge of performs all the acts of execution which would
any act which it may deem proper to repress and produce the felony as a consequence but which,
which is not punishable by law, it shall render the nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
proper decision, and shall report to the Chief independent of the will of the perpetrator.
Executive, through the Department of Justice, the
reasons which induce the court to believe that said There is an attempt when the offender commences
act should be made the subject of legislation. the commission of a felony directly by overt acts,
and does not perform all the acts of execution which
In the same way, the court shall submit to the Chief should produce the felony by reason of some cause
Executive, through the Department of Justice, such or accident other than this own spontaneous
statement as may be deemed proper, without desistance.
suspending the execution of the sentence, when a
strict enforcement of the provisions of this Code Two (2) Phases of a crime
would result in the imposition of a clearly excessive 1. Subjective phase – if the offender still has
penalty, taking into consideration the degree of control over his actions. The moment the
malice and the injury caused by the offense. offender desisted, he no longer incurs criminal
liability.
Police officers arrested X because X was performing 2. Objective phase – if the offender loses control
a pervert act. The investigating prosecutor could over his actions. The moment the offender
not find any violation of the law. What should the commits all acts of execution.
resolution of the public prosecutor be?
The prosecutor should not charge him in court because Attempted Felony: There is an attempt when the
under Art. 5 of the RPC, if a person is charged in court, offender commences the commission of a felony
and the court finds that the act of which he was charged directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts
was not defined and penalized by any other law, the of execution which should produce the felony by reason
court must dismiss the case. DO NOT SAY ACQUIT of some cause or accident other than his own
THE ACCUSED. Acquittal comes after trial on the spontaneous desistance.
merits.
Elements of attempted felony:
Under Art 5, the court may, through the DoJ, 1. The offender commences the commission of a
recommend that this act be subject of a penal felony directly by overt acts – requires that the
legislation. offender has begun, commenced the
commission of the felony by overt acts. The
If a judge tried the case and all the elements have been attempted felony is one which is directly
proven, even if the judge took pity of the accused under connected to the overt act performed by the
the circumstances, the judge have no recourse but to offender, even if he has a different crime in
impose the penalty prescribed by law. Judges only apply mind. What is material is the offender’s overt
the penalty. However, the judge through the Secretary act, not the crime he has in mind;
of Justice can recommend to the President that this 2. He was not able to perform all the acts of
accused be given clemency. execution; and
3. He was not able to perform all the acts of
Art. 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted execution by reason of some cause or accident
felonies. — other than his own spontaneous desistance.
Consummated felonies as well as those which are

frustrated and attempted, are punishable.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 13 of 142
What if the felony is not produced because the jammed and the bullet did not come out. what
offender voluntarily desisted during the attempted crime, if any, was committed by X?
stage? Attempted homicide. The overt acts – aiming the gun at
The offender is not criminally liable because Y, pulling the trigger with intent to kill Y, are acts
spontaneous desistance of the offender negates criminal directly related to homicide. He was unable to perform
liability. all acts of execution because the gun was jammed, not
by his spontaneous desistance.
Y used to be X’s friend. Y worked in Dubai and
arrived home. X was very happy. X thought Y would What if X fired the gun but it turned out the gun
give something to him. When X went to Y’s house, was not loaded. Is X liable for any crime?
house was cold to X. X believed Y has many dollars. Impossible crime of homicide. Under any and all
He waited for night time. The moment the lights in circumstances, a gun without a bullet will not kill a
the house of Y were off, X went near the kitchen and person. There is an inherent impossibility to
removed 6 jalousies. But as he was about to enter, consummate the crime. Thus, X is liable for the
he was caught by barangay tanods. A complaint for impossible crime of homicide.
attempted robbery was filed against him before the
public prosecutor. Would you indict X as charged? Distinguish an attempted felony from an
No. The elements of an attempted crime are: (a) the impossible crime
offender commences the commission of the crime; (b)
does not perform all acts of execution; and (c) by reason Attempted Felony Impossible Crime
of some cause other than the offender’s own Evil intent is possible of Evil intent is not possible
spontaneous desistance. The first element requires that accomplishment of accomplishment
the act committed have a direct relation to the intended The crime was not The crime was not
act. Here, the mere opening of the jalousies do not relate accomplished by reason accomplished because of
to the crime of robbery, absent a showing of intent to of some cause or accident its inherent impossibility
gain. The most it could be is for attempted trespass to other than the offender’s
dwelling (People v. Lamahang). Even if X’s real intent own spontaneous
was robbery, his overt act of trying to enter and desistance
removing the jalousies are not overt acts directly
connected to robbery – they are directly connected to Frustrated Felony: A felony is frustrated when the
attempted trespassing. offender performs all the acts of execution which would
produce the felony as a consequence but which,
In Baleros v. People, the accused was charged with nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
attempted rape. Is the overt act of pressing a cloth independent of the will of the perpetrator.
soaked with chemicals in the face of a woman an overt
act of rape? SC: No. the accused’s intent was to make Elements of a frustrated felony:
Malou unconscious. After Malou becomes unconscious, 1. The offender performs all the acts of execution
the accused may do anything, not necessarily rape which would produce the felony; and
Malou. 2. The felony was not produced by reason of
causes independent of the will of the
Indeterminate offense: One wherein the overt act perpetrator.
done by the offender in relation to his intent is
ambiguous. Should he be charged of indeterminate Distinguish attempted felony v. frustrated felony
offense? No. An indeterminate offense has no juridical
standpoint in the RPC. Attempted Felony Frustrated Felony
Offender does not Offender performs all
X in going home chanced upon Y. he has long been perform all acts of acts of execution
wanting to kill Y. X opened the cabinet of clothes of execution
their house and found a gun. X shot Y. But the gun The failure to perform all The failure to perform all
acts of execution is due to acts of execution is due to
Daverick Pacumio
Page 14 of 142
any cause or accident any cause independent of climbing on top of a naked female does not
other than the offender’s the offender’s will constitute attempted rape without proof of his
own spontaneous erectile penis being in a position to penetrate
desistance the female's vagina.
Still in the subjective Already in the objective
phase phase What are material crimes and formal crimes?
If a crime admits stages (consummated, frustrated,
Felonies that do not admit of frustrated stage: attempted or consummated and attempted stages), they
1. Theft (Valenzuela v. People) – theft is the are material crimes. They are punished based on
unlawful taking of the personal property of tendency. If a crime does not admit stages, they are
another with the intent to gain without force or called formal crimes which are punished only in the
violence or use of force upon thing. The only consummated stage, e.g. physical injuries – they are
operative act to consummate theft is the punished based on the resulting injuries on the victim;
unlawful taking. Unlawful taking is complete false testimony – if the offender falsely testified under
the moment the offender gains possession of oath during criminal or civil proceedings, he is liable for
the property of another. Disposal is immaterial. false testimony.
What matters is the taking of the personal
property. X was being interviewed by a manager and applying
2. Rape (People v. Campuhan) – In People v. Orita, for a job. The phone of the manager rang. The
frustrated rape is deleted. Since the law used manager went out and answered her phone. While
carnal knowledge and not sexual intercourse, X was left alone, he took notice of the manager’s
the slightest penile penetration consummates bag. X went near the bag and opened the zipper. He
the crime of rape. peeked inside and saw 2 wallets. X took the bigger
wallet and placed it inside his pocket. When he was
No penetration, no rape. However, the about to leave, the manager went inside. What
penetration need not be full or complete. When crime has been committed by X?
is there slightest penile penetration? The Consummated theft. The moment X took the wallet,
moment the penis touched the labia or even if he has no opportunity to dispose of it, theft is
pudendum of the woman’s genitalia. already in the consummated stage as he already gained
possession of the personal property of the manager.
In People v. Pareja, the SC distinguished rape
from acts of lasciviousness, viz: when the Same problem. X went near the manager’s bag,
"touching" of the vagina by the penis is coupled opened the zipper, looked inside, saw the wallet.
with the intent to penetrate, attempted rape is He was about to take the wallet, and the manager
committed; otherwise, the crime committed is went inside. X was unable to take anything. Is X
merely acts of lasciviousness. liable of any crime?
Attempted theft. The overt acts performed by X (going
In Cruz v. People, AAA’s breasts got mashed but to the bag, opening without permission, looking at the
she was able to struggle. Crime charged was contents) these are overt acts revealing intent to gain or
attempted rape. SC: Acts of lasciviousness only. take the manager’s personal property. He was unable to
In the prefatory statement of Justice Bersamin, consummate the act of taking by reason of an act, i.e.,
he said: the manager re-entered the room.
The intent of the offender to lie with the female Same problem. X opened the zipper. He took the
defines the distinction between attempted rape wallet. Few seconds later, he had a change of mind
and acts of lasciviousness. The felony of and returned the wallet. He closed the bag. There
attempted rape requires such intent; the felony was a CCTV which caught X. Is X liable of any crime?
of acts of lasciviousness does not. Only the Consummated theft. The moment he took the wallet,
direct overt acts of the offender establish the unlawful taking is complete and theft is consummated.
intent to lie with the female. However, merely His returning of the wallet is not considered a
Daverick Pacumio
Page 15 of 142
desistance because the crime has already been Art. 7. When light felonies are punishable. - Light
consummated. Desistance does not affect the criminal felonies are punishable only when they have been
liability of the accused in the frustrated and consummated, with the exception of those
consummated stages. The effect of returning the wallet committed against person or property.
is simply a mitigating circumstance of restitution. No
civil liability shall be adjudged in the event X is Light felonies: Infractions of the law for which the
convicted. penalties of arresto menor or fine not exceeding 40k
• Punished only in the consummated stage
In Canceran v. People, the crime charged was frustrated except crimes against persons and crimes
theft. The trial court held that it was consummated theft against property (there may be attempted stage)
and cited the case of Valenzuela and thus, convicted
Canceran. Canceran appealed because his right as an Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. -
accused was violated. He was deprived of the right to be Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are
informed of the nature and cause of the accusation punishable only in the cases in which the law
against him. SC: Agreed. Even if it was proven that specially provides a penalty therefor.
Canceran committed consummated theft, since he was
charged of frustrated theft only, he cannot be convicted A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come
of consummated theft because it is higher than to an agreement concerning the commission of a
frustrated theft. felony and decide to commit it.
X pulled out his bolo. He hacked Y, with intent to There is proposal when the person who has decided
kill. Y tried to evade the blow. It was only the to commit a felony proposes its execution to some
portion of Y’s shoulder which was hit. When Y was other person or persons.
brought to the hospital, the doctor said the wound
would heal in 10 days. what crime is committed by Conspiracy exists when 2 or more persons come to an
X? agreement to commit a felony and decide to commit it.
Attempted homicide. The act of raising the bolo and
hacking Y were overt acts of homicide. But the homicide Proposal: An act done by a single person. a person has
was not produced because the acts of execution were decided to commit a felony and he proposes its
incomplete, i.e., X did not inflict a mortal wound upon commission to another. If the other agrees, there is
Y. conspiracy.
X raised his bolo intending to kill Y. As a result, Y As a rule, conspiracy and proposal are not punishable.
was hacked on the chest. It was a fatal wound. Y Exception: when the law specially provides a penalty
survived, thanks to the operation. What crime is therefor. The moment the RPC, SPL provides a penalty
committed by X? for merely conspiring or proposing to commit a felony,
Frustrated homicide. The moment X inflicted upon Y then conspiracy and proposal become crimes by
a mortal wound, X performed all acts of execution, themselves
nothing more is left for X to do. However, death was not
produced by reason of a cause independent of X’s will, 2 concepts:
i.e., immediate medical intervention. 1. Conspiracy as a crime
2. Conspiracy as a means of incurring criminal
In Labiaga and Trinidad, if the wound inflicted upon the liability/as a means to commit a felony
victim is non-mortal, the felony is only in the attempted
stage. If the wounds were mortal but death did not A, B, C, D, and E met, planned, and agreed to stage
supervene, the offender is liable for a frustrated felony. a tumultuous public uprising by violence and by
The moment the offender inflicts a mortal wound, the force because they were against the promulgation
offender performed all acts of execution. of a new law. After, the police got a tip and they
were arrested and charged with conspiracy to
commit sedition. Will the case prosper?
Daverick Pacumio
Page 16 of 142
The case will prosper because conspiracy to commit Implied/inferred – a conspiracy deduced from the
sedition is a crime in itself. mode and manner of committing the crime. Here, it is
not based on a preconceived plan. The offenders acted
A, B, C, D, and E, while eating in a restaurant, were simultaneously in a synchronized and coordinated
planning the killing of W and decided to commit it. manner towards a common criminal design. It is a
Unknown to them, the waiter knew W. The waiter conspiracy that happened at the spur of the moment –
immediately went to the police station of ABCDE’s impulsively based on the acts done by the offenders. By
planned agreement to kill W. as they were about to virtue of the overt acts of the offenders, one can deduce
leave, the police arrested ABCDE and were charged that they conspired.
with conspiracy to commit murder. Will the case
prosper? For one to be liable in case of implied/inferred
The case will not prosper because conspiracy to commit conspiracy, it is necessary that he must actively
murder is not a crime by itself. The law does not participate in the commission of the crime. Mere
prescribe a penalty for merely conspiring to commit acquiescence or presence at the scene of the crime,
murder or homicide. There must be an overt act for the absent an active participation, does not make one a co-
conspirators to be liable for at least attempted murder. conspirator.
What if A, B, C, D, and E, when planning the killing The moment conspiracy is established the act of one is
of W, were armed, had pistols, and decided to kill the act of all. All perpetrators are punished to the same
W by firing at their guns. The police arrived and extent regardless of the quantity/quality of their
they were arrested after they came up with the participation in the crime. The court does not look into
agreement. May they be held liable for conspiracy who performed the fatal blow, who performed a minor
to commit murder? act.
They cannot be held liable for conspiracy to commit
murder because it is not a crime by itself. They can be In People v. Feliciano, Carandang, and Octa, Macairan,
held criminally liable, however, for illegal assembly and Napoles, the SC appreciated the presence of
because it is a meeting attended by armed persons who conspiracy and convicted all the conspirators based on
agreed to commit a crime punished under the RPC the principle that the act of one is the act of all.
(murder).
Insofar as public officers are concerned, the SC held that
X was stabbing Y. Z passed by and watched without a head of office cannot be a conspirator by merely
giving Y any help because he approved of X’s act of affixing his signature in a document which involves
stabbing Y. is Z an implied conspirator of X? anomalous transactions (Arias v. Sandiganbayan). He
No. The mere approval of a crime does not make one a may be negligent in signing such, however, that will not
conspirator. The approval by Z of X’s stabbing of Y does make him a co-conspirator. Because in conspiracy, it
not make Z a co-conspirator. requires intentionality in the commission of the crime.
If conspiracy is not established each conspirator is liable
2 kinds of conspiracy as a means to commit a only for the acts committed by him.
felony:
People v. Bokingco – since Col had nothing to do with
Direct – when the conspirators met, planned, and Bokingco’s act of killing, he cannot be a co-conspirator
agreed to commit a crime. In agreeing to commit the to the crime of homicide because at the time Bokingco
crime, they are all conspirators but they are not yet was killing the victim, Col was doing an act of robbery.
criminally liable. But the moment they perform the The charge insofar as Col is concerned should only be
crime they commit, they become criminally liable attempted robbery.
because they are part of the agreement even if at the
time of the commission of the crime a co-conspirator People v. Castillo – Padayhag was acquitted because she
was not present or was merely looking at others had no criminal intent to kidnap the boy for ransom.
committing the crime.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 17 of 142
X was walking. A, B, C, D, and E suddenly appeared. to Mama Elsa. The fact that D knew what to do means
They were all armed with a piece of wood and A, B, he had information of the criminal design.
C, D, and E ganged up on X, each one of them
hitting X until X was on the ground. A, B, C, D, and 2 kinds of conspiracy
E kept hitting X’s head. They left when they saw 1. Wheel/circle – when a person/group (hub)
other people were coming. X died. Was there deals individually with a person/group (spoke)
conspiracy? 2. Chain conspiracy – when just like in ordinary
Yes – in murder. Though there was no direct evidence business transactions involving contrabands,
of planning X’s killing, it may be established by their there was continued communication among the
acts immediately prior to – they suddenly appeared and manufacturer to the retailer, the retailer to the
encircled X; at the time of – all of them hit X with a piece consumer.
of wood; and after the commission of the crime – when
they saw people coming, they left. Direct evidence need GMA v. People – allegedly, wheel conspiracy was
not be considered insofar as the planning of the present. SC: No. when the counsel of GMA filed a
conspiracy was concerned. demurrer, the SC granted the same and dismissed the
case. SC held PGMA cannot be considered a co-
While X was walking, A immediately hit him many conspirator or the hub simply by signing the word “OK”
times on the face and the chest. Because of the on the document. A mere signing of the word “OK” does
suddenness of the attack, X fell on the ground. A not suffice to make her a co-conspirator in the wheel
kicked and kicked X. X was bleeding. A went on top conspiracy. Second, in the Information filed, there was
of X. A picked up his fan knife, opened it, and as he no allegation who is the main plunderer who deals with
was about to stab X, A stabbed the ground. After, A the other officers of the PCSO (spokes). Absent the main
left X. B and C, brothers of A, arrived after A left and plunderer, there can be no conspiracy.
repeatedly stabbed X. A, B, and C were charged as
conspirators for X’s killing. Is there conspiracy? Conspiracy can lie even in SPL.
There was conspiracy between B and C but not insofar
as A is concerned. This is because there was on A’s part People v. Morilla – accused Mitra and Morilla are liable
no intent to kill, which was present on the part of B and as conspirators for transporting dangerous drugs under
C. There was no intent to kill on the part of A because Sec. 26, RA 9165 which punishes conspiracy in Sec. 5
he desisted in killing X. which includes transporting dangerous drugs. When
SPL provides for conspiracy, conspiracy lies among
A, B, and C boarded the tricycle of D. they stopped perpetrators of the crime violating the SPL.
in this big house. The tricycle was there. D was
there. A, B, and C entered the big house, ransacked Go-Tan v. Tan – the wife filed a TPO not only against the
it, killed the people inside it. Thereafter, they husband but also against her parents in law alleging that
boarded the tricycle of D. Then they left. A even the parents-in-law were in conspiracy in abusing
instructed D “lahat ng yan kay Mama Elsa.” They her. The parents-in-law argued otherwise. SC:
parted ways but they were subsequently arrested. Conspiracy will lie. Based on Art. 10 of the RPC, the
A, B, C, and D were charged as conspirators for privisions thereof can apply suppletorily to violations of
robbery with homicide. D countered that he cannot the SPL, unless the latter provides otherwise. There is
be held liable because he did not even enter the nothing in RA 9262 which provides otherwise. In fact,
house. He was not part of the robbers who killed RA 9262 makes RPC apply suppletorily.
the victim. He was simply the driver of the tricycle.
Is D liable as a co-conspirator for the crime of Art. 9. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and light
robbery with homicide? felonies. – Grave felonies are those to which the law
SC: He is liable as a co-conspirator. D provided the attaches the capital punishment or penalties which
means for A, B, and C to go to the place and for an easy in any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance
escape. Thus, he has a common purpose as that of A, B, with Art. 25 of this Code.
and C. He was part of the plan. Second, when D was
given by A the instruction, D knew that the loot must go
Daverick Pacumio
Page 18 of 142
Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes 1. Unlawful aggression
with penalties which in their maximum period are Elements:
correctional, in accordance with the above- a. Physical/Material attack/assault;
mentioned Art.. b. Assault is imminent or actual;
c. Assault is unlawful
Light felonies are those infractions of law for the 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
commission of which a penalty of arrest menor or a prevent or repel it – The said act done by the
fine not exceeding 200 pesos or both; is provided. person defending himself must be reasonable or
rational in order to prevent the said unlawful
Grave felonies: punished by capital punishment or aggression.
afflictive penalties in any of its periods Factors to consider:
a. Nature and number of weapons used by
Less grave felonies: punished by correctional penalties the unlawful aggressor versus that of
in their maximum periods the person defending himself;
b. Personal circumstances of the unlawful
Light felonies: punished by arresto menor aggressor and the person defending
himself; and
Art. 10. Offenses not subject to the provisions of this c. Place and location of the assault.
Code. - Offenses which are or in the future may be 3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the
punishable under special laws are not subject to the person defending himself
provisions of this Code. This Code shall be
supplementary to such laws, unless the latter It includes defense of one’s life and limb, honor and
should specially provide the contrary. chastity, and property.
Article 11 The primordial element is unlawful aggression. Without

unlawful aggression, there is nothing to repel. There is
What are justifying circumstances? no need for the accused to claim that he merely
Those which if present in the commission of the felony, defended himself.
the offender is deemed not to have transgressed the law.
There is no criminal and, as a rule, there is no civil 2 kinds of unlawful aggression:
liability. 1. Actual/material unlawful aggression – when the
attack is done by physical force
If a person raises as a defense any of the justifying 2. Imminent unlawful aggression – when the
circumstances, the accused is admitting the acts alleged attack is impending or at the point of
in the Information but he is saying he is not criminally happening.
liable because his act was justified. Therefore, to raise it
is both an admission and an avoidance. He admits the What is provocation?
acts alleged but he is trying to avoid criminal liability. Any improper/unjust act that tends to excite another to
commit a wrongful act.
Once an accused invokes a justifying circumstance, the
trial will be inverted. In the ordinary course, the When is it sufficient?
prosecution presents the evidence. If the accused raised When it is adequate to stir a person to commit a
a justifying circumstance, the burden of evidence is wrongful act and when it is proportionate to the gravity
shifted on the accused to prove the elements of the of the act.
justifying circumstance. If he fails to prove it, it will
definitely be a conviction. “Stand ground when in the right.” What does it
mean?
I. SELF-DEFENSE It means that when the accused is where he should be,
the law does not require him to retreat when he saw his
Elements:
Daverick Pacumio
Page 19 of 142
assailant fast approaching him. Otherwise, he runs the followed him and was able to catch up and stabbed
risk of being stabbed at the back. Y repeatedly. X is prosecuted for homicide. X said
he acted in self-defense. Will self-defense lie?
BAR QUESTION: TRUE OR FALSE: Self-defense No. The act of the hold-upper pointing the knife at X
applies only in case of consummated felony. placed the latter’s life and limb in actual/imminent
FALSE. Self-defense would apply the moment there is danger. However, when X grabbed the knife and Y ran
any unlawful aggression done by the victim on the part away, the unlawful aggression had ceased. The moment
of the person defending himself. The moment the life the inceptive unlawful aggression on the part of the
and limb of the said accused was placed in actual or victim had ceased, the person defending himself had no
imminent danger, whether it is consummated or not, he right to wound or kill the victim. X should have stopped
has to act based on the impulse of self-preservation. when he had the weapon. When he followed the
Therefore, self-defense does not only lie in case of aggressor and stabbed him, this was an act of retaliation
consummated felony. It applies even in case of as X became the aggressor. X should be convicted of
attempted and frustrated for as long as the life and limb homicide.
of the person defending himself was placed in actual
and imminent danger. Woman went to the public market at 4:00AM. She
was walking on her way home. To go to her house,
X was walking. Y appeared and, pointing a long she was about to pass a vacant place filled with
knife, told X, “This is a holdup, give your wallet to trees and tall grasses. A man appeared in front of
me.” X took his wallet and he extended his hand as the mother. He boxed the mother twice and
if in the act of giving the wallet to Y. However, covered her mouth and forcibly dragged her
instead of giving it, X grabbed the knife. The behind the tall grasses, pinned her down,
moment X was able to grab Y’s knife, Y pulled out a undressed her and himself, and placed himself on
gun. He aimed it at X and was about to fire at X but top of the woman. The woman was able to grab the
X was quick enough to stab Y. Y died. X is knife she has always been carrying. She stabbed the
prosecuted for homicide. X’s defense: self-defense. man without looking at the man. The knife pierced
Is there self-defense? thru the heart of the man. The man died. The
Yes. Was there unlawful aggression? The act of pointing woman is prosecuted for homicide. Defense: self-
the knife at X placed the latter’s life and limb in danger. defense of her honor and chastity. Will self-defense
When X grabbed the long knife, did the unlawful lie in her favor?
aggression cease? No. the holdupper Y pulled out a gun. Yes. There was unlawful aggression – the man punched
Was the means used by X reasonable? Yes – he was the woman and pinned down the woman, undressed the
about to be fired at but he was quick to stab the woman and himself, placing the honor and chastity of
holdupper to save his life. Lastly, there was no sufficient the woman in actual and imminent danger. Reasonable
provocation. means – the man was stronger than her. It was on a place
where there were no people. It was a vacant lot. No one
In Ganal, Jr. v. People, Ganal, Jr. emptied his gun in firing could hear the woman. Considering the strength of the
at the victim. The SC held that this is still reasonable man and the location, the means used was reasonable.
means because what you take into consideration is the Last, there was no sufficient provocation on the
point of view of the person defending himself. At that woman’s part.
particular moment, Ganal, Jr. felt that his family would
be under attack. Toledo v. People – there is no such thing as accidental
self-defense. It is wrong for an accused to raise both
X was walking. Y appeared and, pointing a long accident and self-defense. Accident means the offender
knife, told X, “This is a holdup, give your wallet to was performing a lawful act with due case and the injury
me.” X took his wallet and he extended his hand as was caused by accident without intent on the part of the
if in the act of giving the wallet to Y. However, accused. In self-defense, the injury was intentionally
instead of giving it, X grabbed the knife. The done by the accused. The accused intentionally and
moment X was able to grab Y’s knife, Y was deliberately wounded or killed the victim to save his
shocked. Thus, Y ran as fast as he could. But X
Daverick Pacumio
Page 20 of 142
own life. Therefore, the two are inconsistent defenses jumped out of the window, the unlawful aggression had
and cannot be raised at the same time. already ceased. So, when X followed him and chased
him, it is no longer an act of defending his sister, it is an
II. DEFENSE OF RELATIVE act of retaliation.
Elements: IV. STATE OF NECESSITY

1. Unlawful aggression;
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to Elements:
prevent or repel it; 1. Actual or imminent danger;
3. If there was sufficient provocation on the part of 2. Injury feared is greater than that done to avoid
the relative being defended, the person it; and
defending took no part therein. 3. There was no other practical and less harmful
means to avoid it.
Relatives that may be defended:
1. Spouse; This is the exception to the rule that in justifying
2. Ascendant; circumstance, there is no civil liability. this civil liability
3. Descendant; is imposed not only against the accused but also against
4. Legitimate, illegitimate, adopted brother/sister; all persons who may have been benefitted by the state
5. Relatives by affinity within the same degree; and of necessity.
6. Relatives by consanguinity within the 4th civil
degree. X was driving his car. Suddenly, he saw a big truck
in front of him without warning devices or lights. If
In defense of relative, for it to lie in favor of the accused, X would go on, his car would collide. If X goes left,
it is necessary that the relative be among those he hits an island. He goes right, he hit a man. The
enumerated above. man sustained serious physical injuries. X’s
defense: state of necessity. Will this defense lie?
III. DEFENSE OF STRANGER Yes. The first element is present – his car might collide
with the truck. The second element is present – the
Elements: injury feared (death) exists. There was no other practical
1. Unlawful aggression; and less harmful means to avoid it. It all happened in a
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to sudden. However, X and the people in the truck shall be
prevent or repel it; held civilly liable.
3. There was no evil intent or motive or retaliation.
V. FULFILLMENT OF A DUTY
It is necessary that in defending a total stranger, his only
motive is the noble objective to help someone in need. Elements:
1. Offender acted in the lawful performance of his
Farmer, 5:00 in the afternoon, was on his way home. duties; and
4-meters away from their house, he could hear the 2. The resulting felony is an unavoidable
loud cries of his sister asking for help. He rushed to consequence of the performance of his duty.
the house. He saw his sister lying on the bed,
naked, kicking Y, who was on top of her. Y looked VI. OBEDIENCE TO A LAWFUL ORDER
at X, and jumped out the window. X, feeling angry,
chased the man. He hacked the man with his bolo. Elements:
Y died. X is prosecuted for homicide. His defense: 1. Lawful order from a superior;
he was acting in defense of his sister. Will his 2. Order was for a lawful purpose; and
defense life? 3. The means employed to carry out such order is
No. The relative is within the scope of relatives that may lawful.
be defended. However, the defense of relative will not
lie because the first element is absent. The moment Y Both the order and the means used must be lawful.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 21 of 142
husband beats hits the wife. the following morning,

In Tabuena, SC held that even if in reality the order is the moment he sees his wife with all the bruises, he
unlawful, if on its face it is lawful and the subordinate would ask for forgiveness, hugging the wife.
complied in good faith, this defense lies. however, come night time, after getting drunk, he
would be physically abusing the wife again. This
X was convicted for murder. Judgement became went on for 5 years. The woman was already under
final and executory so he was being moved to treatment by a psychiatrist. The husband arrived
Bilibid. While on board the BJMP vehicle, there was home. He slapped the wife. he pointed an ice pick
X with handcuffs and 2 police officers A and B. X at the wife, who tried to parry the blow. The
told the police officers he needed to pee. The police husband left the woman and went to sleep as he
officers said no since they were near Bilibid. X was drunk. The woman became so afraid. The
insisted. Because of that, police officer A instructed husband’s violence was escalating – he was now
the driver to stop. He accompanied X and went using a lethal weapon. She feared for her life and
behind a tree. X said he has handcuffs and asked for her children’s lives. Thus, she killed her husband
them to be removed. Police officer A unlocked X’s while the latter was sleeping. What defense can she
handcuffs. The moment he was freed, he boxed raise?
police officer A and ran. Police officer A called his Battered woman syndrome – refers to a scientifically
companions and chased X. X went in a defined pattern of psychological and behavioral
neighborhood, who pointed to where X was. The symptoms found in women living in battering
police officers A and B and the prison guard called relationships as a result of cumulative abuse.
on X to come out otherwise, they will forcibly go in.
X came out holding as hostage a woman – the In People v. Genosa, for battered woman syndrome to lie
owner of the house. X had a bolo pointed on the in favor of the accused, it is necessary that there be at
neck of the woman, which was already bleeding. X least 2 battering episodes which has the following
told the police, “I will kill this woman if you will phases: (1) tension building phase, (2) acute battering
take me to Bilibid.” Because of this, X became so incident phase, and (3) tranquil or loving phase. Here,
mad and raised his bolo to cut the neck of the the wife did not only experience 2 battering episodes but
woman. Police officer A fired and X fell. The woman a whole 5 years of battering episodes with all these
was rescued. Police officer A is prosecuted for phases. Therefore, she should be acquitted. She incurs
homicide. What justifying circumstances may he no civil nor criminal liability based on Section 26 of RA
raise in order to be free from both criminal and 9262.
icvil liability?
1. Defense of stranger – there was unlawful aggression: If BWS is proven, it is akin to a justifying circumstance.
X was about to stab the woman; the means used was No criminal and civil liability.
reasonable: he cannot go near, he can only fire from afar
and the target was only X’s head because he might hit However, under Sec. 26, in order to determine the state
the woman’s body; there was no showing that police of mind of the battered woman at the commission of the
officer A was ignited by evil intent or motive. crime, there must be expert testimony from
psychiatrists and psychologists.
2. Fulfillment of duty – police officer A’s duty is to save
the life of a citizen and bring X to the Bilibid and the act Husband was verbally abusing the wife all the time.
of killing X is the unavoidable consequence of police One time, the husband arrived home. He did not
officer A’s fulfillment of his duty of saving the life of the only verbally abuse the wife, he also slapped the
woman. wife. the wife killed the husband while he was
sleeping. The wife raised BWS. Will it lie in her
VII. BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROME favor?
No. To bring about battered woman syndrome, there
X and Y are married. They are married for 5 years. must be at least 2 battering episodes. Battery, as defined
Since the time they were married until today, said under RA 9262 is the infliction of physical harm on the
husband was physically abusing the wife. the woman or her child which results in physical,
Daverick Pacumio
Page 22 of 142
psychological, or emotional distress. Here, the physical been insane prior to, at the time of the commission, he
harm was only inflicted once. Therefore, battered was sane and could have acted under lucid interval.
woman syndrome will not lie in favor of the wife.
2. & 3. MINORITY
Article 12
What is the effect of minority on the criminal
Exempting Circumstances: Those which, if liability of the offender?
present/attendant would exempt the offender from Qualify.
criminal, but not civil liability.
If the CICL is 15 years old or under: Absolutely
Offender incurs no criminal liability in doing a wrongful exempt from criminal liability
act because the offender acted without voluntariness.
If the CICL is over 15 but under 18: Exempt only if the
1. INSANITY/IMBECILITY offender acted without discernment. If offender acted
with discernment, it is a privileged mitigating
Imbecility: circumstance.
• Mental age of offender is 2-9 years old, even if
he is already of advanced age X was 15. He is physically disable. Whenever he
• He is free of criminal liability because he acted walks, he walks differently. A neighbor Y would
without intelligence because his mental always make fun of X. X has a grudge against Y and
capacity is that of a minor he wanted to get even at Y. He planned Y’s killing.
• Exempting in all circumstances One night, while Y was opening their house’s gate,
X stabbed Y repeatedly. X, at the time, was 15. Can
Insanity: X be prosecuted for Y’s killing?
• Acting with total mental aberration of the mind No. Even if X planned it, and obviously there was
• Does not know right from wrong. Cannot treachery, but because he was 15 at the time of the
appreciate the consequences of his act commission, even if there was discernment, he is totally
• Acted without intelligence exempt from criminal liability.
• Exempting only if it was proven that the
offender did not act in a lucid interval X was 17. He deliberately stabbed the victim as an
• Must be existing immediately prior to or during act of revenge because the victim was always
the commission of the crime. Supervening bullying him for his physical defect. Because of
insanity is not counted. this, as an act of revenge, X waited for the victim
and stabbed him. X is prosecuted for murder,
X killed the victim. Because of the tension of the qualified by treachery. He was 17. During the
trial, he suddenly became insane. Effect? He is still promulgation of the judgement, X was already 20
criminally liable. Supervening insanity is not counted. years old. How shall the judge who found him
The trial of the case will be stopped and the case guilty promulgate the judgement? Will there be a
archived. The accused will be brought to a mental pronouncement of his guilt?
institution. Trial resumes when he regains sanity. No pronouncement as to his guilt. Judge should only
pronounce X’s civil liability. the judge should only place
People v. Haloc – defense of accused was insanity X under suspended sentence because at the time of the
immediately prior to and at the time of the commission promulgation of judgement, he was only 20 years old.
of the crime. He surrendered the weapon to his sister
and he voluntarily went with the police. SC: If accused Under Sec. 38, RA 9344, the CICL shall be entitled to a
was insane, he was acting under lucid interval. He went suspended sentence even if he is already 18 or above at
home and knew his place of residence. He even the time of the promulgation of judgement provided he
recognized his sister. He went voluntarily with the is not yet 21 years old. Therefore, the judge should just
police. These are acts of a sane person. if he could have impose a suspended sentence without need of
application.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 23 of 142
What if at the time of the promulgation of the What are status offenses?
judgement, X who was 17 at the time of the Acts or conduct which when done by a minor is
commission and acted with discernment, X is punishable and penalized but not when done by adults.
already 24 years old? How shall the judge rule on These are prohibited. You cannot discriminate against
the finding of guilt? minors.
He can no longer avail of the suspension of sentence in
Sec. 38 of RA 9344 because it is limited to when the In SPARK v. QC, the SC upheld the constitutionality of
minor offender reaches 21 years old. the QC ordinance on curfew but stated that the Manila
and Navotas curfews were unconstitutional because
Since he can no longer be given a suspended they imposed penalties on minors who committed
sentence, what will be the effect of minority on his violations of the ordinance.
criminal liability?
It will be a privileged mitigating circumstance and the 4. ACCIDENT
penalty will be lowered by 1 degree.
Elements:
Minority, if not an exempting circumstance, is always a 1. Offender is performing a lawful act;
privileged mitigating circumstance. 2. With due care;
3. Offender causes injury to another by accident;
Should X be brought to Bilibid to serve his and
sentence? 4. There must be no fault or intent on his part to
No, under Sec. 51, RA 9344, X serves his sentence in do so.
agricultural compounds. According to the SC, no matter
how old the offender is at the time of the promulgation Accident is something which happened outside the
of judgement, for as long as he was a minor at the time sway of things. You cannot control it. It is necessary that
of the commission of the crime, he shall not be made to there be the second element – the lawful act be done
serve his sentence in Bilibid with hardened criminals. with due care. even if the offender is performing a lawful
act, if he is not performing it with due care, he is liable
People v. Sarcia – can RA 9344’s benefits be given for a culpable felony under Art. 365.
retroactive application to a CICL who was already
serving his sentence? Yes, as provided for under Sec. 68, In exempting circumstances, there is no criminal
RA 9344. Based on said provision, the benefits of RA liability but there is a civil liability. Accident is an
9344 can be given retroactive application to those exception – there is no criminal and civil liability.
convicted and serving sentence at the time of the
effectivity of RA 9344, provided he was a minor at the There was a drug operation in Mandaluyong. The
time of the commission of the crime. police officers, armed with a search warrant,
searched for a big house. There were many police
Moreover, under Sec. 38 (suspended sentence), said cars. The motorcycle of X passed by and hit one of
suspended sentence applies to any CICL regardless of the side mirrors of the patrol cars. Police officer Y
the crime he has committed. Even if the crime became mad and chased X. X was driving along
committed is a heinous crime, SC said that Sec. 38 Shaw Blvd., and was about to turn right. Police
applies to a CICL regardless of the nature of the crime officer Y pulled out his pistol and repeatedly fired
committed. Justification: If Sec. 38 does not distinguish, shots at the tires of X’s motorcycle. However, one
neither should the court. For as long as he is a minor at of the stray bullets hit a Foodpanda delivery man
the time of the crime and he is not beyond 21 at the time on the chest, which caused his death. The police
of promulgation, he is entitled to suspended sentence. officer is being prosecuted for the death. Police
officer’s defense: Accident. Will accident free him
In Sarcia, however, the offender was not given from criminal and civil liability?
suspended sentence because the minor was already 31 No. While he was performing a lawful act, he was not
years old at the time of promulgation. doing it with due care. Lawful act – when police officer
Daverick Pacumio
Page 24 of 142
Y chased X, he was performing a lawful act. However, Yes. First element – a gun was pointed at Y. the fear was
when Y started firing at the tires, he was no longer real and imminent. If X was able to kill Z, X can also kill
performing a lawful act. You do not chase a violator of Y. Y’s fear of losing his life is greater than his act of
the law by repeatedly firing at his car because stray burying Z.
bullets may hit another person. the killing of the
delivery man may be by accident, but there was, on the X and Y are walking. Suddenly, they chanced upon
part of Y, fault. Thus, the last element was absent. Z. Z was a mortal enemy of X. Upon seeing Z, X
pulled out his home made gun and was keeping it
5. IRRESISTIBLE FORCE on his right side. X fired at Z. Z died. X ordered Y to
bury Z. Y refused. X told Y, if he will not obey, he
Elements: (PIT) will go to his house and rape his youngest sister.
1. Compulsion by Physical force; Afraid of what X will do, Y obeyed and buried Z. X
2. Compulsion is Irresistible; and was charged as principal by direct participation, Y
3. Compulsion came from a Third person. as accessory. Y said he is not criminally liable as he
acted under the impulse of uncontrollable fear. Is
The accused performed the criminal act because there Y correct?
was an irresistible force employed on him by the third No. The fear is speculative and imagined. It is not real
person. he has no freedom of action. Because of the or impending. Before X can do that, he will still go to Y’s
force employed, he is reduced to a mere instrument – he house and by that time, Y could have already asked for
has no freedom of choice. help.
6. UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR 7. LAWFUL OR INSUPERABLE CAUSE
Elements: (URG) Elements: (RFL)

1. Uncontrollable fear; 1. Act is Required by law to be done;
2. Injury feared is Real or imminent; and 2. Person Fails to do such act; and
3. Injury feared is Greater or equal to that which is 3. Reason for such failure is due to some Lawful or
committed. insuperable cause.
In order for this EC to lie, the threat must be real, Offender is free of both criminal and civil liability.
impending, and at the point of happening. It must not reason: Even if the offender failed to act as required by
be speculative and must not be imagined (Ty v. People). law, his reason is lawful or insuperable cause.
In Ty, the SC did not consider Ty’s defense that she Distinguish justifying circumstances from
issued the bouncing checks because of uncontrollable exempting circumstances
fear. SC: The fear that the mother might commit suicide
because of the harsh treatment of the hospital is Justifying Exempting
speculative. Circumstances Circumstances
No crime is committed There is a crime, but in
X and Y are walking. Suddenly, they chanced upon because the offender did the eyes of the law, there
Z. Z was a mortal enemy of X. Upon seeing Z, X not transgress the law is no criminal.
pulled out his home made gun and was keeping it Affect the act done, not Affect the accused or the
on his right side. X fired at Z. Z died. X immediately the doer of the act doer, not the act done
told Y to bury Z. Y refused. X pointed the gun to Y No crime and no criminal There is a crime but there
and told Y, “You are my friend, but if you will not is no criminal because he
follow me, the next bullet will be on you.” Y then acted without
agreed to bury Z. both were arrested. X was charged voluntariness
as principal by direct participation, Y as accessory. No criminal liability and, No criminal liability but,
Y said he is not criminally liable as he acted under as a rule, no civil liability as a rule, there is civil
the impulse of uncontrollable fear. Is Y correct?
Daverick Pacumio
Page 25 of 142
liability because a wrong bullet wounds which caused X’s death. Y is being
has been committed prosecuted for homicide. Y’s defense: fulfillment of
May be raised as defenses May be raised as defenses duty. Will his defense lie? In case not, is there
in intentional felonies both in intentional and incomplete justifying circumstance of fulfillment
culpable felonies of duty?
No. The second element is absent – police officer Y’s act
What are mitigating circumstances? of inflicting 5 gunshot wounds on X is not an
Would serve to reduce the penalty to the minimum unavoidable consequence of fulfillment of duty. A single
period. Reason: It reveals lesser criminality on the part shot on the leg would suffice. Therefore, it is only an
of the offender. There is a diminution of voluntariness incomplete JC which is a privileged mitigating since
(criminal intent, freedom of action, or intelligence). fulfillment of duty only has 2 elements.
Distinguish ordinary mitigating from privileged II. MINORITY OR SENIORITY

mitigating
Ordinary – may be offset by an ordinary aggravating Minority is privileged mitigating if offender is over 15
Privileged – penalty may be reduced by one degree. and below 18 and he acted with discernment.
I. INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING OR EXEMPTING Seniority is a privileged mitigating circumstance. An

CIRCUMSTANCES offender over 70 years who commits an offense
punishable by death = punished by RP. However, by
What are the rules to help the court determine if an reason of RA 9346, death penalty is prohibited.
incomplete justifying or exempting circumstance
should be considered as an ordinary mitigating or III. PRAETER INTENTIONEM
a privileged mitigating circumstance?
1. If majority of the elements necessary to Elements:
justify/exempt attended the commission of the 1. Felony has been committed
crime, the incomplete JC/EC = privileged 2. Notable disparity between the means employed
mitigating circumstance and the resulting felony
2. If less than majority of the elements necessary
to justify/exempt attended the commission of IV. SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION OR THEAT
the crime, the incomplete JC/EC = ordinary
mitigating Elements:
3. If there are only 2 elements to justify/exempt, 1. Sufficient provocation – any act or conduct
the presence of 1 is considered a majority. which is capable of exciting a person to do a
Hence, the incomplete JC/EC = privileged MC. wrongful act. It is sufficient if it is proportionate
4. In case of incomplete self-defense, defense or to the gravity of the act.
relative, or defense of stranger, there must 2. Originate from offended party – it must come
always be unlawful aggression. If the element of from the victim, not form a third person. it must
unlawful aggression is the only element be the victim who provokes the accused.
existing, it is ordinary mitigating. If aside from 3. Immediate to the commission of the crime by
it, there are other elements present, it is the person provoked – requires that there be no
privileged mitigating circumstance. lapse of time between provocation and
commission of the crime. Right after the
A warrant was issued against convict X. he was provocation, the accused should commit the
convicted of homicide. It was a trial in absentia. crime against the offended party.
The police officers went to him. They knocked at
the door. The moment X opened the door, X Urbano v. People – SC appreciated praeter intentionem
immediately pushed him and ran away. Police and sufficient provocation. Praeter intentionem – no
officer Y fired shots in the air asking X to stop. X did one could have foreseen that out of a lucky punch, the
not. Y fired repeatedly at the back of X. X sustained victim would die. Since the victim died, there was a
Daverick Pacumio
Page 26 of 142
notable disparity between the act done and the resulting These are all done immediately – there must be no
felony (death). Sufficient provocation – it was Tomelden considerable lapse of time between the act and the
who was always insulting Urbano and provoked the commission of the crime. In Ignas, 2 weeks is held to be
latter to commit a crime. a long time for the offender to recover his moral
equanimity.
Miranda v. People – the act of the victim of throwing
stones in the house of the accused is not unlawful In People v. Pagal, the accused said they were maltreated
aggression because it did not place the accused’s life and by the victim. So, they planned the robbery and
limb in actual or imminent danger. But said act is homicide. When convicted, they raised this mitigating
sufficient to irritate a person to commit an unlawful act. circumstance. SC: Passion and obfuscation cannot be
considered in a crime deliberately planned and calmly
V. IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF GRAVE OFFENSE meditated upon. Passion and obfuscation happens at
the spur of the moment brought by the unlawful act
Elements: done against the accused. If the killing was planned and
1. Grave offense committed to: meditated upon, passion and obfuscation cannot be
a. Offender appreciated.
b. Spouse
c. Ascendants VII. VOLUNTARY SURRENDER & VOLUNTARY
d. Descendants PLEA OF GUILT
e. Legitimate, natural, adopted siblings
f. Relatives by affinity of the same degree If these 2 are present, they are treated as separate and
2. Immediate vindication fo the grave offense distinct mitigating circumstances. they will never arise
from the same facts and circumstances.
Grave offense – does not need to be an aact punished by
law. It is an act which caused pressure, anxiety to a Elements of voluntary surrender:
person which moved him to commit a crime. 1. Offender has not been actually arrested –
requires that public officers had not yet arrested
Immediate – allows a lapse of time because there was an the offender, even if there is already a warrant.
erroneous Spanish translation. In the Spanish codigo if the police have not yet gone out to look for the
penal, the word used was “proxima”. Immediate offender, and the latter gave himself up, there is
therefore means that the grave offense is the proximate still voluntary surrender because police have
cause of the crime. not yet exerted efforts.
2. He surrendered to a person in authority or agent
VI. PASSION OR OBFUSCATION – governor, mayor, brgy. Chairman, judge; APIA
– police officers, brgy. Tanod.
Elements: 3. Surrender is done voluntarily – when it is done
1. Unlawful act sufficient to produce passion and by the offender spontaneously or
obfuscation unconditionally because he felt remorse and
2. Act that produced such and the commission of wanted to save the government the funds,
the crime must not be far removed by a efforts, time hey will consume in looking for
considerable length of time during which the them.
offender may have recovered his moral
equanimity. Elements:
1. The offender confessed his guilt spontaneously
People v. Ignas – SC held that when sufficient (original crime charged) and unconditionally
provocation, immediate vindication, and passion or (no conditions);
obfuscation are all present and arose from the same 2. The confession of guilt must be made in open
facts, they are treated only as one mitigating court – the court that is trying the case; and
circumstance and not as three. 3. The confession of guilt must be made before the
presentation of evidence for the prosecution.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 27 of 142
compliance and submissiveness of the accused before

X was charged for murder. Information was read. public authorities.
He said not guilty. During pre-trial, counsel of X
moved that X be allowed to enter into a plea- Police officers caught X in possession of a loose
bargaining agreement where X pleads guilty to firearm. X was charged with illegal possession of a
homicide. The judge, private complainant, and low-powered firearm. Since X knew he has no
prosecutor agreed. Accused was rearraigned and he license, during arraignment, he immediately
pled guilty to the lesser crime of homicide. The pleaded guilty. Judge convicted X. judge did not
judge rendred a decision convicting X of homicide. consider voluntary plea of guilt as mitigating
In imposing the penalty, the judge did not consider circumstance. Judge argued that illegal possession
voluntary plea of guilt. Is the judge correct? of low-powered firearms is a violation of a special
Yes. The plea of guilt was not spontaneous, i.e., not on penal law which does not consider mitigating
the original charge of murder, btu to the lesser crime of circumstances.
homicide. The judge is wrong. Although illegal possession of
loose firearm is punished by an SPL, if you look at the
What if X was charged as principal and co- penalties, it has the same nomenclature of penalties as
conspirator in special complex crime of robbery the RPC. Therefore, since RA 10591 has the same
with homicide. He moved to plead guilty to robbery nomenclature of RPC, the latter’s provisions may
with homicide but as a mere accomplice. The suppletorily apply pursuant to Art. 10. Thus, the judge
prosecutor and private complainant agreed. The should have considered the MC of voluntary plea of
judge did not consider voluntary plea of guilt. guilt.
Judge is correct. X’s plea of guilty was subject to a
condition, i.e., that he be made liable as a mere X was found in possession of shabu. He was
accomplice. The original charge was that he was a charged with Sec. 11, RA 9165. During arraignment X
principal and co-conspirator. pled guilty. Judge convicted X, and did not consider
his plea of guilt. Judge is correct because RA 9165
X charged with rape. During the trial, after the expressly provides that RPC provisions do not apply
prosecution presented evidence, it filed its formal (Sec. 98, RA 9165). Since there is an express prohibition,
offer. Instead of presenting evidence, it moved to the judge cannot consider modifying circumstances.
allow X to plead guilty to rape. No conditions. Same
crime. Judge convicted the accused. Judge did not In plunder, Senator X and his subordinates were
consider voluntary plea of guilt. charged as co-conspirators. Sandiganbayan issued
Judge is correct. Plea of guilt was too late to be a warrant against Senator X and his subordinates.
considered as a MC. X pleaded guilty after the Senator X and his co-conspirators immediately
prosecution terminated its presentation of evidence. went to the Sandiganbayan and surrendered. They
The law requires the plea of guilt to before the were convicted. In imposing the penalty, the
prosecution’s presentation of evidence. Sandiganbayan considered the mitigating
circumstance of voluntary surrender.
X burned the house of Y. thereafter, he went home Correct. Sec. 2 of RA 7080 (Anti-Plunder Law) provides
as if nothing happened. W saw X burning Y. W that in imposing the penalty of RP to death, mitigating
narrated such facts to the police. Police went to X’s and extenuating circumstances should be considered.
house. They told X and invited him for
investigation based on W’s narration of facts. X X came from the office. He was driving recklessly
voluntarily went. Therafter, he was charged with because he was sleepy. He failed to see a pedestrian
arson. He was convicted. Judge did not consider his crossing the lane. He hit the man. X panicked and
act of going with the police as voluntary surrender. increased his speed. Someone took notice of his
Is the judge correct? lpate number. The following day, police officers
Yes. In People v. Sabalberino, for voluntary surrender to came to X. he voluntarily admitted to the police
lie, it is necessary that there be an actual overt act of that he was the one who hit the police. X pleaded
surrendering. It cannot be presumed from the guilty to reckless imprudence. Judge convicted
Daverick Pacumio
Page 28 of 142
him, but did not consider voluntary plea of guilt. Is In Nizurtado v. Sandiganbayan, the SC held that in
the judge correct? malversation, restitution of the amount malversed is
Yes. As held in People v. Mariano, the SC held that in analogous is akin to voluntary surrender. Thus, it is
case of quasi-offenses under Art. 365, it is expressly considered as a mitigating circumstance.
provided that courts are not mandated to observe the
rules provided for in Art. 64, which provides for the Article 14 – Aggravating Circumstances
rules for appreciating aggravating and mitigating
circumstances in divisible penalties. Whether to What are aggravating circumstances?
appreciate modifying circumstances in cases covered by • Those which if present or attendant in the
Art. 365 depends solely on the sound discretion of the commission of a felony will serve to increase the
trial court. imposable penalty without however going
beyond the maximum penalty prescribed by
VIII. DEAF, DUMB, BLIND, OR SUFFERING FROM law.
SOME PHYSICAL DEFECT • The moment the commission of a felony was
attended by an aggravating circumstance, the
Physical defect msut have restricted the offender’s court shall impose the maximum penalty.
means of communication. If there is no connection with However, it is necessary that in imposing the
the defect and the crime committed, his physical defect penalty, the court cannot impose a penalty
will not mitigate his criminal liability. beyond the maximum penalty prescribed by
law.
X was born with no legs. One time, he snatched the • The effect of an aggravating circumstance is to
woman’s bag in a public market. X was charged increase the penalty. Reason is: it shows the
with theft. He raised physical defect as a mitigating greater criminality on the part of the offender.
circumstance. If mitigating shows the lesser perversity and
It will not mitigate his criminal liability. his being therefore, the penalty is lowered. In case of
crippled has no connection with the crime of theft. aggravating, it reveals the greater criminality
and so the penalty is increased. But the limit is
X is being scolded by the neighbor. The neighbor the maximum penalty prescribed by law.
was shouting invectives against X in front of the • Therefore, no matter how many aggravating
public. X could not talk back. He lost the power of circumstances attended the commission of the
speech by accident. X picked up a stone and hit the crime, the court cannot impose a penalty
head of his neighbor. X raised the mitigating beyond the maximum penalty prescribed by
circumstance of physical defect. law. So if a crime is attended by ten aggravating
It will mitigate his criminal liability. had he had the circumstances, all of them were alleged and
power of speech, he would answer back. He could not. proven, the court cannot impose a penalty
the only way to stop the neighbor was to hit his head. beyond the maximum penalty prescribed by
His physical defect restricted his means of action, law. This is the limit.
defense, or communication with his neighbor. Thus,
physical defect is considered as a mitigating What are the types of aggravating circumstances?
circumstance. 1. Generic aggravating circumstances – those
which apply to all kinds of crimes.
IX. ILLNESS • Example: Nighttime.
2. Specific aggravating circumstances – those that
Offender is suffering from an illness which diminished apply only to a certain or particular crimes.
the exercise of the willpower but he has consciousness • Example: Treachery – it applies only to
of the consequences of his act. crimes against persons. Treachery is
not considered in crimes against public
X. ANALOGOUS CIRCUMSTANCES order, crimes against chastity, crimes
against public interest, and in crimes
against property.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 29 of 142
3. Inherent aggravating circumstances – those rape is committed by public officer taking advantage of
which are of necessity accompanied in the his public position, the imposable penalty is death.
commission of the crime. From reclusion perpetua, it becomes qualified rape
• It is considered an element of the crime, punishable by death.
without which, the crime would not
have been consummated. A notary public falsified a deed of sale by forging
• Even if they are present, they are no the signature of the vendor and vendee. In reality,
longer to be considered so as to increase no such deed existed. He was charged with
the imposable penalty because they are falsification under Art. 171. In the Information it
inherent elements in the commission of was alleged that in committing the crime, the
the crime. notary public abused his public position. How shall
• Example: Evident premeditation – the court consider?
inherent in all crimes against property. Inherent AC. It is absorbed and will have no effect on
Hence, it is not considered in robbery, the imposition of the penalty. In Art. 171, the second
theft element is that the offender took advantage of his public
4. Special aggravating circumstances – imposition position in committing the crime. Without this
of maximum penalty. Cannot be offset by an element, the notary public cannot be prosecuted under
ordinary mitigating circumstance. Art. 62, as Art. 171, but only Art. 172.
amended by RA 7659 – crime committed by
syndicate. It was lunch time. Police officer has no money. He
5. Qualifying aggravating circumstances – saw a cigarette vendor and bought cigarettes. When
circumstances enumerated in Art. 248. Only the cigarette vendor was waiting for payment, sabi
one (1) may change the nature of the crime. ni pulis, “Anong bayad? Bigyan mo ko P100.00
Others, even if present and listed as QAC, they pang-lunch. Pag di mo ko binigyan, papaalisin kita
are considered generic AC, depending on the jan.” Police officer charged with robbery. It was
kind of qualifying circumstance. alleged that police took advantage of his public
position and proven during trial. How should the
For an AC to be considered against the accused, it must court appreciate it?
be alleged in the Information and proven during trial. Special aggravating circumstance. Although under
Accused must be given opportunity to rebut its Art. 14, 1st par., taking advantage is a generic AC, under
presence. Art. 62, as amended by RA 7659, Heinous Crime Law,
fact that police committed the crime by taking
I. TAKING ADVANTAGE OF PUBLIC POSITION advantage of his public position, it is treated as a special
aggravating circumstance thus, the maximum penalty
Offender must necessarily be a public officer. for robbery shall be imposed.
When do you say that an offender took advantage II. IN CONTEMPT OF OR WITH INSULT TO PUBLIC
of his public position? AUTHORITY
When he uses, misuses, or abuses his position to
commit the crime of facilitate the commission thereof. Elements:
1. That the public authority is engaged in the
Police officer X arrested Y, a woman, for illegal sale exercise of his functions;
of drugs. After investigation, Y was placed behind 2. That the public authority is not the person
bars. The same night, Police officer X took Y out of against whom the crime was committed;
the detention cell, brought Y inside his office, and 3. That the offender knows him to be a public
raped Y. in the Information for rape, it was alleged authority; and
that the rape was committed by the police officer 4. That the presence of the public authority did
by taking advantage of his public position. not prevent the said offender from committing
Court shall consider it as a qualifying aggravating the crime.
circumstance. Art. 266-B, as amended by RA 8353, if
Daverick Pacumio
Page 30 of 142
People v. Tiongson – SC did not appreciate in contempt III. DISREGARD OF SEX, AGE, RANK, AND
of or insult because a police officer is not a PA. He is DWELLING
simply an agent of a PIA. Second, the police officer
himself is the victim of the killing. When is there disregard of rank?
it is necessary that the offender be of lower rank than
Who is a public authority? that of the offended party.
Public authority or a person in authority is any person
directly vested with jurisdiction whether an individual When is there disregard of sex?
or some members of court or governmental When in the commission of the crime, the offender
commissioner. It is necessary that he has the duty to disregarded or disrespected the womanhood of his
govern and execute the laws. Example: Mayors, victim. Disrespect of sex refers to the female sex. This is
barangay chairman. Note: Police officer is merely an inherent in the crime of rape and in certain crimes
agent of a person in authority. involving chastity.
X was running for Mayor in an election. It was When is there disregard of age?
Sunday. X went to the public market and was When in the commission of the crime, the offender
campaigning to the people. While he was disrespected or disregarded the minor age or the senior
campaigning, Y and Z came. They were his age of the victim.
compadres. They greeted X. At the time, X was
incumbent Mayor. While they were talking, Z left. What is dwelling?
Less than a meter, Z went to a fruit stand where any building or structure which is used for rest or
grapes are being sold. While Z was buying grapes, comfort, it also includes:
tasted it, and said, “Ang asim naman!” and threw it The dependencies attached, the staircase, and the
on the face of the vendor. There was a heated enclosures therein. Note: In the aggravating
argument between Z and the vendor. Mayor and Y circumstance of dwelling, ownership is immaterial.
heard this argument. The Mayor tried to pacify Z
and the vendor. Z got mad. Z took the knife in front Why is dwelling an aggravating circumstance?
of him and stabbed the vendor. The vendor It reveals the offender’s greater criminality. He violated
sustained a shallow wound. A case for attempted the enshrined right in the Constitution which is the
homicide was filed against Z. it was alleged that it right to privacy of one’s abode.
was committed in contempt of or with insult to
public authority. Correct? Are there instances wherein even if the crime was
Mayor is a public authority. The moment the mayor committed in the dwelling, dwelling is not
tried to pacify, Mayor was engaged in the performance considered an aggravating circumstance?
of his duties by maintaining peace and order. Second 1) When it is the victim who gave the provocation
element – he is not the person against whom the crime 2) When both the offender and the offended party
was committed. Third element – they know that X is the are living therein
Mayor. Fourth element – Mayor’s presence did not deter 3) When dwelling is inherent
the offender from committing the crime.
X was running for reelection as Congressman. Early
What if when the Mayor was telling Z to just leave, morning, he, his political advisors, and campaign
Z took it against the Mayor and stabbed the Mayor. managers were at the terrace planning. As they
The Mayor sustained a shallow wound. In the were planning, X, holding a cup of coffee, was
commission of the crime, is this AC present? walking to and fro the terrace. Suddenly he fell.
No. The second element is absent, i.e., that the crime is There was a bullet on his head. Y shot him from the
not committed against the public authority. Here, since outside. Is dwelling to be considered?
it was the Mayor himself, the public authority himself, Yes. The terrace is an enclosure attached to the house –
who was stabbed, this aggravating circumstance cannot a part of the place X used for comfort. Since he was
be appreciated. there, even if the perpetrator was outside, dwelling is
considered an aggravating circumstance.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 31 of 142
3. That abuse of confidence facilitated the

X and Y were engaged in a fistfight. In the course of commission of the crime.
the fistfight, X gave Y a strong kick. Because of this,
Y fell on the ground. X ran inside his house. X Elements of obvious ungratefulness:
locked the gate. X entered the house and closed the 1. That the offended party has trusted the
door. Suddenly, Y jumped over the fence and offender;
barged inside X’s house. Y repeatedly stabbed X 2. That the offender abused such trust by
until X died. The Information alleged the AC of committing a crime against the offended party;
dwelling. Is dwelling aggravating? and
Yes. The moment X left the fight and entered his house, 3. That the crime be committed with obvious
he believed he is secure. When Y barged inside, he ungratefulness.
violated such privacy.
V. IN THE PALACE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE, IN
What if, in the same problem, when X ran inside his HIS PRESENCE, IN PLACES WHERE PUBLIC
house, he deliberately left his door open. He went OFFICERS DISCHARGE THEIR FUNCTIONS, AND
to the kitchen, took a bolo, and called on Y, “Kung IN PLACES OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP
matapang ka, dito ka sa loob ng bahay ko.” X hid
behind the door, armed with the bolo. Y accepted Inside the palace of Chief Executive: Always
the challenge. He was armed with a small knife. aggravating. In order however for these aggravating
Upon entering, he immediately stabbed X. Is circumstances to be considered, it is necessary that the
dwelling aggravating? offender deliberately sought the said place to commit
No. When it is the victim who gave the provocation, the the crime because otherwise it cannot be said that he
aggravating circumstance of dwelling should not be disrespected the place.
considered. Here, since it was X, the victim, who gave
such provocation, the aggravating circumstance of In the presence of the Chief Executive: Even if the
dwelling should not be considered. Chief Executive is doing an act in his private capacity, it
will always be an aggravating circumstance for the lack
X, in need of money, decided to rob Y’s house. In of respect to the chief executive.
the middle of the night, he entered Y’s house. He
took valuables. However, Y was awakened. The Where the public authorities are engaged in the
moment Y was awakened, X stabbed Y. Thereafter, discharge of their duties: It is necessary that at the
X left. X is being prosecuted for robbery with time of the commission of the crime, the public
homicide. The Information alleged that robbery authorities are actually discharging their duties.
with homicide took place inside the dwelling. Is Therefore, it will not suffice that it is a public office.
dwelling aggravating?
Yes. Dwelling is only inherent in robbery with use of It is also an additional requirement that at the time of
force upon things. Dwelling is not inherent in robbery the commission of the crime, these public authorities
with force or intimidation of persons because this kind are performing their public functions to show disrespect
of robbery need not necessarily be committed inside the of lawful authority.
dwelling of the victim.
In a place dedicated to religious worship: If a crime
IV. ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE AND OBVIOUS is committed in a place dedicated to religious worship,
UNGRATEFULNESS it is always an aggravating circumstance. It is immaterial
whether there is a religious ceremony or a religious
Elements of abuse of confidence: function on going. It suffices that the place is one
1. That the offended party has trusted the dedicated for religious worship, it reveals the offender’s
offender; greater criminality in committing the crime.
2. That the offender abused the trust by
committing a crime against the offended party; VI. NIGHT TIME, UNINHABITED PLACE, BY A
and BAND
Daverick Pacumio
Page 32 of 142
4. In contempt of or with insult to public

Elements of night time: authorities – No. it is necessary that the crime
1. The offender deliberately took advantage of was committed in the presence and the crime is
nighttime or cover of darkness; and not committed against the public authority
2. The purpose of the offender is to facilitate the himself.
commission of the crime or to insure or afford
impunity. A, B, C, D, and E were waiting for W along Ayala
Avenue. They planned and agreed to kill W. around
Elements of uninhabited place: 11:00PM, here comes W. ABCDE simultaneously
1. The offender has very little or remote possibility attacked W with fan knives. W died. Are night time,
to receive some help; and uninhabited place, and by a band present?
2. The offender deliberately sought the Night time – No. Ayala Avenue is adequately lit.
uninhabited place to facilitate the commission
of the crime. Uninhabited place – No. 11:00, Ayala Avenue is still
busy. Anyone can aid W.
Elements of by a band:
1. There is more than three (at least four) armed By a band – Yes. There are 5 armed malefactors – armed
malefactors; and with fan knives who simultaneously attacked the
2. They shall have acted together in the victims. They are all principals in the crime of murder.
commission of the crime.
VII. ON OCCASION OF CONFLAGRATION,
X was mad at the judge. The judge convicted him SHIPWRECK, EARTHQUAKE, EPIDEMIC,
and did not listen to his argument. X deliberately CALAMITY, MISFORTUNE
escaped to get even. Upon escaping, he conducted
surveillance on the judge. Every Friday, after office If crime is theft, this is a qualifying circumstance
hours, the judge would not go home to the house of because it is included in the qualifying circumstances of
his wife, but would to the house of his mistress and theft under Art. 310.
would stay there until Sunday morning. That
Friday, X went to the mistress’ house as early as If crime is killing, it is also a qualifying aggravating
6:00PM. He was waiting for the judge to arrive. circumstance.
Judge’s car arrived at 9:00PM. X waited for the
lights to be turned off. Past 11:00PM, the lights went For other crimes, this is simply a generic aggravating
off. X entered the house. Stabbed the judge to circumstance.
death. X is being prosecuted for killing the judge.
In the Information, the following ACs were alleged: VIII. AID OF ARMED MEN
1. Nighttime – Yes. X waited for total darkness
inside the house. When the judge alighted from There is an actual perpetrator and armed men merely
the car, he could have killed the judge. Instead, aided the perpetrator in committing the crime. They are
he waited until there is total darkness before he mere accomplices in the commission of the crime.
committed the crime.
2. Dwelling – Yes. In dwelling, ownership is Only the actual perpetrator is the principal, the armed
immaterial. Even if the place was not owned by men are considered accomplices.
the judge but owned by the mistress, since the
judge used the place for his comfort, it is within Aid of armed men By a band
the meaning of dwelling. There is no requisite as to The law requires a
3. Disregard of rank – No. It is inherent because the number of armed number of persons, that
the crime committed by X is qualified direct men who aided the actual is, at least 4 armed
assault with murder. Thus, disregard of rank is perpetrator of the crime. malefactors.
absorbed and not considered an aggravating It is not necessary that It is necessary that the
circumstance. the armed men acted armed men must have
Daverick Pacumio
Page 33 of 142
together in the acted together in the

commission of the crime actual commission of the X was convicted by MeTC of serious physical
because the armed men crime. injuries. Maximum penalty imposed is 4 years.
merely aided the actual Within probationable penalty. After conviction, X
perpetrator of the crime filed for probation. MeTC granted X’s application.
and their participation X is a free man on probation. Several months
may either be a direct or thereafter, X engaged in a fight and in the course
indirect participation in thereof, he killed his opponent. X is being
the commission of the prosecuted for homicide. The judge found X guilty.
crime. Should recidivism be appreciated?
Yes. First, X is on trial for homicide. Second, at the time
IX. RECIDIVISM of such trial, he was previously convicted by final
judgement of another crime, i.e., serious physical
Four (4) forms of habituality: injuries. The fact that he applied for and was granted
1. Recidivism (Art. 14, par. 9); probation did not erase his conviction as probation
2. Reiteracion (Art. 14, par. 10; simply suspends the execution of his sentence. Third,
3. Habitual delinquency (Art. 62, no. 5); and both the first and second offenses are embraced in the
4. Quasi-recidivism (Art. 160). same title of the RPC, i.e., they are both crimes against
persons. Last, X is convicted of the second offense of
Elements of recidivism: homicide.
1. That the offender is on trial for one crime;
2. That at the time of said trial, he was previously X was pardoned. Father, to insure that his son will
convicted by final judgment of another crime; no longer commit any crime, would always be
3. That both the first and second offenses are bringing his son to his political sorties. The son got
embraced in the same title of the code; drunk and stabbed a waiter. X is now being
4. That the offender is convicted of the second prosecuted for homicide. Should recidivism be
offense charged. appreciated?
Yes. Pardon only exempts X from serving out his
Generic AC – may be offset. If not offset, the penalty penalty. It does not erase his previous conviction.
shall be imposed in its maximum period. Recidivism is Therefore, all the elements are still present.
a mere generic aggravating circumstance. It applies to
all kinds of crimes. There must be at least two X was charged with conspiracy to commit rebellion.
convictions. The first conviction on the first crime He was convicted. He was now in Bilibid serving his
committed must be a conviction by final judgment. The sentence. President issued an Amnesty
second conviction must be for the new crime in which Proclamation with Congress’ concurrence. X
he is on trial. It is not a conviction by final judgment applied for amnesty and was granted the same. 2
because it is on this second conviction wherein the years after, X was again arrested for conspiracy to
judge will appreciate recidivism as an aggravating commit sedition. He was charged. Judge convicted
circumstance. him. In imposing the penalty, should recidivism be
considered?
X convicted of serious physical injuries. X served No. His amnesty obliterated his previous criminal
out his sentence. X served out his sentence. X tried liability or his conviction of conspiracy to commit
to live a good life. However, 20 years after, someone rebellion. It is as if no crime has been committed. It is
tried to molest his granddaughter. X fought and as if he did not commit said crime. Therefore, the
killed the man. X is prosecuted for homicide. Judge second element is not present.
found X guilty of homicide. May the judge consider
recidivism? X. REITERACION
Yes. All elements are present. The fact that years have
lapsed between the first crime and second crime is Elements:
immaterial. Recidivism has no prescriptive period. 1. That the accused is on trial for an offense;
Daverick Pacumio
Page 34 of 142
2. That he previously served sentence for another Yes. Second element – he had served sentence for
crime to which the law attaches an equal or homicide which carries with it penalty equal to forcible
greater penalty or for two or more crimes to abduction (reclusion temporal). All elements are
which it attaches a lighter penalty; present. Moreover, the crimes are not embraced in the
3. That he is also convicted of the new offense. same title of the RPC (homicide is a crime against
persons, while forcible abduction is a crime against
Habituality and reiteracion are the same. chastity).
Reiteracion is a generic aggravating circumstance, it X was charged and convicted of serious physical
applies to all kinds of crimes. Just like recidivism, injuries by the MeTC. Since the penalty imposed
reiteracion requires that there must be at least two has a maximum of 4 years, X applied for probation.
convictions. However, unlike recidivism wherein a X was released from prison. Thereafter, X was in
conviction by final judgment will suffice insofar as the need of money. X saw a cellphone on top of the
first crime, in reiteracion, what the law requires that the neighbor’s table, jumped over the fence. He took
offender has already been punished. The offender has the cellphone by intimidating the neighbor. He is
already served sentence for the first crime that he has prosecuted for simple robbery. Judge found X
committed. A mere conviction by final judgment will guilty of simple robbery under Art. 294, par. 5. In
not suffice. imposing said penalty, can judge consider
reiteracion?
Recidivism Reiteracion No. Second element – not present. Probation is not
Requires conviction by Requires service of equivalent to service of sentence (Moreno v.
final judgement sentence COMELEC). The effect of probation is to suspend the
Crimes must be felonies Crimes may be felonies execution of the sentence. The moment a person is
as they must be or offenses punished by granted probation, he is deemed to have had a
embraced in the same SPL suspended sentence.
title of the RPC
Felonies must be Crimes need not be HABITUAL DELINQUENCY (Art. 62, no. 5)
embraced in the same embraced in the same
title of the RPC title of the RPC. Elements:
1. That the offender has been convicted of either
In one old case, the SC said that if the crimes are falsification, robbery, estafa, theft, serious
embraced in the same title of the Code, reiteracion physical injuries or less serious physical
cannot be considered although it is not expressly stated injuries (FRETSeL);
in Art. 14(10). Therefore, recidivism cancels out 2. There must at least be three (3) convictions; and
reiteracion. 3. Each conviction must come within 10 years from
the offender’s last conviction or release
X was charged and convicted of homicide. X served
his sentence. After 20 years, X is now released. First If recidivism and reiteracion are generic ACs, habitual
thing X noticed, he has new neighbors. He was delinquency is considered as an extraordinary
attracted to a beautiful sexy woman. X saw the aggravating circumstance because an additional
woman one time sweeping the ground. X barged penalty is imposed on him provided: the total penalties
inside the woman’s house, brought the woman do not exceed 30 years.
inside his house, and attempted to have carnal
knowledge of said woman. Woman put up a fight, X was charged and convicted of robbery. He served
and was rescued. X is charged with forcible out the sentence. After service, X is now released.
abduction. Judge found X guilty of forcible Within 6 months, X committed theft. Court
abduction.1 In imposing the penalty, can the judge convicted him of theft. He served out the sentence.
consider reiteracion? After service, X is again released. Within 1 ½ year
1
Punishable by reclusion temporal (12 years and 1 day to 20 years).
Daverick Pacumio
Page 35 of 142
from his last release/conviction for theft, he imposition of an

committed another robbery. Convicted. He served additional penalty.
sentence. After service, he was again release and
out of prison. Just within a month, he again QUASI-RECIDIVISM (Art. 160)
committed robbery. Judge found him guilty of
simple robbery. In imposing the penalty, should Elements:
recidivism, habitual delinquency be considered? (1) That the accused is already convicted by final
judgment of one offense; and
X is a recividist. First, he is on trial for robbery. Second, (2) The accused committed a new felony before
at the time of his trial, he was previously convicted beginning to serve his sentence or while serving
thrice for robbery, theft, and another robbery. Third, the his sentence.
crimes for which X was charged fall under the same title
of the RPC (robbery, theft – Crimes against property). A special aggravating circumstance because the
Last, X was convicted for the current crime of robbery. maximum period of the penalty prescribed shall be the
Author’s note: Reiteracion cannot be considered one imposed.
because of the old case which provides that recidivism
cancels out reiteracion. Thing to remember: first crime committed may be any
crime – it may be a felony or a SPL. Insofar as the second
X is also a habitual delinquent. First, X has been crime is committed, however, the same must be a
previously convicted for robbery and theft. Second, X felony.
had three (3) convictions (robbery, theft, robbery). Last,
each conviction came within ten (10) years from his last Recidivism Quasi-recidivism
conviction/release. There must be at least There must be two (2)
two (2) convictions convictions
People v. Melendrez – Both recidivism and habitual It is necessary that the There is no such
delinquency may be considered by the court because crimes are embraced in requisite. The only
they have different effects in the imposition of the the same title of the RPC requisite is that the
penalty. Recidivism – penalty for robbery is maximum if second crime committed
recidivism is not offset by OMC. Habitual delinquent – by the offender must be a
additional penalty is imposed for being a habitual felony
delinquent provided these additional penalties shall not
exceed 30 years. X was convicted of homicide. Judgement became
final. X is serving his sentence. Months later, X was
Recidivism Habitual Delinquency not feeling well. His inmates said he has high fever.
There must be at least There must be at least When the prison guards arrived, they saw 5 plastic
two (2) convictions three (3) convictions sachets on his bed. X is now being prosecuted for
The crimes must be The crimes are specified, Sec. 11, RA 9165. After trial, X was found guilty.
embraced under the i.e., falsification, robbery, Should quasi-recidivism be appreciated?
same title of the RPC estafa, theft, serious No. The second crime committed while X was serving
physical injuries, and less sentence for homicide is not a felony, but an offense – a
serious physical injuries violation of RA 9165, a SPL.
No prescriptive period Each crime must be
within which the crimes committed within ten X was convicted of qualified theft. While he was
should be committed (10) years from the last serving his sentence, there were 2 groups of
release/conviction inmates. X became a member of the first group.
A generic aggravating An extraordinary Later, there was a riot. X was involved and X killed
circumstance which may aggravating a member of the second group. X is prosecuted for
be offset circumstance which homicide. X was found guilty. Should quasi-
provides for the recidivism be considered?
Daverick Pacumio
Page 36 of 142
Yes. The second crime he has committed while he is placed it under his bed. He was waiting for the best
serving sentence for qualified theft is a felony. time to kill X. a week had lapsed. One time, he was
looking at the window when he saw X. X was
XI. IN CONSIDERATION OF PRICE, REWARD, OR opening the gate of the house. He killed Y. How
PROMISE would you appreciate treachery and evident
premeditation?
This aggravating circumstance can be considered both Convict X for murder qualified by treachery. If both
against the person who gave the price, reward or treachery and E.M. attended, treachery is qualifying,
promise, that is the principal by inducement and the and E.M. is generic. E.M. is never absorbed by
person who received the price, reward or promise, in treachery.
order to commit the crime, the principal by direct
participation. Effect on the penalty: Penalty for murder is RP to death.
Since there is ne GAC of E.M., Art. 63 provides that the
It is necessary that these must be the primary reason maximum penalty shall be imposed. Therefore, death
why the crime has been committed. It is the sole penalty. But death cannot be imposed because of RA
consideration why the crime has been committed by the 9346. Therefore, it is reduced to RP but without the
principal by direct participation. benefit of parole. In order to show that there is this GAC
of E.M. which could have provided for the imposition fo
If the price, reward or promise, as a circumstance is the death penalty.
present in the killing of a person, it is not considered as
a generic aggravating person but a qualifying XIV. CRAFT, FRAUD, DISGUISE
aggravating circumstance. It is one of the qualifying
circumstances under Art.248. Craft means intellectual trickery or cunning resorted to
by the accused, so that he will be able to carry out his
XII. INUNDATION, FIRE, ETC. evil design.
A qualifying aggravating circumstance in killing Fraud or deceit is manifested by the use of insidious
(Art. 248). words or machinations resorted to by the accused so
that the offended party will perform an act that will
XIII. EVIDENT PREMEDITATION make the offender do the crime easily.
Elements: Disguise - ways and means resorted to by the accused

1. The time when the offender determined to to conceal his identity.
commit the crime;
2. An act manifestly indicating that the culprit has These three can be considered singly, or collectively
clung to his determination; depending on absence and presence.
3. Sufficient lapse of time between the
determination and execution, to allow him to XV. ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH
reflect upon the consequences of his acts.
Elements:
If present, qualifying aggravating circumstance – from 1. That there be a notorious disparity of forces
homicide, it becomes murder. You never consider this between the offender and the offended party in
circumstance in crimes against property. terms of their age, size and strength;
2. That the offender took advantage of this
In front of people, X belittled and defamed and disparity of forces to facilitate the commission
maligned Y. Y was so hurt. Because of that, Y told X, of the crime.
“It is your day today. I will get even with you. There
will be your time. I am going to kill you.” Y couldn’t Inequality of forces:
sleep. He felt so ashamed. The following morning, 1. Victim is unarmed
Y took his bolo and sharpened it the whole day. He 2. Numerical superiority;
Daverick Pacumio
Page 37 of 142
3. Difference in physical characteristics such as charged with murder qualified by treachery.

age strength and size. Should the court appreciate treachery?
No. In People v. Enriquez, it is necessary that an
Should show evidence that the offender took advantage eyewitness must see how the attack commenced in
of his superiority in order to facilitate the crime. order to testify that at the inception, the victim was
Otherwise, it cannot be appreciated. without any defense. Here, employees heard gun fires.
They did not see the initial attack. Since no one saw how
XVI. TREACHERY the attack commenced, treachery cannot be considered
to increase the imposable penalty.
Elements:
1. That the offender deliberately adopted the X took valuables inside a house. Suddenly the
particular means, method or form of attack owner of the house went downstairs and thereafter,
employed by him; the accused fired at the owner. Upon firing at the
2. That at the time of the attack, the victim was not owner, accused went inside and took valuables.
in a position to defend himself. Thereafter, he left. In the commission of the crime,
can treachery be appreciated in the special
People v. Vicente – the first element means the offender complex crime of robbery with homicide?
must have had time to reflect on the means he will use Yes. In People v. Escote, treachery may be appreciated
to commit the crime. He must have had time to reflect. insofar as the killing is considered. However, it cannot
There can be no treachery, therefore, if crime was be considered a qualifying circumstance, but only a
committed at the spur of the moment. generic AC. It cannot qualify the homicide to murder
because there is no such crime as robbery with murder.
People v. Moreno – even if the offended party was able
to retaliate by reason of reflexes, there can still be XVII. IGNOMINY
treachery provided the initial attack was treacherous.
Here, the victim was fast asleep and was awakened only In People v. Jose, ignominy was appreciated since the
by the attack of the accused. At the inception, he was appellants in ordering the complainant to exhibit to
fast asleep. them her complete nakedness for about ten minutes,
before raping her, brought about a circumstance which
X went to the store buying soap. He took notice of tended to make the effects of the crime more
Y. Y, at the other side, was already drinking beer. X humiliating
looked at Y. Y didn’t like the stare of X. Y gave X a
stern look. Y broke a bottle of beer, went directly to In People v. Bumidang, ignominy was appreciated since
X, and stabbed X on the stomach. X died. BALIWANG used the flashlight and examined the
Information alleged that X committed treachery. Is genital of Gloria before he ravished her. He committed
there treachery? his bestial deed in the presence of Gloria's old father.
No. In People v. Corpin, there is no treachery if the These facts clearly show that BALIWANG deliberately
attack happened impulsively (at the spur of the wanted to further humiliate Gloria, thereby aggravating
moment) and the meeting was casual. Here, the attack and compounding her moral sufferings.
was done impulsively because Y did not like X’s act of
staring. Y did not use any other weapon except the In People v. Butler – outraging or scoffing at the corpse
bottle of beer. The act occurred at the spur of the is equivalent to ignominy. However, the case was
moment. dismissed because Butler was a minor at the time of the
commission of the crime.
X owns an office. Y frequents X’s office. That day, X
was inside, Y arrived to visit his friend. Y entered XVIII. UNLAWFUL ENTRY
X’s office. A few minutes later, employees outside
heard 2 gunfires. X rushed to the door. Upon Crime must be committed after unlawful entry
opening the door, X instructed his employees to get
an ambulance. Y died of gunshot wounds. X was
Daverick Pacumio
Page 38 of 142
XIX. WALL, ROOM, FLOOR, DOOR, WINDOW BE

BROKEN RA 10951
In robbery with use of force upon things – XVIII and XIX X shot Y. Y died. X was arrested. The gun was
are inherent elements. confiscated. But, it was an imitation firearm. It was
a toy firearm.
XX. UNDER 15, MOTOR VEHICLE Section 35 of RA 10591 says it has the same effect. He still
shall be prosecuted with carnapping with the special
X was on his way home. Here comes a motorcycle. 2 aggravating circumstance of use of a loose firearm.
persons on board. When they were nearing X, the
motorcycle became slower. The moment they X stabbed Y. Y died. X was arrested. He has a bag,
reached X, the backrider grabbed X’s bag. The police officers confiscated it. When they looked
driver increased the speed and left. Both of them inside, there was a home-made gun. What are the
wre wearing helmets. Are the ACs of use of motor charges?
vehicle and disguise present? The two crimes charged should be, homicide and illegal
possession of loose firearms. Separate charges because
Use of motor vehicle – YES. It facilitated the act of the loose firearm is not inherent to the commission of
stealing and death. the crime of homicide. (Section 29, RA 10591)
Use of disguise – NO. Absent intention to conceal X shot Y. Y died, X was arrested. When he was
identity, no use of disguise. This is because there is a law frisked, pistol he used in shooting was confiscated
requiring all motorcycle drivers to wear helmets. from him. What crime/s should be filed against X?
Homicide with SAC of use of unlicensed firearm.
XXI. CRUELTY
X poked a gun at a driver and told the driver to give
Elements: the keys. Driver gave him. X took away the car. X
1. That at the time of the infliction of the physical was arrested. Pistol he used was seizd and
pain, the offended party is still alive; confiscated. What crime/s?
2. That the offender enjoys and delights in seeing Carnapping under RA 10883 with SAC of use of
his victim suffer gradually by the infliction of unlicensed firearm. Sec 29, 1st par – if use of loose
the physical pain. firearm is inherent or used in committing a crime, such
use is a SAC. Whether it is a violation of RPC or SPL, if
Ignominy Cruelty a loose firearm was used in committing the crime, such
Moral pain Physical pain use of loose firearm is a SAC and not a separate and
Victim need not be alive Victim must be alive distinct charge.
when ignominy is when cruelty is
committed (see People v. committed X stabbed Y. X was arrested. Loose firearm was
Butler) recovered.
2 crimes: Homicide; Illegal possession of loose
People v. Lucas – the father, while raping his daughter, firearms. Under Sec. 29, 3rd par., if use of loose firearm
burned the face of the daughter. The act of burning the is not inherent, it constitutes a separate and distinct
face of the rape victim added physical pain which is not charge. Since X used a knife and did not use the loose
necessary in order to consummate rape. Cruelty is firearm, his possession constitutes a separate charge for
considered an AC. violating RA 10591.
In a 2021 case, an accused killed the victim and Article 15 – Alternative Circumstances
thereafter opened the stomach and brought out the
stomach. Cruelty is not attendant because the victim Three alternative circumstances:
was already dead when the acts of cruelty were
committed.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 39 of 142
1. Relationship – spouse, ascendants, descendants, who merely lured or induced the offender to
brothers/sisters, relatives by affinity in the same commit the crime.
degree a. Viz entrapment – mens rea originated
a. Absolutory cause – In theft, estafa, and from the mind of the offender and pubic
malicious mischief. officer merely devised means to capture
b. Mitigating – in other crimes against him in flagrante delicto.
property
c. Aggravating – in crimes against persons, X was released from prison. He was
i.e., serious physical injuries (it will be previously charged with illegal
qualified serious physical injuries) and possession of dangerous drugs. Police
less serious physical injuries (only if the officers who arrested him learned that
offended party is of a higher age than he was acquitted. The police officers
the offender) went to X. they wanted X to act as poseur
2. Intoxication buyer. X refused. Police left. 2 days
a. Mitigating – not habitual and not thereafter, they returned with the Chief
intentional subsequent to commission PNP who told X he is their only hope. X
of crime agreed and acted as poseur buyer.
b. Aggravating – if done habitually or However, X was arrested on the buy-
intentional subsequent to the bust and charged X with violation of RA
commission of the crime 9165.
3. Degree of instruction/education Instigation will lie. Mens rea came from
a. Aggravating – high degree of education the police.
if it facilitated commission of the crime.
Example: A lawyer falsified a Deed of Instigation Entrapment
Sale to have it notarized – he took The mens rea originated The mens rea originated
advantage of his high degree in law to from the mind of the from the mind of the
facilitate the commission of the crime. public officer offender
b. Mitigating – low degree of education. An absolutory cause by Not an absolutory cause
Example: An uneducated man falsifying reason of public policy
a document. Exception: If the act The public officer is liable The public officer is not
committed by the unlettered man is as a principal by criminally liable
inherently wrong, e.g., rape. inducement
Atty. X, drunk, had an argument with a waiter. Atty. Extenuating circumstances – lower or reduce
X stabbed the waiter. It was a shallow wound. X was imposable penalty. Example: Concealment of dishonor
charged with attempted homicide. Intoxication in infanticide and intentional abortion – if it is the
was alleged as an aggravating circumstance. Should mother who kills her less than 72-hours child, such
intoxication be appreciated? Should high degree of concealment will mitigate her criminal liability. if it is
education be appreciated? the pregnant woman who expelled the fetus to conceal
No. Atty. X’s law degree did not in any way facilitate the her dishonor.
commission of attempted homicide. Moreover, it has no
relation to the crime. Infanticide – privileged mitigating because it lowers the
penalty by 2 degrees.
Absolutory causes – circumstances which exempt
offender from criminal, but not civil, liability. Intentional abortion – ordinary mitigating
1. Mistake of fact;
2. Desisted in the attempted stage; Art. 16. Who are criminally liable. — The following
3. Instigation – criminal intent or mens rea are criminally liable for grave and less grave
originated from the mind of the public officer felonies:
Principals.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 40 of 142
Accomplices. cooperate in the execution of the offense by

Accessories. previous or simultaneous acts.
The following are criminally liable for light felonies: Elements

Principals 1. There must be a community of design – The
Accomplices accomplice had been informed of the criminal
design of the offender and having been
Art. 17. Principals. — The following are considered informed, he concurs with the said criminal
principals: design. He’s not part of the conspiracy but he
knows and concurs with the design because he
1. Those who take a direct part in the was informed of the same only after the
execution of the act; principal had come up with agreement;
2. That he performs the acts previous or
2. Those who directly force or induce others to simultaneous to the commission of the crime;
commit it; and
3. That the acts performed by the principal is
3. Those who cooperate in the commission of related to the acts performed by the accomplice.
the offense by another act without which it
would not have been accomplished. Art. 19. Accessories. — Accessories are those who,
having knowledge of the commission of the crime,
PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION and without having participated therein, either as
Principal by direct participation are those who take principals or accomplices, take part subsequent to
direct part in the execution of the act. its commission in any of the following manners:
PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT 1. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender

Principal by direct participation are those who directly to profit by the effects of the crime;
force or induce other to commit it.
2. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime,
The principal by inducement may or may not be present or the effects or instruments thereof, in order to
in the scene of the crime. prevent its discovery;
Elements; 3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the

1. Inducement be made with the intention of escape of the principals of the crime, provided the
procuring the commission of the crime; accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or
2. The inducement is the determining cause of the whenever the author of the crime is guilty of
commission of the crime by the material treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt to take
executor. the life of the Chief Executive, or is known to be
habitually guilty of some other.
Principal by direct participation and principal by
indispensable cooperation must be present in the scene The prosecution has the burden of proving that the
of the crime. offender knows that a crime has been committed, that
the offender has actual knowledge of the commission of
PRINCIPAL BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION the crime and despite such actual knowledge, takes part
Principal by indispensable cooperation are those who in the commission of the crime.
cooperate in the commission of the offense by another
act without which it would not have been accomplished. BY PROFITING FROM THE EFFECTS OF THE
CRIME.
Art. 18. Accomplices. — Accomplices are those The accomplice profited themselves or assisted the
persons who, not being included in Art. 17, offender to profit from the effects of the crime.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 41 of 142
Fencing No merit. Even if Y’s deceased body cannot be found,

Elements: the fact that W saw the act of killing, the corpus delicti
1. A robbery or theft has been committed; can still be proven. There can still be conviction.
2. The accused, who took no part in the robbery or
theft, buys, receives, possesses, keeps, acquires, ASSISTING THE ESCAPE OF THE PRINCIPAL
conceals, sells or disposes, or buys and sells, or The 3rd act of the accessory is by harboring, concealing,
in any manner deals in any article or object or assisting in the escape of the principals of the crime.
taken during that robbery or theft;
3. The accused knows or should have known that 2 kinds of accessories under the 3rd act:
the thing derived from that crime; and 1. Public officer – Acts with abuse of his public functions;
4. Intent to gain for himself or for another. or
2. Private person – The author of the crime is guilty of
Accessory Fence treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life
Has actual knowledge. No need to prove actual of the Chief Executive, or is known to be habitually
knowledge. Under Sec. 5, guilty of some other offense.
PD 1612, the law
presumes that any Art. 20. Accessories who are exempt from criminal
person found in liability. — The penalties prescribed for accessories
possession of the shall not be imposed upon those who are such with
proceeds of robbery or respect to their spouses, ascendants, descendants,
theft that he knows of the legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and
same sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same
Profiting may be for any Only robbery and theft. degrees, with the single exception of accessories
crime In Dimat v. People, it falling within the provisions of paragraph 1 of the
includes carnapping, next preceding article.
which is similar to
robbery and theft An accessory is exempted from criminal liability in the
following instances;
DESTROYING THE BODY OF THE CRIME TO 1. When the crime committed is a light felony;
PREVENT ITS DISCOVERY 2. When the said accessory is the spouses, ascendants,
2nd act of an accomplice is by concealing or destroying descendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers
the body of the crime, or the effects or instruments and sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same
thereof, in order to prevent its discovery. degrees.
Body of the crime Note: Relationship will not absolve the accessory from
The body of the crime does not mean the corpse of a criminal liability if the act done by him pertains to the
deceased person in murder, or the item stolen in case of first act under Art. 19, i.e., By profiting themselves or
robbery or theft. It means that a fact has been assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime
committed by someone.
X is the head of a fraternity. Y is the head of another
Elements of body of the crime; fraternity. These 2 fraternities were always at war.
1. Proof of occurrence of a certain event; X long wanted to kill Y. he tried a number of times,
2. Proof of person’s criminal liability. but Y wouldn’t die. X knew that Y was renting a unit
in a school. X told the caretaker of his intent to kill
X killed Y. Afraid of what he had done, he looked Y and instructed him to open the back door of the
around, and placed Y’s body inside the trunk of his building the moment the caretaker feels that Y is
car. He drove and threw the deceased body of Y into already asleep. X promised the caretaker that he
the ocean. Unknown to X, W saw everything. will not involve the latter whatsoever. The
Because of W’s testimony, X was arrested. X’s caretaker agreed because he is mad at Y for being
defense was Y’s body is not found. arrogant. 2:00AM – the caretaker gave the signal to
Daverick Pacumio
Page 42 of 142
X that Y is asleep. X went inside. The caretaker of crimes. Second, she is absolved of criminal liability
the building even showed X Y’s room. X barged under Art. 20. However, the wife is still criminally liable
inside the room of Y and repeatedly stabbed Y until for violating PD 1829 – obstruction of justice, where
Y died. relationship is not absolutory. Her act of advising her
X – principal by direct participation in the crime of husband to flee to South Cotabato to hide frustrates and
murder. impedes the investigation of the case the prosecution of
Caretaker – accomplice. X simply concurred in the her husband.
criminal design of X. he also performed previous acts Friend – not liable as accessory. X was not yet found
directly connected with the acts performed by principal guilty of murder. Therefore, Art. 19 does not apply.
X. nevertheless, he is liable under PD 1829.
Prosec. G: When in the exam, the question is “what are X is a domestic servant in the house of the master
the criminal liabilities,” state not only the crime in Makati. The master went out on a party – X was
committed, but also their participations. But if the left alone. X broke the door of the master’s
question is what is the crime committed, just state the bedroom. X broke the lock of the cabinet where he
crime. knows valuables are being kept. X found cash and
valuable jewelries, and took these. X went home
Congressman was defeated in the survey but he and narrated to his mother what he did. The
needed to win. He wanted to get rid of his political mother advised X to flee. X called a friend and
opponent. He was looking for an assassin. X, in asked to stay at the house of the friend for a
need of money, presented himself to the “vacation.” The mother, afraid of the authorities,
congressman and told the latter that he would kill decided to get rid of the jewelries. The mother went
the political opponent for P200,000.00. to Bulacan where she sold the stolen jewelries to a
Congressman gave P100,000.00, the balance to be jewelry store there. When the owner appraised the
paid after the job is done. X asked Z, his brother, to jewelries, he said that he had no money because the
accompany him to the house of the political jewelries were real. The mother said that whatever
money. X told Z to stay outside and serve as a look money would suffice. The owner only had
out. X went inside the house and killed the political P50,000.00. The mother accepted and left. The
opponent. After the killing, he told his brother. X jewelries amounted to more or less P2.5 million.
and Z went to the house of the congressman. X told Yet he paid only P50,000.00. what are the criminal
Z to wait outside. X told the congressman, “Job liabilities of X, his mother, and the friend, and the
done.” Congressman gave X the P100,000.00 jewelry store owner?
balance. At the hospital, X told his wife what he did X – principal by direct participation for robbery
to earn P200,000.00. The wife told X to go to South with use of force upon things (Art. 299, 2nd act).
Cotabato, where she had an old friend. X went to Although she is a domestic servant, it cannot be
Cotabato, and the wife’s friend concealed X. what qualified theft because the act of taking was done by
are the criminal liabilities of X, the Congressman, force.
Z, the wife, and the wife’s friend? Mother – liable as an accessory. While robbery is not
X – principal by direct participation in murder. among the crimes mentioned under Art. 19. However,
Congressman – principal by inducement. Without the mother is liable as an accessory because she profited
the P200,000.00, the crime would not have been from the act. Moreover, the mother is liable for PD 1829,
committed. The prize was the primary reason. obstruction of justice.
Z – not liable. Z did not know the criminal intent, Friend – no criminal liability. He was unaware of the
design, or even the criminal act done by X. he was totally crime.
unaware. Owner – fencing. The owner should have alerted him
Wife – 1st act: knowledge of the murder done by X. She that the jewelries were stolen because of the price the
assisted in the escape of her husband. She, however, is mother sold them to him.
not liable as an accessory because first, under Art. 19, in
case of assisting the offender, it is necessary that the
principal be found guilty of murder, among other
Daverick Pacumio
Page 43 of 142
In Ong v. People, the SC held that criminal intent is Reclusion perpetua – distinct from life imprisonment.
immaterial in fencing because the latter is mala
prohibita. Reclusion Perpetua Life Imprisonment
Prescribed by RPC Prescribed by SPL
Here, the owner was caught in the possession of Has a fixed duration of 20 Has no fixed duration
jewelries by the Makati Police. A case of violation years and 1 day to 40
of PD 1612 was filed before OCP Makati. Does the years
later have jurisdiction? Carries accessory Does not carry any
NO. Fencing is not a transitory/continuing offense. penalties accessory penalties
The offense can only be prosecuted in the place the
offender was found in possession of the proceeds of Reclusion temporal,
theft/robbery, i.e., in Bulacan. The criminal action must • Duration: 12 years, 1 day to 20 years
be filed in Bulacan.
DISQUALIFICATION
PENALTIES
Perpetual Absolute
Penalties – punishment imposed by lawful authority Effective during the Effective only during the
upon a person who has committed an intentional felony lifetime of the service of sentence and is
or a culpable felony. convict and even removed after service, except:
• Only penalties prescribed by law prior to the after service of his 1. Deprivation of the
commission of the crime may be imposed. sentence Public
Otherwise there would be a violation of the office/employment;
Constitutional prohibition against ex post facto 2. Loss of all rights to
laws. retirement pay or
pension for any office
2 kinds of penalties: formerly held.
1. Principal penalties – prescribed by law and
imposed by the court Disqualification as principal penalty
2. Accessory penalties – follow the principal • Duration: 6 years, 1 day to 12 years.
penalties as a matter of law.
Disqualification as accessory penalty
Principal Penalties • Same period as the principal penalty.
Capital Punishment: Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification,
Death
• RA 9346 prohibits the imposition of the death Perpetual or temporary special disqualification,
penalty. RA 9346 did not amend the RPC. The
penalty for a heinous crime remains to be death. Prision mayor
RA 9346 simply prohibits the imposition of the • Duration: 6 years, 1 day to 12 years.
death penalty.
• Under Sec. 3, RA 9346, if the penalty has been Correctional penalties:
reduced to reclusion perpetua, the penalty to be
imposed shall be reclusion perpetua without the Prision correccional,
benefit of parole. It is necessary to state the • Duration: 6 months, 1 day to 6 years
same to show that the penalty should have been Arresto mayor,
death, but it could not be imposed because of • Duration: 1 month, 1 day to 6 months
RA 9346. Suspension,
• As principal, duration: 6 months, 1 day to 6
Afflictive penalties:
years.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 44 of 142
• As accessory: Follows the duration of the

principal penalty to which it attaches Indemnification,
Destierro. • Damages imposed by the court against the
• Penalty which does not involve imprisonment. offender, awarding it to the private
He is prohibited, however, from entering the complainant, viz: actual, moral, exemplary
place designated by the court. damages.
• Duration as principal penalty: 6 months, 1 day
to 6 years Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and
proceeds of the offense
Light penalties: • An accessory penalty which attaches or follows
all kinds of principal penalties. Any instrument,
Arresto menor, effects used by the offender in committing the
• Duration: 1 day to 30 days crime is forfeited in favor of the State, except: if
it belongs to an innocent person. exception to
Public censure. the exception: if such proceeds are outside the
• Has no fixed duration. It means public commerce of men, in which case they must be
reprimand. It is indivisible. destroyed.
Penalties common to the three preceding classes: Payment of costs

Fine – a pecuniary penalty imposed by the court on a • Includes fees
person convicted • If an offender is convicted, the court will require
• Afflictive: If it exceeds P1,200,000.00 him to pay the cost of proceedings.
• Correctional: Between P40,000 to P1,200,000. • If the offender is acquitted, each party must
• Light: Below P40,000.00 bear their respective costs.
Bond to keep the peace – he is required to present 2
sureties. If he fails, he shall be detained. PREVENTIVE IMPRISONMENT (Art. 29)
Preventive Imprisonment is the detention of accused
ACCESSORY PENALTIES while the case against him is on-going trial either
because;
Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification, 1. The crime he committed is a non-bailable
Perpetual or temporary special disqualification, offense and evidence of guilt is strong; or
2. The crime committed is a bailable offense but
Suspension from public office, the right to vote and he does not have the funds.
be voted for, the profession or calling.
As a general rule, Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code
Civil interdiction – an accessory penalty which follows states that offenders who have undergone preventive
the principal penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, and imprisonment shall be credited in the service of their
reclusion temporal. It deprives the offender of these sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty, with the
rights: full time during which they have undergone preventive
1. Rights of parental authority; imprisonment, if the detention prisoner agrees
2. Guardianship, either as to the person or voluntarily in writing in the presence of the counsel to
property of any ward; abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon
3. Marital authority, convicted prisoners, except in the following cases;
4. The right to manage his property; and 1. When they are recidivists or have been
5. The right to dispose of such property by any act convicted previously twice or more times of any
or any conveyance inter vivos. crime; and
2. When upon being summoned for the execution
Note: A civil interdictee may prepare a last will and of their sentence they have failed to surrender
testament. This is because a last will and testament is voluntarily;
mortis causa, not inter vivos.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 45 of 142
4/5 credit – if the detention prisoner does not agree in

writing in the presence of counsel to abide by the same PARDON
disciplinary rules imposed on convicted felons. Note:
Disagreement must still be in writing. Everything must X stabbed Y. Y sustained a fatal wound. Y survived.
be in writing. A case for frustrated homicide was filed against X.
Y pardoned X. X begged for Y’s pardon. Y pardoned
X was charged with falsification of public X. will such pardon extinguish X’s criminal liability
document. He does not have money to post bail. for frustrated homicide?
Due to protracted trial, it has been 6 years from his No. Frustrated homicide is a public crime. Therefore,
arrest. PAO counsel filed a petition for habeas the real injured party is the State because of the
corpus moving for X’s immediate release from disturbance of public order. Even if the party had
prison. Ground: Art. 29 – if a detention prisoner has pardoned the offender, the State may still prosecute the
undergone preventive imprisonment for a period offender.
equal to the maximum penalty imposable, he shall
be immediately released. Since X has already been The teacher molested the student by seducing the
behind bars for 6 years (the maximum of minor student. The latter had sex with her teacher.
falsification), he ought to be released. MeTC The teacher was charged with qualified seduction,
granted the PAO’s petition for habeas corpus. The a private crime. While on-going trial, the teacher
next day of hearing, the judge asked the PAO where asked for the student’s forgiveness. The student, at
X is. PAO was unaware of X’s whereabouts. The next first, refused. But the fellow professors of the
hearing, X was still nowhere to be found. The judge teacher asked for the student’s forgiveness. The
issued a warrant of arrest against X. the police, student and her family pardoned the teacher. What
armed with the warrant, looked for X and found X is the effect of such pardon?
in the house of a relative. Is the judge correct in No effect. Pardon in case of private crimes must be
ordering the arrest of X despite the fact that X had made before they are filed in court. In order that the
already served 6 years? pardon may extinguish the criminal liability of an
Yes. This is a bench warrant. the warrant is not because offender in private crimes, it must be given before the
of X’s violation of falsification – it is for X’s act of institution of judicial proceedings. Here, the case was
disobeying the court order to appear during hearing. already going trial. Therefore, no amount of pardon
This is for X’s violation of the rules requiring him to extinguishes the teacher’s criminal liability. the
appear for every hearing. moment a case is filed in court, no amount of pardon
will extinguish the criminal liability of the offender in
The wife got information that her husband is private crimes. Exception:
cohabiting with another woman. The wife gathered • Art. 266-C, as amended (Marital Rape) – if it is
pieces of evidence. The moment the evidence she the husband who raped the wife, the subsequent
gathered are, to her belief, sufficient already, she pardon by the wife shall extinguish the husband’s
filed a case for concubinage vs. her husband and criminal liability and the penalty imposed by the
the concubine. Fiscal found probable cause. court
Information for concubinage was filed. Trial court
issued a warrant of arrest vs.the husband and the Pardon granted by the private offended party on the
concubine. They were placed behind bars. It has offender extinguishes the latter’s civil liability – it is a
been 30 days since the time they were placed waiver of the recovery of civil liability.
behind bars. Trial has not yet even begun. What
should the counsel of the concubine do? This is different from pardon by the President.
File a petition for habeas corpus moving for the
concubine’s immediate release. Under Art. 29, if the Pardon by the President: Extinguishes the offender’s
maximum penalty imposable is destierro, the offender criminal liability if pardon is granted after conviction by
shall be immediately released after 30 days of preventive final judgement. however, even if it extinguishes the
imprisonment. The penalty for a concubine is destierro. offender’s criminal liability, it does not automatically
Therefore, she should be released after 30 days. restore:
Daverick Pacumio
Page 46 of 142
1. Right to vote and be voted; of private crimes (Art.

2. Right to hold public office; and 344)
3. Right of suffrage.
Article 39. Subsidiary penalty. - If the convict has no
These rights must be expressly granted. property with which to meet the fine mentioned in
the paragraph 3 of the nest preceding article, he
Moreover, pardon by the President does not extinguish shall be subject to a subsidiary personal liability at
civil liability, the latter being personal to the offended the rate of one day for [every highest minimum
party. wage rate2 in the PH at the time of the rendition of
judgement by the trial court], subject to the
X was charged with murder. He was convicted after following rules:
trial. The penalty imposed: reclusion perpetua.
Judgement became final and executory. The 1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision
President granted him absolute pardon. It states, correccional or arresto and fine, he shall remain
“I, the President, by virtue of the powers granted, under confinement until his fine referred to in the
grants pardon on X.” The RTC immediately ordered preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his subsidiary
X’s release, upon the pardon’s impleading in the imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the
court. Upon his release, X realized there is a term of the sentence, and in no case shall it
forthcoming election. X filed a COC. However, his continue for more than one year, and no fraction or
opponent moved to disqualify him for conviction part of a day shall be counted against the prisoner.
for murder. X opposed, and invoked his absolute
pardon – arguing that his right to vote and be voted 2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a
was restored. fine, the subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed
Wrong. There was no express statement in the pardon six months, if the culprit shall have been prosecuted
by the President that X’s right to vote and be voted for for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not exceed
was restored. X cannot, therefore, exercise these rights. fifteen days, if for a light felony.
President Erap was granted absolute pardon by 3. When the principal imposed is higher than prision
GMA. How come Erap was able to run as Mayor of correccional, no subsidiary imprisonment shall be
Manila? imposed upon the culprit.
According to the SC: Former President Erap may run
again because in the absolute pardon granted by PGMA, 4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be
“by the grant of this pardon, she is restoring Erap’s all executed by confinement in a penal institution, but
civil rights.” This is all encompassing to include the right such penalty is of fixed duration, the convict, during
to suffrage, the right to hold public office, and the right the period of time established in the preceding
to vote and be voted for. rules, shall continue to suffer the same deprivations
as those of which the principal penalty consists.
Pardon by offended Pardon by President
party 5. The subsidiary personal liability which the
Does not extinguish Extinguishes criminal convict may have suffered by reason of his
criminal liability. except: liability insolvency shall not relieve him, from the fine in
marital rape case his financial circumstances should improve.
Extinguishes civil liability Does not extinguish civil (As amended by RA 10592, April 21, 1969).
– a waiver liability – it is personal to
the offended party SUBSIDIARY PENALTY
Given only before Given only after Subsidiary Penalty is a substitute penalty for fine in case
institution of criminal conviction by final of insolvency by the accused.
proceedings and in case judgement
2
Varies depending on the place. In Metro Manila, it is P537.00
Daverick Pacumio
Page 47 of 142
• There must be an express statement that in case

of failure to pay the fine, subsidiary penalty may X was convicted of malicious mischief. In the
be imposed. judgement, court stated, “X is sentenced arresto
mayor and fine. In case of X’s insolvency, he shall
Requisites before subsidiary penalty may be imposed: suffer subsidiary penalty.”
1. Sentence to pay fine and he is insolvent to pay Court is correct. Under the first rule in Art. 39, if the
fine principal penalty imposed be prision correccional or
2. Express statement that in case of his failure to arresto and fine, he shall remain under confinement
pay fine, he is subject to subsidiary penalty. until his fine referred to in the preceding paragraph is
satisfied, but his subsidiary imprisonment shall not
Rules under Art. 39: exceed one-third of the term of the sentence, and in no
1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision case shall it continue for more than one year, and no
correccional or arresto and fine, he shall remain fraction or part of a day shall be counted against the
under confinement until his fine referred to in prisoner.
the preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his
subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed one- X was convicted of reckless imprudence resulting
third of the term of the sentence, and in no case in damage to property. Penalty imposed: public
shall it continue for more than one year, and no censure and fine. Subsidiary penalty also stated.
fraction or part of a day shall be counted against Court is wrong. The principal penalty that goes with
the prisoner; fine is public censure is not to be executed in a penal
2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a institution and is an indivisible penalty.
fine, the subsidiary imprisonment shall not
exceed six months, if the culprit shall have been X was convicted. Penalty imposed: fine. Court
prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and sheriff returned the writ of execution unsatisfied
shall not exceed fifteen days, if for a light felony; because X was insolvent to pay the fine. In the
3. When the principal imposed is higher than judgement, it was stated that in case of X’s
prision correccional, no subsidiary insolvency, he shall be liable for subsidiary penalty.
imprisonment shall be imposed upon the X served the subsidiary penalty. Since he suffered
culprit; much behind bars, upon his release, X put up and
4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be had a successful business and his financial
executed by confinement in a penal institution, circumstances improved. The writ of execution was
but such penalty is of fixed duration, the re-issued against X to pay the fine.
convict, during the period of time established in Court is correct. The subsidiary personal liability
the preceding rules, shall continue to suffer the which the convict may have suffered by reason of his
same deprivations as those of which the insolvency shall not relieve him, from the fine in case his
principal penalty consists; financial circumstances should improve.
5. The subsidiary personal liability which the
convict may have suffered by reason of his Article 48. Penalty for complex crimes. – When a
insolvency shall not relieve him, from the fine in single act constitutes two or more grave or less
case his financial circumstances should grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary
improve. means for committing the other, the penalty for the
most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be
X is charged and convicted of perjury. Penalty applied in its maximum period.
imposed was prision mayor and fine. In the
dispositive portion, “In case of X’s insolvency, he 2 kinds of complex crime:
shall suffer subsidiary penalty.” 1. Compound crime – when a single act produces
Court is wrong. The principal penalty imposed is 2 or more grave or less grave felonies.
prision mayor, which is higher than prision Elements:
correccional. Therefore, even if X is insolvent to pay the a) Offender performs single act;
fine, he cannot be made to suffer subsidiary penalty.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 48 of 142
b) Resulted to 2 or more grave or less grave

felonies 2. Complex crime proper – when an offense is a
necessary means to commit another offense.
Basis: Singularity of act. Elements:
a) 2 offenses committed;
Effect: Penalty in the most serious crime shall be b) Offenses necessary means to commit
imposed. It is more favorable to the accused. the other; and
c) Both crimes are punished by the same
X wanted to kill Y and his family, his statute.
political rivals. He placed a bomb under Y’s
car. When Y’s family opened the car, it X, wanting to rape Y, forcibly abducted Y and at the
exploded. What crime/s are committed? outset, there was lewd design. He had carnal
Compound crime of multiple murder. X knowledge of Y. crime?
performed a single act of placing an explosive Complex crime of rape thru forcible abduction – the
device under the car of Y which resulted to 2 or forcible abduction being a necessary means to commit
more grave felonies. Only 1 Information must be rape.
filed.
In order to swindle Y, X falsified a deed of sale
Same problem. When Y opened the car, forging Y’s signature. It was notarized by the notary
huge explosion. Y died, wife died, 3 children public. The property was transferred to X’s name.
sustained fatal founds but survived, the 2 crime?
body guards sustaind non-fatal wounds. Estafa thru falsification of public document. The
Compound crime of double murder with falsification of the deed, a public document, is a
multiple frustrated murder and double necessary means to swindle Y of his property.
attempted murder. X performed a single act of
placing an explosive device under the car of Y In Batulanon v. People, the SC held that estafa and
which resulted to 7 grave felonies. falsification of private document cannot be complexed
because they both require damage as elements. Since
In the cases, the SC held that if there are many they require damage as elements, no 2 crimes can arise
gunmen who used different guns and used from the same damage. So, how should the accused be
many bullets, there are as many crimes prosecuted? If estafa cannot be committed without
committed as persons killed/wounded. Article falsification, the correct charge is falsification. Estafa is
48 is inapplicable. merely a consequence. If estafa can be committed
without falsifying, the proper charge is estafa.
People v. Nelmida – the accused waited in Falsification is merely an incident of estafa.
ambush for the arrival of Mayor Tawan-tawan.
The moment the Mayor arrived, the accused SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME
peppered with bullets the Mayor’s vehicle. 2 In reality, 2 or more crimes have been committed but in
bodyguards died. 5 others were wounded. 2 the eyes of the law, he commits only one. It is the law
were unhurt. Nelmida, et al. were charged with which combines the crimes and prescribes the penalties
double murder with multiple frustrated murder therefor.
and double attempted murder. SC: Wrong.
There are as many crimes committed as there Examples:
are persons injured or killed. Proper charge: 2 1. Rape with homicide (Art. 266-B) – penalty
counts of murder, 7 counts attempted murder. prescribed is death
2. Attempted rape with homicide (Id.) – penalty
People v. Punzalan – single act of stepping on prescribed is reclusion perpetua to death
the accelerator killing 2 seamen and injuring 4
others = complex crime of double murder and DELITO CONTINUADO
multiple attempted murder.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 49 of 142
Wherein the offender, impelled by a single criminal passenger to his destination. A fellow passenger Y
impulse, commits a series of overt acts, at the same time offered to bring the passenger to his destination
and place, violating one and the same provision of law. and return the trike. Y did not return the trike. A
Basis: Singularity of criminal impulse. There is only one month thereafter, the Valenzuela Police Station
crime – a continued crime. received a call from PNP Sta. Maria, Bulacan
informing the former that they saw a suspicious
A high rise condominium is being constructed. trike being sold at a low price and the owner could
Among those people assigned to sell is X. X is not not present any documents. The Valenzuela Police
authorized to make collections from the unit went to the Sta. Maria Bulacan with X. X confirmed
owners. However, X was in need of money. Since X it was his trike, showing documents as proof. The
needed the money, what X did was to go to the police officers of Bulacan arrested Y. Y was charged
building and represented to unit owners A,B,C, and with carnapping and convicted thereof. CA
D that he is authorized to collect their monthly affirmed the conviction.
amortizations in the amount of P20,000.00 each. SC: Dismissed the case. reason: want of
ABCD gave the said amount. X never remitted such jurisdiction. Sta. Maria RTC has no right to hear the
payments to the condominium corporation and case. Even if carnapping is a transitory offense, none of
instead, pocketed the same. X was charged with 5 the elements thereof took place in Sta. Maria Bulacan.
counts of estafa by means of false pretenses. Should All elements took place in Valenzuela. The carnapping
the OCP indict X for 5 counts? was consummated in Valenzuela.
No. Only 1 count because it is a delito continuado. X is
impelled by single criminal impulse – to deceive. He Penalty imposed upon accessories and accomplices
committed a series of overt acts at the same time and for consummated, frustrated, and attempted
place, violating a single provision of law Art. 315. felonies (Arts. 50-57).
Consummate Frustrated Attempted
CONTINUING OFFENSE/TRANSITORY OFFENSE d
One where the offender can be prosecuted before the Principals Penalty The penalty A penalty
prescribed by lower by lower by two
court of the place where any of the elements of the crime law for the one degree degrees than
occurred. offense; than that that
prescribed prescribed by
Example: Treason, rebellion, evasion of service of by law for law for
sentence, BP 22, unfair competition. the principal of a
principal of consummate
a d felony;
X issued a check to B in Manila. B deposited the consummat (Art. 51)
check to his depositary bank in BDO, Quezon City. e d felony;
The check was dishonored by BPI, Caloocan City. Accomplice A penalty The penalty A penalty
When X failed to make good on the check, B s lower by one lower by lower by one
decided to file a BP 22 case against X. where may B degree than one degree degree than
file? that prescribed than that
by law for prescribed prescribed by
Metc of Manila (where issuance took place), QC
principal of a by law for law for
(where deposit took place), or Caloocan (where consummated the principals of
dishonor took place). However, the moment the case felony; principal of an attempted
is filed in one court, B can no longer file the same case (Art. 52) a frustrated felony;
in another court. felony; (Art. 56)
(Art. 54)
Accessories A penalty The penalty The penalty
X is a member of the Valenzuela Public Market
lower by two lower by lower by two
Toda. His trike was parked. He received a call from degrees than two degrees degrees than
his wife. when he was about to go inside the public that prescribed than that
market, a passenger arrived and boarded his by law for prescribed prescribed by
tricycle. X did not know what to do, to buy the principal of a by law for law for
things his wife was asking him or to bring his the principals of
Daverick Pacumio
Page 50 of 142
consummated principals an attempted a period in accordance with the provisions of

felony; of a felony; (Art. Articles 76 and 77, the court shall observe for the
(Art. 53) frustrated 57)
application of the penalty the following rules,
felony;
(Art. 55
according to whether there are or are not
mitigating or aggravating circumstances:
Degree – penalty prescribed by law, whether divisible or
indivisible. 1. When there are neither aggravating nor
Period – subdivision of a divisible penalty (minimum, mitigating circumstances, they shall impose the
medium, and maximum). These applies only to divisible penalty prescribed by law in its medium period.
and not indivisible penalties. For indivisible penalties,
Art. 63 applies, viz: 2. When only a mitigating circumstances is present
in the commission of the act, they shall impose the
Article 63. Rules for the application of indivisible penalty in its minimum period.
penalties. - In all cases in which the law prescribes a
single indivisible penalty, it shall be applied by the 3. When an aggravating circumstance is present in
courts regardless of any mitigating or aggravating the commission of the act, they shall impose the
circumstances that may have attended the penalty in its maximum period.
commission of the deed.
4. When both mitigating and aggravating
In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty circumstances are present, the court shall
composed of two indivisible penalties, the following reasonably offset those of one class against the
rules shall be observed in the application thereof; other according to their relative weight.
1. When in the commission of the deed there is 5. When there are two or more mitigating
present only one aggravating circumstance, the circumstances and no aggravating circumstances
greater penalty shall be applied. are present, the court shall impose the penalty next
lower to that prescribed by law, in the period that it
2.When there are neither mitigating nor may deem applicable, according to the number and
aggravating circumstances and there is no nature of such circumstances.
aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty shall
be applied; 6. Whatever may be the number and nature of the
aggravating circumstances, the courts shall not
3. When the commission of the act is attended by impose a greater penalty than that prescribed by
some mitigating circumstances and there is no law, in its maximum period.
aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty shall
be applied; 7. Within the limits of each period, the court shall
determine the extent of the penalty according to the
4. When both mitigating and aggravating number and nature of the aggravating and
circumstances attended the commission of the act, mitigating circumstances and the greater and
the court shall reasonably allow them to offset one lesser extent of the evil produced by the crime.
another in consideration of their number and
importance, for the purpose of applying the penalty Application of Art. 64
in accordance with the preceding rules, according
to the result of such compensation. Crime Penalty
Homicide Prescribed penalty:
Article 64. Rules for the application of penalties Reclusion temporal
which contain three periods. - In cases in which the Attending
penalties prescribed by law contain three periods, circumstance:
whether it be a single divisible penalty or composed No aggravating and no Reclusion temporal in its
of three different penalties, each one of which forms mitigating medium period
Daverick Pacumio
Page 51 of 142
One mitigating and no Reclusion temporal in its Indeterminate Sentence Law

aggravating minimum period Indeterminate Sentence Law modifies the imposition of
One aggravating and no Reclusion temporal in its penalty. It is applied both to the Revised Penal Code and
mitigating maximum period Special Penal Laws. It provides for a minimum and max
One mitigating and one Reclusion temporal in its term, such that the moment the offender serves the
aggravating medium period minimum of the sentence, he shall be eligible for parole.
Two mitigating and no Prision mayor in its If granted, he will serve the remainder of the sentence
aggravating medium period (Special out of prison, but subject to the supervision of the
Mitigating parole officer.
Circumstance)
Two or more aggravating Reclusion temporal in its PAROLE
maximum period Parole is the conditional release of the offender form the
Three mitigating and no Prision mayor in its correctional institution after serving minimum sentence
aggravating minimum period (Special after showing that he has reformed. Note it does not
Mitigating extinguish criminal and civil liability
Circumstance)
Four mitigating Prision mayor in its Elements:
minimum period 1. He must be placed in prison jail to serve an
(Penalty cannot be indeterminate sentence penalty which exceeds 1
lowered by two [2] year;
degrees). Note: In order 2. Served minimum term of sentence;
that the penalty will be 3. Board of pardons and parole found that his
lowered by one (1) release is for greater interest of society
degree, it is necessary
that there be absolutely DISQUALIFICAITONS UNDER THE
NO aggravating INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW: (DTEP-HEV-
circumstance. Even if 1FU)
there are many 1. Convicted of offense punished with Death
Mitigating penalty or life imprisonment;
circumstances, as long as Note: The Court has equated the penalty of life
there is 1 aggravating imprisonment to reclusion perpetua for
circumstance, you will purposes of ISL.
cannot lower the penalty 2. Convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to
by degrees, it is only by commit Treason;
periods. 3. Convicted of misprision of treason, rebellion,
Privileged mitigating Apply first before sedition, or Espionage;
circumstance applying Art. 64’s 4. Convicted of Piracy;
provisions 5. Habitual delinquents;
PMC of minority Prision mayor in its Note: Recidivists are entitled to an
medium period indeterminate sentence.
Two (2) PMCs: One for Prision correccional in its 6. Those who have Escaped from confinement or
minority, another for medium period evaded sentence;
incomplete self-defense 7. Granted conditional pardon by the President
Two (2) PMCs and one Prision correccional in its and Violated the terms thereof;
8. Those whose maximum term of imprisonment
ordinary mitigating minimum period
does not exceed 1 year;
Two (2) PMCs and three Arresto mayor in its
9. Those sentenced by Final judgement as of the
(3) ordinary mitigating minimum period
time of the approval of this Act;
10. When its application is Unfavorable to the
INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW
accused.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 52 of 142
mitigating
Computation for IS: circumstance
1. Get first the maximum term of sentence with all the One privileged Current Current
attendant circumstance in accordance with Article 64 of mitigating Interpretation Interpretation:
3
the RPC; circumstance : Prision Mayor Prision
2. Lower it the one degree. Do NOT consider anymore or two in its medium Correccional in
the attendant circumstance. The minimum term of ordinary period any of its
sentence depends upon the sound discretion of the mitigating periods
court. circumstances Correct
Interpretation Correct
Crime Indeterminate Penalty : Interpretation:
4
Homicide Prision Mayor
(Prescribed ISL Maximum ISL Minimum in its medium Prision Mayor in
penalty: period its minimum
Reclusion period
Tempural) One privileged Current Current
Attending Reclusion Prision Mayor in mitigating Interpretation Interpretation:
Circumstance Temporal in its any of its circumstance : Prision Arresto Mayor
: medium period periods and two Correccional in in any of its
No mitigating ordinary medium period periods
and mitigating
aggravating circumstances Correct Correct
circumstance Interpretation Interpretation:
(or if 1 MC and : Prision Mayor in
1 AC offset) Prision any of its
One ordinary Reclusion Prision Mayor in Correccional in periods
mitigating Temporal in its any of its its medium
circumstance minimum periods period
and no period No aggravating Prision Mayor Prision
aggravating circumstance, in its minimum Correccional in
circumstance four (4) period its minimum
One Reclusion Prision Mayor in ordinary period
aggravating Temporal in its any of its mitigating
circumstance maximum periods circumstance
and no period (note: In case
mitigating of ordinary
circumstance mitigating
One Reclusion Prision Mayor in circumstances,
aggravating Temporal in its any of its You cannot
and one medium period periods lower the
mitigating penalty 2
Two Reclusion Prision Mayor in times, you can
aggravating Temporal in its any of its only lower it
circumstance maximum periods one time)
and one period
3 4
Also Prosec G’s interpretation. See Chua, Ronald C. and Mancenido-Gayo, Uella (2013),
Correcting an 80-year-old Mistake: A Review of the Indeterminate
Sentence Law, 58 Ateneo L.J. 359.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 53 of 142
1 aggravating Reclusion Prision mayor in 2 mitigating Reclusion perpetua (As

circumstance temporal in its its minimum circumstances, 1 is). If the penalty imposed
4 mitigating minimum period aggravating circumstance by law is a single
circumstance period indivisible penalty, you
(offset 1 MC do not consider
with 1 AC, circumstances.
leaving 3 MCs)
Note:
Reduction of
penalty by 1
degree because
of special
Qualified rape (Death) Penalty
mitigating
circumstance
applies only if Special aggravating Reduce to reclusion
there are no circumstance of minority perpetua (RA 9346)
ACs and relationship without the benefit of
Privileged Arresto Mayor None. parole
mitigating in its medium
circumstance, period (straight
2 ordinary penalty)
mitigating Murder (Reclusion Penalty
circumstance Reason: ISL perpetua to death)
(penalty is does not apply
lowered by 2 to those whose
degrees, and 1 maximum term No aggravating and Reclusion perpetua (the
degree because of mitigating circumstance lesser penalty)
of special imprisonment
mitigating does not exceed
No aggravating Reclusion perpetua (the
circumstance 1 year, like
circumstance, 1 lesser penalty)
[2 OMC]. arresto mayor.
mitigating circumstance
Effectively, it is
lowered by 3
degrees) 1 aggravating Death (the greater
circumstance, no penalty) but reduced to
Application of Article 63 mitigating circumstance reclusion perpetua w/o
eligibility for parole
Simple rape (Reclusion Penalty under Sec. 3, RA 9346
perpetua)
1 aggravating Reclusion perpetua (the
(offset)
No aggravating Reclusion perpetua (the
Simple rape Reclusion perpetua
Daverick Pacumio
Page 54 of 142
1 privileged mitigating Maximum: Prision Sec. 41, RA 10591

circumstance, 2 ordinary mayor in its medium (illegal transfer
mitigating period of firearms –
circumstances, no prision
aggravating circumstance Minimum: Prision correccional)
(PMC lowers the penalty correccional in its No Prision Arresto mayor
from RP to RT, thus, it medium period. circumstances correccional in in its medium
becomes a divisible its medium period
penalty governed by Art. period
64, governed by the ISL)
Complex crime of direct Reclusion temporal PROBATION LAW (P.D. 968 as Amended by R.A.
assault with homicide (penalty for most serious 10707)
crime which is homicide) Probation is a disposition by which a convict after
No aggravating Maximum: Reclusion conviction and sentence is released subject to the
circumstance, 1 temporal in its maximum conditions imposed by the court under the supervision
mitigating circumstance period. of a probation officer.
Minimum: Prision Objectives

mayor in its maximum The following are the objectives of probation law;
period 1. To promote the correction and rehabilitation of the
1 privileged mitigating Maximum: prision offender because he is placed under a personalized
circumstance, 1 ordinary mayor in its maximum treatment;
mitigating circumstance period 2. To provide an opportunity for the reformation of
penitent offender;
Minimum: Prision 3. To prevent further commission of crimes because the
correccional in its offender is placed under an individualized treatment;
maximum period 4. To decongest cases;
5. To save the Government from spending much-needed
For offenses punishable by Special Penal Laws: funds when the offender will be placed behind bars
To get the maximum term: The maximum term shall The first three objectives are based on P.D. 968. The last
not exceed the maximum fixed by said special law. two purposes are jurisprudential.
Note: The rule of offsetting is not applicable to crimes
punished under a special penal law. The presence of Probation as a Privilege
generic aggravating and ordinary mitigating Probation is not a right but a privilege. Thus, even if a
circumstances will not affect the proper imposition of convict is not among those disqualified of probation, the
the penalty. However, if the SPL uses the same judge can still deny the application. This denial is not
nomenclature as the RPC, you apply the provisions of appealable. The grant or denial of application is
the RPC. dependent solely on the sound discretion of the judge.
To get the minimum term: The minimum term shall DISQUALIFICATIONS

not be less than the minimum term prescribed by the The following are disqualified to avail probation;
same special law. 1. Those whose maximum term of imprisonment is more
than 6 years;
Sec. 11, RA 9165 ISL Maximum ISL Minimum 2. Those who have been convicted of subversion and
(12 yrs, 1 day to crimes against national security;
20 yrs) 3. Those who have previously been convicted by final
Not more than Not less than judgment of an offense punished by imprisonment of
20 years 12 years, 1 day more than six (6) months and one (1) day and/or a fine
of more than one thousand pesos (P1,000.00);
Daverick Pacumio
Page 55 of 142
4. Those who have already availed the benefit of defendant shall be allowed to apply for probation based
probation; on the modified decision before such decision becomes
5. Those who have perfected an appeal from judgment final. The application for probation based on the
of conviction; modified decision shall be filed in the trial court where
6. Those convicted of an election offense under the the judgment of conviction imposing a non-
Omnibus Election Code; probationable penalty was rendered, or in the trial court
7. Those convicted of drug trafficking or drug pushing; where such case has since been re-raffled.
8. Those who filed a malicious report that a person is
committing a violation of Anti-money laundering law This notwithstanding, the accused shall lose the benefit
and was convicted because of such malicious filing of probation should he seek a review of the modified
decision which already imposes a probationable
X was charged and convicted for alarms and penalty.
scandals. He was sentenced to 30 days of arresto
menor. Can X avail probation? 2. Section 42 of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare act
If the felony was committed prior to the amendment of provides that the court may, after it shall have convicted
the probation law, X cannot avail probation. Under P.D. and sentenced a child in conflict with the law, and upon
968, a person who is convicted of a crime involving application at any time, place the child on probation in
public disorder cannot avail probation. The felony of lieu of service of his/her sentence taking into account
Alarm and Scandal is a crime against public disorder. the best interest of the child. For this purpose, Section 4
Thus X cannot avail probation. However, if the crime of Presidential Decree No. 968, otherwise known as the
was convicted after the amendment, X may avail "Probation Law of 1976", is hereby amended
probation. Under R.A. 1070, crimes against public accordingly.
disorder is removed from the disqualifications. Thus, X
may avail probations Colinares v. People (G.R. No. 182748, December 13,
2011)
May probation be availed even if the penalty Colinares hit Rufino twice in the head with a stone.
imposed upon the offender is only a fine? Thereafter, Colinares was charged and convicted
YES. Under Section 4 of P.D. 968 as Amended by R.A. for frustrated homicide in the regional trial court.
10707, Probation may be granted whether the sentence He was sentenced to 2 years and 4 months of
imposes a term of imprisonment or a fine only. prision correcional to 6 years and 1 day of prision
mayor. Colinares appealed to the Court of Appeals
APPEAL AND PROBATION for the purpose of modifying his conviction from
Generally, under P.D 968, appeal and probation are frustrated homicide to attempted homicide
mutually exclusive remedies. This is because the reason thereby lowering the penalty so that he can avail
behind appeal and the reason behind probation are probation. The Court of Appeals affirmed the
diametrically opposed. decision of the RTC. Thus, Colinares elevated the
case to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court
If a person appeals, it means that he is questioning the held that Colinares is only liable for attempted
decision of the court. He is insisting on his innocence. homicide because the prosecution failed to prove
On the other hand, if a person applies for probation, it that the wound of Rufino is fatal. Thus the penalty
means that he is accepting the judgment of the court. imposed on him should be lowered to
He, however, does not want to serve his sentence behind imprisonment of four months of arresto mayor, as
bars. minimum, to two years and four months of prision
correccional, as maximum. Can Colinares avail
Exceptions; probation after the perfection of appeal to modify
1. However, Section 4 of R.A. 10707 which amended the his conviction?
probation law, states that when a judgment of YES. Colinares did not appeal from a judgment that
conviction imposing a non-probationable penalty is would have allowed him to apply for probation. He did
appealed or reviewed, and such judgment is modified not have a choice between appeal and probation. He was
through the imposition of a probationable penalty, the not in a position to say, "By taking this appeal, I choose
Daverick Pacumio
Page 56 of 142
not to apply for probation." The stiff penalty that the SENTENCE PERIOD OF
trial court imposed on him denied him that choice. PROBATION
Besides, in appealing his case, Colinares raised the issue Imprisonment of not Will not exceed 2 years
of correctness of the penalty imposed on him. He more than one (1) year
claimed that the evidence at best warranted his All other cases of Will not exceed 6 years
conviction only for attempted, not frustrated, homicide, imprisonment (that do
which crime called for a probationable penalty. In a way, not exceed 6 years)
therefore, Colinares sought from the beginning to bring Fine, subsidiary Not less than nor be more
down the penalty to the level where the law would allow imprisonment in case of than 2x than the total
him to apply for probation. insolvency number of days of
subsidiary
When and where do you apply for probation? imprisonment, taking
A grant of probation is applied before the Trial Court into account the highest
which heard the case within the period of perfecting an minimum wage rate at
appeal or within 15 days from promulgation of the time of the rendition
judgment. of the judgment.
CONDITIONS IMPOSED UPON OFFENDER UNDER EFFECT OF PROBATION

PROBATION Probation will suspend the execution of the sentence.
There are two conditions imposed upon a person However, it will not extinguish civil liability.
seeking probation;
1. Mandatory/ Ordinary; Under Section 16 of P.D. 968 as amended by R.A. 10707,
2. Discretionary/ Special; the final discharge of the probationer shall operate to
restore to him all civil rights lost or suspended as a result
Mandatory of his conviction and to totally extinguish his criminal
The following are mandatory conditions imposed by the liability as to the offense for which probation was
court to the probationer; granted.
1. Appear before the probationary officer within 72 hours
from the receipt of the order; Moreno v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 168550, August 10,
2. Report once a month; 2006)
Moreno ran for the public office of punong
Discretionary barangay. However, a petition for disqualification
Discretionary or special conditions are dependent upon was filed against him because he was convicted by
the sound discretion of the court. Usually involves final judgment of the crime of Arbitrary Detention
engaging in a vocation, not drinking alcohol, not going and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment of Four
to house of ill-reputes. (4) Months and One (1) Day to Two (2) Years and
Four (4) Months. Moreno argues that the
The only limitation on the discretionary conditions is disqualification under the Local Government Code
that they must not be so restrictive to the rights of the is for those ho have served sentence for more than
accused such that they will no longer be in consonance 1 year. Since Moreno applied and was granted of
with his freedom. probation, he did not serve his sentence because
probation suspends the service of the offender. Can
In the case of Baclayon v. Mutia (G.R. No. L-59298, April a person who was convicted by final judgment but
30, 1984) the trial court prohibited the offender, who is was granted probation run for public office?
a teacher by profession, to teach as a condition during YES. The phrase service of sentence, understood in its
the period of probation. This is a restrictive condition. general and common sense, means the confinement of
It deprives the offender his means of livelihood. a convicted person in a penal facility for the period
adjudged by the court. During the period of probation,
PERIOD OF PROBATION the probationer does not serve the penalty imposed
upon him by the court but is merely required to comply
Daverick Pacumio
Page 57 of 142
with all the conditions prescribed in the probation In the imposition of the penalties, the order of their
order. Furthermore, he accessory penalties of respective severity shall be followed so that they
suspension from public office, from the right to follow a may be executed successively or as nearly as may be
profession or calling, and that of perpetual special possible, should a pardon have been granted as to
disqualification from the right of suffrage, attendant to the penalty or penalties first imposed, or should
the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to they have been served out.
prision correccional in its minimum period imposed
upon Moreno were similarly suspended upon the grant For the purpose of applying the provisions of the
of probation. next preceding paragraph the respective severity of
the penalties shall be determined in accordance
Lindsay Lohan, after conviction, applied for with the following scale:
probation and was granted the same. Thereafter, 1. Death,
she filed an appeal questioning the civil indemnity 2. Reclusion perpetua,
imposed upon her. The judge denied the appeal on 3. Reclusion temporal,
the ground that Lindsay already applied for 4. Prision mayor,
probation. Therefore, the appeal cannot be 5. Prision correccional,
granted. Is the judge correct? 6. Arresto mayor,
NO. The only effect of probation is to suspend the 7. Arresto menor,
execution of the sentence. It has nothing to do with the 8. Destierro,
civil aspect of the case. Insofar as the civil aspect is 9. Perpetual absolute disqualification,
concerned, the convict can still appeal it. 10 Temporal absolute disqualification.
11. Suspension from public office, the right to vote
D, under the probation for two years, was imposed and be voted for, the right to follow a profession or
the condition that he could not change his calling, and
residence. For two years, he complied with this 12. Public censure.
condition. After the lapse of two years, D now
changed his residence. The probation officer Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next
learned about this and filed for a Motion to Revoke preceding, the maximum duration of the convict's
the probation. D contended that the period of sentence shall not be more than three-fold the
probation (2 years) has already been completed, so length of time corresponding to the most severe of
he is already allowed to change residence. The trial the penalties imposed upon him. No other penalty
court granted the revocation. Is the trial court to which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the
correct? sum total of those imposed equals the same
YES. The expiration of the period of probation does not maximum period.
ipso facto mean the termination of probation. Probation
is only terminated upon the issuance of the court of a Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty
final discharge of probation. This happens when after years.
the lapse of the period of probation, the probation
officer will file a Motion before the court with a In applying the provisions of this rule the duration
recommendation stating that the convict has complied of perpetual penalties (pena perpetua) shall be
with the conditions imposed and therefore, he should computed at thirty years. (As amended).
be discharged. The court will then issue a final discharge
of probation. Only then will probation be terminated. In case of multiple penalties, under Art. 70,the convict
shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the
Article 70. Successive service of sentence. - When the penalties allow for the same. Example: Imprisonment
culprit has to serve two or more penalties, he shall and fine.
serve them simultaneously if the nature of the
penalties will so permit otherwise, the following However, if the penalties are all imprisonment, the
rules shall be observed: offender can only serve it successively. Under Art. 70, in
case of successive service, there is a limitation, i.e.,
Daverick Pacumio
Page 58 of 142
three-fold rule – the maximum duration shall not Civil liability – if offender dies before conviction by final
exceed 3x the length of the most severe penalty and in judgement. if offender dies after conviction by final
no case to exceed 40 years. judgement, his civil liability survives and is executed
against administrator/executor of the estate. The civil
Application of Art. 70 liability extinguished is civil liability ex delicto, the one
arising from the crime committed.
11 counts of unjust vexation.
• Penalty: 11 days of AM 1. Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction
• No 3-fold rule = 11 counts x 11 days = 121 days or extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil
4 months liability based solely thereon. As opined by Justice
• Applying 3-fold rule: 11 (maximum/most severe Regalado, in this regard, "the death of the accused prior
penalty) x 3 = 33 days. to final judgment terminates his criminal liability and
only the civil liability directly arising from and based
3 counts of homicide, 1 count of frustrated homicide solely on the offense committed, i.e., civil liability ex
• Penalty: 15 years of RT per count of homicide, 10 delicto in senso strictiore."
yrs of prision mayor for frustrated homicide
• No 3-fold rule: 15 x 3 + 10 = 55 years 2. Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives
• Applying 3-fold rule: 15 (most severe penalty) x notwithstanding the death of accused, if the same may
3 = 45 years. But under Art. 70, the 3-fold rule also be predicated on a source of obligation other than
shall not exceed 40 years so, he serves only 40 delict. Article 1157 of the Civil Code enumerates these
years. other sources of obligation from which the civil liability
may arise as a result of the same act or omission:
EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY 1. Law
2. Contracts
Art. 89. How criminal liability is totally 3. Quasi-contracts
extinguished. — Criminal liability is totally 4. xxx
extinguished; 5. Quasi-delicts
3. Where the civil liability survives, as explained in
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal Number 2 above, an action for recovery therefor may be
penalties and as to pecuniary penalties, liability pursued but only by way of filing a separate civil action
therefor is extinguished only when the death of the and subject to Section 1, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on
offender occurs before final judgment; Criminal Procedure as amended. This separate civil
action may be enforced either against the
2. By service of the sentence; executor/administrator or the estate of the accused,
depending on the source of obligation upon which the
3. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the same is based as explained above (People v. Bayotas).
penalty and all its effects;
X was charged and convicted of murder. He
4. By absolute pardon; appealed to the CA. Affirmed. While pending
review with the SC, the Director of Prisons
5. By prescription of the crime; informed the SC that X died.
X’s criminal and civil liabilities are extinguished.
6. By prescription of the penalty;
X was charged with and convicted of murder. He
7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as appealed to the CA and the SC, who both affirmed.
provided in Art 344 of this Code; Counsel of X was planning to file an MR before the
SC. Before the lapse of the 15 days, X died. What is
DEATH the effect?
X’s criminal and civil liabilities are still extinguished.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 59 of 142
SERVICE OF SENTENCE known, from discovery by offended party, authorities

The satisfaction of the penalty. If sentenced to and agents.
imprisonment – it is service. If sentenced to pay fine –
payment of fine. Husband and wife were fighting. Husband slapped
the wife. the wife began crying and went to the
AMNESTY & ABSOLUTE PARDON garden. The husband followed the wife. they
Both are acts of grace coming from the Chief Executive continued to argue. The husband was telling the
which exempts the offender from the penalty prescribed wife to stop but the wife didn’t. in the course of the
by law for the crime he has committed. argument, the husband pushed the wife. the wife
hit her head on the cemented wall. The husband
Pardon Amnesty became so afraid. The husband went to the kitchen,
Excuses the convict from Obliterates the effects of stabbed the wife. Thereafter, he dug the ground
service of sentence the crime, as if no cime and buried his dead wife. unknown to the husband,
has been committed a passerby, W, watched their fight and witnessed
May be granted after the May be granted at any everything. Since the passerby did not want to be
final judgement of stage of the proceedings involved, he kept quiet. 20 years after, the passerby
conviction reported what he saw to the authorities. The
A private act of the A public act requiring authorities went to the husband’s ex-residence and
President. Courts do not concurrence of congress. found the wife’s remains. Can the State still
take judicial notice of Thus, courts take judicial prosecute the husband?
pardon thus, it must be notice of amnesty Yes. Reason is, the running of the period of prescription
pleaded and proven. has not yet even commenced to run. The said act of the
Granted to any offender Granted to group of husband of killing the wife is unknown to the
for any crime offenders who commit authorities for the past 20 years. It came to the
political crimes. knowledge of authorities when W divulged it 20 years
thereafter. It is only then that the period of prescription
PRESCRIPTION OF CRIME began to run – from the time the crime was reported to
The loss or forfeiture of the right of the State to the authorities.
prosecute an offender. The moment that a crime has
already prescribed, the court has to dismiss the case In People v. Pangilinan, the SC said that there is no more
even if the accused has not moved for its dismissal. The distinction between cases under the RPC and those
courts lose their jurisdiction to try the case. covered by special laws with respect to the interruption
of the period of prescription. The institution of
Penalty Prescriptive period proceedings for preliminary investigation against the
Death, reclusion 20 years accused interrupts the period of prescription.
perpetua, reclusion
temporal X boxed Y. Y reported the incident to the barangay.
Other afflictive penalties 15 years He filed a complaint against X because they live in
Correctional penalties 10 years the same barangay. At first, no one appeared. On
the second call, only Y appeared. The case was filed
Arresto mayor 5 years
with the OCP only after 1 month from the slapping
Libel and other similar 1 year
incident. The OCP filed the Information for slight
offenses
physical injuries only 6 months after the incident.
Oral defamation and 6 months
Counsel of X moved to quash for prescription.
lsander by deed
The judge should deny the MTQ. The charge for
Light felonies1 2 months
slight physical injuries did not prescribe. Since Y filed it
within a month from the slapping, it is well-within the
COMPUTATION OF PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD 2-month prescriptive period. The filing of the complaint
The running of the prescriptive period shall be from the
with the OCP interrupted the running of the
time of the commission of the crime, if known. If not prescriptive period.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 60 of 142
absentia ensued. X was adjudged guilty. The police

In Pangilinan, the SC held that if it is a violation of the officers looked for X. 20 years thereafter, X was
RPC/SPL, the prescriptive period is interrupted upon arrested. Counsel of X filed a petition for habeas
the filing of the complaint with the OCP. If it is a corpus for prescription of penalty. Grant/deny?
violation of the municipal ordinance, it is interrupted Deny. Penalty has not yet prescribed. X has not evaded
upon the filing of the case in court. service of his sentence. To jump bail is different from
evading service of sentence. Even if X was arrested 50
PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTY years after, pwede pa rin siya maaresto.
Prescription of penalty is the loss of the right of the State
to execute the sentence. SUSPENSION OF PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD OF
PENALTY
Art. 92. When and how penalties prescribe. — The The following are the grounds when the prescriptive
penalties imposed by final sentence prescribe as period of penalty is suspended;
follows; 1. When offender surrenders;
2. When offender went to a country which has no
1. Death and reclusion perpetua, in twenty years; extradition treaty with the Philippines;
3. When convict commits a crime before the
2. Other afflictive penalties, in fifteen years; expiration of period of prescription.
3. Correctional penalties, in ten years; with the VALID MARRIAGE

exception of the penalty of arresto mayor, which Only lies in one public crime – rape, and in these private
prescribes in five years; crimes: seduction, abduction, and acts of lasciviousness.
Subsequent valid marriage between the offender and
4. Light penalties, in one year. the victim extinguishes the criminal liability of the
accused (Art. 344). Under Art. 344, it would even remit
COMMENCEMENT PERIOD the penalty imposed on the accused.
The running of the period shall commence from the
time the convict evaded the service of his sentence. It is Art. 90. Prescription of crime. — Crimes punishable
necessary therefore that the convict is serving his by death, reclusion perpetua or reclusion temporal
sentence and while serving, he escaped. It is from the shall prescribe in twenty years.
time of escape that the prescriptive period runs.
Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall
X was charged with homicide. Trial on the merits prescribe in fifteen years.
ensued. The judge found X guilty as charged.
Judgement became final and executory – X was Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall
brought to Bilibid. He was brought only for a week prescribe in ten years; with the exception of those
when X escaped during a riot. 20 years thereafter, punishable by arresto mayor, which shall prescribe
the police got a tip that X was on a flight from Cebu, in five years.
to land at NAIA Terminal 2. X was arrested. Counsel
for X filed a petition for habeas corpus for The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall
prescription of penalty. Should the judge grant/deny? prescribe in one year.
GRANT. Penalty for reclusion temporal had already
prescribed (15 years). Here, 20 years had passed from The crime of oral defamation and slander by deed
time of X’s evasion of his sentence. shall prescribe in six months.
X was charged with homicide. It was bailable, he Light offenses prescribe in two months.
posted bail. He is on temporary liberty. During
arraignment, he pleaded not guilty. Trial on the When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one,
merits ensued. X initially appeared, but jumped the highest penalty shall be made the basis of the
bail thereafter. Since X jumped bail, trial in application of the rules contained in the first,
Daverick Pacumio
Page 61 of 142
second and third paragraphs of this article. (As old and sickly. He then told the police what he
amended by RA 4661, approved June 19, 1966.) witnessed 25 years ago. The police then went to the
backyard, dug the ground and saw the bones of Y.
Art. 91. Computation of prescription of offenses. — Can the State still prosecute H for parricide?
The period of prescription shall commence to run YES. The crime has not yet prescribed. The authorities
from the day on which the crime is discovered by the and their agents only came to know the crime 25 years
offended party, the authorities, or their agents, and from its commission. This is the only time when the
shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or prescriptive period for the crime shall commence to run.
information, and shall commence to run again Also, the neighbor who knew the commission of the
when such proceedings terminate without the crime is not the person required by law to discover the
accused being convicted or acquitted, or are crime in order to start the running of the prescriptive
unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable period. Therefore, the State can still file the case of
to him. parricide.
The term of prescription shall not run when the Niki and Mariah were friends. Niki, before going to
offender is absent from the Philippine Archipelago. Mindanao, left the titles of her properties to
Mariah for safekeeping. Mariah became interested
PRESCRIPTION OF CRIME in one of the properties. While Niki was in
Prescription of Crime is the loss or forfeiture of the right Mindanao, Mariah falsified a Deed of Absolute Sale
of State to prosecute an act prohibited by law. The forging the signature of Niki, making it appear that
moment that a crime has already prescribed, the court Niki sold the property to her. Mariah then
has to dismiss the case even if the accused has not registered the Deed before the Registry of Deeds.
moved for its dismissal. The courts lose their The title was thereafter transferred to the name of
jurisdiction to try the case. Mariah. 20 years thereafter, Niki came back to
Manila and acquired the titles she left to Mariah.
Period of prescription of crimes Niki noticed that one title was missing. She
Penalty Prescriptive period eventually discovered that the property covered by
Death, reclusion 20 years such missing title was already transferred to the
perpetua, reclusion name of Mariah. Can Niki file case of falsification of
temporal public document punishable by Prision mayor,
Other afflictive penalties 15 years against Mariah?
Correctional penalties 10 years NO. The crime has already prescribed. If a document or
Arresto mayor 5 years transaction involves real properties (sale, lease,
Libel and other similar 1 year attachment), the moment the document is registered
offenses before the Registry of Deeds, such registration
Oral defamation and 6 months constitutes constructive notice. As such, the law
slander by deed presumes that the whole world, including Niki, knows
Light felonies 2 months about the registration. The period of prescription
commences to run from that time. Since 20 years have
COMPUTATION OF PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD already lapsed in this case, the crime has already
The running of the prescriptive period shall be from the prescribed. This concerns only criminal liability. But
time of the commission of the crime, if known. If not Niki can still file a civil case for damages or any civil
known, from discovery by offended party, authorities action to recover the property.
and agents.
VIOLATION OF SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
X and Y had a quarrel. In the course thereof, X In the case of People v. Pangilinan (G.R. No. 152662, June
killed Y. Thereafter, X buried the body of Y in his 13, 2012), the Supreme Court said whether it is a
backyard. Unknown to X, neighbor A witnesses A violation of a special penal law like the BP 22 or a
burry the body in his backyard. After 25 years from violation of the RPC, the filing of a complaint before the
the commission of the crime, the neighbor became office of the public prosecutor suspends or interrupts
Daverick Pacumio
Page 62 of 142
the running of the prescriptive period. It remains YES. The crime has not yet prescribed. The rule on
suspended until the case has been decided the accused constructive notice by registration is applicable only if
being acquitted or convicted or the case has been the transaction involves real properties. Registration as
dismissed for any reason not imputable to him. to other documents or transactions with the Office of
the Civil Registry does not constitute constructive
Here the checks were issued, and the notice of dishonor notice to the whole world. Since the wife herein
was received by the maker in 1995. The cases were filed discovered the bigamous marriage only 20 years
before the prosecutors in 1997, and they filed the thereafter, this shall be the starting point for the
information in the MTC in 2000. The MTC and RTC running of the prescriptive period of the crime.
ruled that the crime did not prescribe. The CA held that
the crime had prescribed, and that the filing of the PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD SUSPENDED
complaint before the prosecutors did not suspend the The Prescriptive period shall be suspended upon filing
running of the prescriptive period. of complaint or info before the fiscal’s office or before
the court/public prosecutor for purposes of preliminary
The CA cited the case of Zaldivia v. Reyes and ruled that investigation. It remains suspended until the accused is
the violation of BP 22 has already prescribed because convicted or acquitted or the case is terminated without
according to the CA, in case of violation of special penal the fault of accused.
laws, the running of the prescriptive period is only
interrupted upon the filing of the case before the The term shall not run when the offender is absent from
appropriate court because the Supreme Court the Philippine Archipelago.
interpreted the word “proceedings” as judicial
proceedings in Zaldivia v. Reyes. Situations which do not follow Art. 91:
1. In continuing crimes-prescriptive period will
The SC said that the interpretation of the CA is start to run only at the termination of the
erroneous. SC said it is now settled in jurisprudence that intended result;
whether it is a violation of a special penal law or a 2. In crimes against false testimony, prescriptive
violation of the RPC, the filing of the complaint with the period is reckoned from the day final judgment
public prosecutor interrupts the running of the is rendered in the proceeding where such false
prescriptive period. testimony is utilized not when the false
Violation of Municipal Ordinance testimony is made;
3. In Election offenses
In Zaldivia v. Reyes (G.R. No. 102342, July 3, 1992), what a. if discovery of the offense is incidental
is involved is a violation of a municipal ordinance. It is to judicial proceedings, prescription
only in case of violation of municipal ordinance wherein begins when such proceedings
the running of the prescriptive period is interrupted terminate; or
upon the filing of the complaint before the proper court. b. From the date of the commission of the
The filing of the information in 1997 suspended the offense.
prescriptive period and the same remains suspended;
thus the crime has not yet prescribed. Art. 92. When and how penalties prescribe. — The
penalties imposed by final sentence prescribe as
Gerald and Kim were spouses. Gerald, as a medical follows;
representative, was assigned in Visayas leaving his
wife, Kim, in Manila. 20 years thereafter, Kim while 1. Death and reclusion perpetua, in twenty years;
watching TV saw Gerald presenting another
woman, Maja, as his wife. Furious, Kim went to 2. Other afflictive penalties, in fifteen years;
Visayas and therein discovered that there was a
registered marriage certificate between Gerald and 3. Correctional penalties, in ten years; with the
Maja, the woman she saw on TV. Can Kim file a case exception of the penalty of arresto mayor, which
of bigamy? prescribes in five years;
Daverick Pacumio
Page 63 of 142
4. Light penalties, in one year. Starts counting upon the Starts counting upon the
discovery of the escape or evasion of
Art. 93. Computation of the prescription of commission of the crime service of sentence
penalties. — The period of prescription of penalties Mere absence from the Absence from the
shall commence to run from the date when the Philippines interrupts Philippines interrupts
culprit should evade the service of his sentence, and the running of the the period only when the
it shall be interrupted if the defendant should give prescriptive period convict goes to a foreign
himself up, be captured, should go to some foreign country without an
country with which this Government has no extradition treaty with
extradition treaty, or should commit another crime the Philippines
before the expiration of the period of prescription. Commission of another Commission of another
crime before the crime before the
PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTY expiration of the expiration of the period
Prescription of penalty is the loss of the right of the State prescriptive period does interrupts the
to execute the sentence. not interrupt prescription.
prescription.
Prescriptive period
Penalty Prescriptive period Art. 94. Partial Extinction of criminal liability. —
Death, reclusion 20 years Criminal liability is extinguished partially;
perpetua 1. By conditional pardon;
Afflictive penalties 15 years 2. By commutation of the sentence; and
Correctional penalties 10 years 3. For good conduct allowances which the
Arresto mayor 5 years culprit may earn while he is serving his
Light penalties 1 year sentence.
COMMENCEMENT PERIOD MODES FOR PARTIALLY EXTINGUISHING

The running of the period shall commence from the CRIMINAL LIABILITY
time the convict evaded the service of his sentence. It is The following are the modes for extinguishing criminal
necessary therefore that the convict is serving his liability:
sentence and while serving, he escaped. It is from the 1. Conditional Pardon;
time of escape that the prescriptive period runs. 2. Commutation of sentence;
3. Good conduct of allowance;
SUSPENSION OF PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD OF 4. Special Time Allowance for Loyalty;
PENALTY 5. Parole under the Indeterminate Sentence Law;
The following are the grounds when the prescriptive 6. Implied repeal or amendment of penal law
period of penalty is suspended; lowering the penalty.
1. When offender surrenders;
2. When offender went to a country which has no CONDITIONAL PARDON
extradition treaty with the Philippines; Conditional Pardon is an act of grace received from a
3. When convict commits a crime before the power entrusted with the authority to execute the law,
expiration of period of prescription; and but the pardon herein is subject to strict conditions.
4. When the offender is captured.
Because of this strict conditions, there must be
Prescription of crimes v. prescription of penalty acceptance on the part of the offender. The moment he
Prescription of crimes Prescription of penalty accepts, it becomes incumbent upon him to comply
Loss or forfeiture of the Loss or forfeiture of the with the strict terms and conditions of the pardon.
right of the State to right of the State to
prosecute enforce final judgement Failure to comply with any of the strict conditions, the
State can file a criminal case under Art 159- evasion of
service of sentence. In addition, the Chief Executive can
Daverick Pacumio
Page 64 of 142
order the immediate incarceration of the offender under favor of the offender so that he will be immediately
the Administrative Code. released.
COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE Period of Deduction

In commutation of sentence, a new sentence imposed Imprisonment
shall be in lieu of the original sentence. First two (2) years 20 days for each month of
Example: Death penalty commuted to Reclusion good behavior during
perpetua. detention
Third to fifth year 23 days for each month of
ART. 97. Allowance for good conduct. – The good good behavior during
conduct of any offender qualified for credit for detention
preventive imprisonment pursuant to Article 29 of Sixth to tenth year 25 days for each month of
this Code, or of any convicted prisoner in any penal good behavior during
institution, rehabilitation or detention center or detention
any other local jail shall entitle him to the following Eleventh and successive 30 days for each month of
deductions from the period of his sentence: years good behavior during
detention
1. During the first two years of imprisonment, he At any time during his Another deduction of 15
shall be allowed a deduction of twenty days for each period of imprisonment days, in addition to
month of good behavior during detention; numbers one to four
hereof for each month of
2. During the third to the fifth year, inclusive, of his service time rendered for;
imprisonment, he shall be allowed a reduction of 1. Study;
twenty-three days for each month of good behavior 2. Teaching; or
during detention; 3. Mentoring
(special time
3.During the following years until the tenth year, allowance for
inclusive, of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed study, teaching,
a deduction of twenty-five days for each month of and mentoring)
good behavior during detention;
ART. 98. Special time allowance for loyalty. – A
4.During the eleventh and successive years of his deduction of one fifth of the period of his sentence
imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of shall be granted to any prisoner who, having evaded
thirty days for each month of good behavior during his preventive imprisonment or the service of his
detention; and sentence under the circumstances mentioned in
Article 158 of this Code, gives himself up to the
5. At any time during the period of imprisonment, authorities within 48 hours following the issuance
he shall be allowed another deduction of fifteen of a proclamation announcing the passing away of
days, in addition to numbers one to four hereof, for the calamity or catastrophe referred to in said
each month of study, teaching or mentoring service article. A deduction of two-fifths of the period of his
time rendered. (As amended by R.A. 10592) sentence shall be granted in case said prisoner
chose to stay in the place of his confinement
An appeal by the accused shall not deprive him of notwithstanding the existence of a calamity or
entitlement to the above allowances for good catastrophe enumerated in Article 158 of this Code.
conduct. (As amended by R.A. 10592)
GOOD CONDUCT TIME ALLOWANCE During the time Bin Laden was serving his sentence
Good conduct allowance is awarded to the offender if he behind bars, an 8.9 magnitude earthquake
has been behaving properly in prison. The Director of suddenly occurred prompting Bin Laden to escape.
Prisons shall compute the good conduct allowance in He then went to the house of his mother. While Bin
Daverick Pacumio
Page 65 of 142
Laden was watching TV in the house of his mother, ACQUITTAL; EFFECT ON CIVIL LIABILITY:
he saw the President announcing that the In the following cases, acquittal in a criminal action bars
earthquake subsided. Within 48 hours from recovery in a civil action;
announcement, Bin Laden surrendered. Because of 1. If the judgment of acquittal states that the
this surrender, Bin Laden is entitled to the special alleged criminal acts of the offender were not
allowance for loyalty for being so loyal to the committed by him;
government. 2. If the judgment of acquittal states that the
accused is not guilty of criminal or civil
If Bin Laden remained in prison despite the 8.9 damages.
magnitude earthquake, he is entitled to a deduction of
2/5 from the period of his sentence. In the following cases, the acquittal of the accused in a
However, if Bin Laden did not return, there will be an criminal case is not a bar to recover civil liability;
additional 1/5 to the term of his sentence. 1. When judgment of acquittal is based on
reasonable doubt - This is because civil actions
If Bin Laden merely remained in prison, there will be require mere preponderance of evidence;
neither deduction nor addition to his sentence. 2. When judgment of acquittal states that the
liability of accused is not criminal but civil in
CIVIL LIABILITY nature - This usually happens when the case is
estafa and there is a contract between the
Art. 100. Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. — accused and complainant, upon which the
Every person criminally liable for a felony is also accused failed to comply with the terms of the
civilly liable. contract. There is breach of contract;
3. When the judgment of acquittal states that the
CIVIL LIABILITY civil liability does not arise from the crime but
As a general rule, every person criminally liable is also from other sources of obligations;
civilly liable. For every criminal action filed in court, the
civil action for the recovery of civil liability is deemed Art. 101. Rules regarding civil liability in certain
impliedly instituted. cases. — The exemption from criminal liability
established in subdivisions 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of article
Reason: 12 and in subdivision 4 of article 11 of this Code does
The commission of a crime, 2 injuries are inflicted; not include exemption from civil liability, which
1. Social injury against the State for the shall be enforced subject to the following rules:
disturbance of social order; and
2. Personal Injury against the offended party and First. In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of Article 12,
his heirs. the civil liability for acts committed by an imbecile
The social injury against the state will be answered by or insane person, and by a person under nine years
reparation. The personal injury will be answered by the of age, or by one over nine but under fifteen years of
civil indemnity. age, who has acted without discernment, shall
devolve upon those having such person under their
Exceptions to Implied Institution of Civil Action legal authority or control, unless it appears that
The following are the exemption to the general that a there was no fault or negligence on their part.
civil action is impliedly instituted in a criminal case:
1. When offended party waives the civil action; Should there be no person having such insane,
2. When the offended party reserves the right to imbecile or minor under his authority, legal
file a separate civil action, which must be made guardianship or control, or if such person be
prior to the presentation of evidence of the insolvent, said insane, imbecile, or minor shall
prosecution; respond with their own property, excepting
3. When the offended party files the civil action property exempt from execution, in accordance
prior to the criminal action with the civil law.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 66 of 142
Second. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of Art. 102. Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers,
Article 11, the persons for whose benefit the harm tavernkeepers and proprietors of establishments.
has been prevented shall be civilly liable in — In default of the persons criminally liable,
proportion to the benefit which they may have innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and any other persons
received. or corporations shall be civilly liable for crimes
committed in their establishments, in all cases
The courts shall determine, in sound discretion, the where a violation of municipal ordinances or some
proportionate amount for which each one shall be general or special police regulation shall have been
liable. committed by them or their employees.
Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the
When the respective shares cannot be equitably restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft
determined, even approximately, or when the within their houses from guests lodging therein, or
liability also attaches to the Government, or to the for the payment of the value thereof, provided that
majority of the inhabitants of the town, and, in all such guests shall have notified in advance the
events, whenever the damages have been caused innkeeper himself, or the person representing him,
with the consent of the authorities or their agents, of the deposit of such goods within the inn; and shall
indemnification shall be made in the manner furthermore have followed the directions which
prescribed by special laws or regulations. such innkeeper or his representative may have
given them with respect to the care and vigilance
Third. In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of over such goods. No liability shall attach in case of
Article 12, the persons using violence or causing the robbery with violence against or intimidation of
fears shall be primarily liable and secondarily, or, if persons unless committed by the innkeeper's
there be no such persons, those doing the act shall employees.
be liable, saving always to the latter that part of
their property exempt from execution. Art. 103. Subsidiary civil liability of other persons. —
The subsidiary liability established in the next
INSANE, IMBECILE, MINOR preceding article shall also apply to employers,
In case the offender is insane, imbecile or minor, the teachers, persons, and corporations engaged in any
civil liability arising from their acts shall be shouldered kind of industry for felonies committed by their
by the persons who have custody of the insane, imbecile servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices, or
or minor. employees in the discharge of their duties.
Secondary liability falls on the property of the insane, SUBSIDIARY CIVIL LIABILITY
imbecile or minor, except those properties which are Parents, teacher, employers, and proprietors shall be
prohibited from being attached. subsidiarily liable for the crimes committed by their
children, students, employees, servants.
STATE OF NECESSITY
All persons who have been benefitted during the state Subsidiary Liability of employers
of necessity shall bear the civil liability. If there are many Employers may be held subsidiarily liable for the acts of
persons benefitted, the liability shall be divided by the their employees provided the following requisites are
court proportionately. present;
1. Employer must be engaged in some kind of
IRRESISTIBLE FORCE OR UNCONTROLLABLE industry;
FEAR 2. Employer and employee relationship;
Borne by the person who enforced the threats to the 3. Employee committed a crime in the exercise of
offender. Secondary liability falls upon the principal by his duties as employee;
direct participation, who is the one who acted under the 4. There must be conviction of the crime and the
compulsion of irresistible force or uncontrollable fear. employee was found insolvent to pay civil
indemnity.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 67 of 142
The moment the employee was found insolvent, the serious physical injuries against the attending
liability of the employer now becomes absolute. A physicians and Ospital ng Maynila. Is Dr. Solidum
motion for the issuance of a subsidiary writ of execution civilly or criminally liable?
must then be filed by the complainant NO. The Prosecution presented no witnesses with
special medical qualifications in anesthesia to provide
Paris Hilton, a guest in a hotel, told the guidance to the trial court on what standard of care was
representative of the hotel that she carries applicable. It would consequently be truly difficult, if
valuables. The representative of the hotel told not impossible, to determine whether the first three
Paris about the rules regarding the care and elements of a negligence and malpractice action were
vigilance of the valuables. However, during attendant.
nighttime, a robbery occurred inside the hotel.
Among those taken were the valuables of Paris. The Is Ospital ng Maynila subsidiarily liable?
offender was arrested, convicted and civil liability NO. For one, Ospital ng Maynila was not at all a party
was imposed upon him. In case of insolvency of the in the proceedings. Hence, its fundamental right to be
offender, does the proprietor of the hotel or heard was not respected from the outset. Second,
establishment have subsidiary civil liability? granting for the sake of argument that Ospital ng
YES. The guest complied with the rules and regulations Maynila was impleaded, still it cannot be subsidiarily
as to the care and vigilance of the goods. He also liable because the requisites for the subsidiary liability
informed the representative of the hotel of the presence of the employers are not present. First, there is no
of his valuables. employer-employee relationship because based on the
evidence, Dr. Solidum is a consultant and not an
Same situation as above. The guard of the hotel employee of OM. Second, OM is not engaged in some
tried to fight the robbers. One of the robbers shot kind of industry, it is a charitable institution that caters
the guard. Prosecuted for robbery with homicide hospital services to poor patients; there is no profit.
and was convicted. In case of insolvency, is the Also, Dr. Solidum was not criminally liable. Lastly,
proprietor of the hotel subsidiarily liable? granting that Dr. Solidum was held liable for civil
NO. The crime committed is robbery with homicide, liability, there was no proof that Dr. Solidum was
which is a crime under robbery with violence against or insolvent such that OM will be subsidiarily liable.
intimidation of persons. If the crime committed is
robbery with violence against or intimidation of A municipal ordinance provides that
persons, the proprietor is not liable, except if the Establishment XYZ should only be open during
offender is the employee of the hotel or establishment. weekdays. However, this establishment violated
the ordinance as it opened on a Sunday. A crime
Solidum v. People (G.R. No. 192123, March 10, 2014) was committed during the Sunday it opened. Is the
Gerald Gercayo was born with an imperforated proprietor of the establishment liable?
anus. Two days after his birth, Gerald underwent YES. There was a violation of the ordinance. Any crimes
colostomy, a surgical procedure to bring one end of committed in the establishment will make the
the large intestine out through the abdominal wall, proprietor subsidiarily liable for civil liability only, not
enabling him to excrete through a colostomy bag for criminal liability.
attached to the side of his body. When Gerald was
three years old, he was admitted at the Ospital ng Vin Diesel was a driver of XYZ Corporation engaged
Maynila for a pull-through operation. Dr. Leandro in the business of distributing goods to
Resurreccion headed the surgical team along with supermarkets. Vin Diesel was driving recklessly as
the anesthesiologists which includes petitioner Dr. he was headed to one supermarket. In the course
Fernando Solidum. During the operation, Gerald thereof, Vin Diesel hit a car. The car was damaged.
experienced bradycardia, and went into a coma. Because of this, a crime for reckless imprudence
His coma lasted for two weeks,9 but he regained resulting to damage to property was filed against
consciousness only after a month. He could no Vin Diesel. Court found him guilty. The penalties
longer see, hear or move. Thus, the mother lodged imposed were fine and payment of damage caused.
a complaint for reckless imprudence resulting in When the judgment became final and executory, a
Daverick Pacumio
Page 68 of 142
writ of execution was issued but was returned The remedy of the offended party is reparation.
unsatisfied due to the insolvency of Vin Diesel. Is
there need to file a separate civil action? Art. 106. Reparation. — How made. — The court
NO. There is no need to file a separate civil action. In shall determine the amount of damage, taking into
the very same action for reckless imprudence resulting consideration the price of the thing, whenever
to damage to property, the moment the employee is possible, and its special sentimental value to the
found to be insolvent, the liability of the employer injured party, and reparation shall be made
becomes absolute. However, even if it is absolute, it is accordingly.
not automatic. The complainant has to file a Motion for
the Issuance of a Subsidiary Writ of Execution. This is Reparation
not an ex parte motion, but a litigated one. Thus, the In case of inability to return the property stolen, the
other party (XYZ COrpo) must be informed for due culprit must pay the value of the property stolen. The
process. court shall determine the value of the thing taken
including its sentimental value.
Art. 104. What is included in civil liability. — The
civil liability established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and Art. 107. Indemnification — What is included. —
103 of this Code includes; Indemnification for consequential damages shall
include not only those caused the injured party, but
1. Restitution; also those suffered by his family or by a third person
by reason of the crime.
2. Reparation of the damage caused;
INDEMNIFICATION
3. Indemnification for consequential damages. Indemnification includes moral damages, civil
indemnity, exemplary damages.
Art. 105. Restitution. — How made. — The
restitution of the thing itself must be made Moral Damages
whenever possible, with allowance for any Moral damages in case of rape or murder need not be
deterioration, or diminution of value as determined proved. It suffices that the crime has been committed.
by the court. The law presumes that the victim suffered moral
indemnity because of the crime committed.
The thing itself shall be restored, even though it be
found in the possession of a third person who has Exemplary Damages
acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter his Exemplary damages can only be granted if there are
action against the proper person, who may be liable aggravating circumstances in the commission of the
to him. crime.
This provision is not applicable in cases in which the
thing has been acquired by the third person in the Article 108. Obligation to make restoration,
manner and under the requirements which, by law, reparation for damages, or indemnification for
bar an action for its recovery. consequential damages and actions to demand the
same; Upon whom it devolves. - The obligation to
RESTITUTION make restoration or reparation for damages and
Restitution is the return of the very thing taken. indemnification for consequential damages
devolves upon the heirs of the person liable.
Exception
Exception: if the innocent purchaser acquired the said The action to demand restoration, reparation, and
property in a public sale. Then, it can no longer be taken indemnification likewise descends to the heirs of
away from him. the person injured.
What is the remedy of the offended party if the Article 109. Share of each person civilly liable. - If
thing can no longer be returned? there are two or more persons civilly liable for a
Daverick Pacumio
Page 69 of 142
felony, the courts shall determine the amount for Art. 112. Extinction of civil liability. — Civil liability
which each must respond. established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103 of this
Code shall be extinguished in the same manner as
If there were 2 accused convicted, insofar as the civil obligations, in accordance with the provisions of
liability is concerned, it is the court which shall the Civil Law.
determine the civil liability of the 2 accused
EXTINGUISHMENT OF CIVIL LIABILITY:
Art. 110. Several and subsidiary liability of Civil Liability shall be extinguished by the following
principals, accomplices and accessories of a felony acts;
— Preference in payment. — Notwithstanding the 1. By pardon of the offended party;
provisions of the next preceding article, the 2. Other modes for extinguishing civil liability under
principals, accomplices, and accessories, each Civil Code; (payment, Condonation, etc)
within their respective class, shall be liable
severally (in solidum) among themselves for their Civil liability is personal and cannot be extinguished by
quotas, and subsidiaries for those of the other pardon, amnesty, probation, commutation of sentence,
persons liable. etc. Civil liability can only be extinguished in the same
manner as in Civil Law, by the extinguishment of
The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first obligations, i.e., payment, loss of the thing,
against the property of the principals; next, against remuneration, compensation, etc.
that of the accomplices, and, lastly, against that of
the accessories. Art. 113. Obligation to satisfy civil liability. — Except
in case of extinction of his civil liability as provided
Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary in the next preceding article the offender shall
liability has been enforced, the person by whom continue to be obliged to satisfy the civil liability
payment has been made shall have a right of action resulting from the crime committed by him,
against the others for the amount of their notwithstanding the fact that he has served his
respective shares. sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty or
other rights, or has not been required to serve the
X, Y and Z were charged in the case of robbery. They same by reason of amnesty, pardon, commutation
were all charged as principals. But the judge ruled of sentence or any other reason.
that X is a principal, Y is an accomplice and Z is a
mere accessory. The judge divided the civil liability THE REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK TWO
proportionately. Their liabilities among
themselves are in solidum. Against whom can the TITLE ONE – CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL
private complainant recover said civil liability? SECURITY AND THE LAW OF NATIONS
The private complainant can recover the entire civil
liability from X, the principal but X now has a right of Article 114 – Treason
action against Y and Z insofar as their respective civil
liabilities are concerned. If X cannot pay, the private Elements:
complainant can go against Y. Y can now go against X 1. Offender is a citizen or a foreigner in the
and Z because their liabilities are in solidum but Philippines;
subsidiary insofar as the private complainant is 2. A war in which the Philippines is involved – in
concerned times of peace, treason remains to be domant. The
moment emergency arises, treason is immediately
Art. 111. Obligation to make restitution in certain put into effect as an act of self-defense on its part
cases. — Any person who has participated (Laurel v. Misa); and
gratuitously in the proceeds of a felony shall be 3. Offender levies war or adheres to the enemies by
bound to make restitution in an amount equivalent giving them aid or comfort.
to the extent of such participation. Elements of levying war:
a. Assembly of men;
Daverick Pacumio
Page 70 of 142
b. Purpose of executing a treasonable design

by force The Ms. U pageant is held here. Among the judges was
DND Secretary X. at first sight, DND really liked Ms.
Adhering to the enemies: When the offender China. He found Ms. China attractive. In the
intellectually and emotionally favors the enemy. However, afterparty, attended by the candidates and judges, X
it is manifested by his acts of giving aid or comfort to the talked to Ms. China. They left the party early. On
enemy. If the offender gives the enemy means of board the car of X, they stopped in a hotel. X and Ms.
transportation, arms, and other supplies, hoping to China talked about the Spratly Islands. Since DND
weaken the defense of the Ph. Secretary X is inebriated, he divulged to Ms. China all
strategies the PH will do in order to defend the Spratly
2 ways to prove: Islands. They had sex afterwards. Early morning, X
1. 2 witness rule – there must be at least two (2) saw that Ms. China was gone. He was alarmed because
witnesses who corroborate each other as to the he divulged the secrets of PH defense to Ms. China. He
overt act done by the offender. Thus, treason saw Ms. China talking to someone over the phone. X
requires direct evidence. There must be witnesses. got the phone and threw it out. X hit Ms. China
Treason cannot be prove by mere circumstantial repeatedly and was asking who she was talking to.
evidence; Turns out, Ms. China was talking to her mother. DND
2. Open court confession – done in open court before Secretary X then left the room. Is DND Secretary X
the court trying the case. an extrajudicial liable for espionage under the second mode?
confession, while admissible, is not sufficient to No. Although he is a public officer and he has in his
convict. possession classified information, he did not divulge it to
the representative of a foreign nation in contemplation of
Article 116 – Misprision of Treason the law. The representative under the law must be a
political representative. Therefore, X is not liable for
Every person owing allegiance to the Government of the espionage.
Philippine Islands, without being a foreigner, and having
knowledge of any conspiracy against them, conceals or X is, however liable for R.A. No. 9262. In this case, a
does not disclose and make known the same, as soon as single sexual intercourse would result to a sexual
possible to the governor or fiscal of the province, or the relationship. Here, the single one night stand between X
mayor or fiscal of the city which he resides, as the case may and Ms. China made the case come within the purview of
be shall be punished as an accessory to the crime of R.A. No. 9262.
treason.
• Can be committed only by Filipino citizens. Article 118 – Inciting to War or Giving Motives for
Reprisals
Article 117 – Espionage
Elements:
2 ways to commit: 1. Offender performs an act unauthorized by the
1. Entering, without authority, a Philippine fort, Philippine government; and
naval, military establishment for the purpose of 2. Such act gives occasion for a war or exposes
obtaining information relative to the defense of Filipino citizens to reprisals in foreign countries.
the Philippines – offender may be any person. once
he enters a prohibited place and the intention is to Members of an NGO held a protest rally in front of the
obtain classified information, he becomes liable Chinese Embassy about the Spratly Islands issue. In
for espionage. This intention is presumed from the said rally, the people burned real Chinese flags. This
fact that he entered without permission; or angered the Chinese government, causing the latter
2. By giving such information to a foreign to become hostile to PH citizens in China. These
representative which he has by reason of the office protesters may be charged with Art. 118. The first element
he holds – can be committed only by a public is present because the offenders performed an act
officer who, by reason of his office, has in his unauthorized by the government, i.e., burning real Chinese
possession the classified information. flags in front of the Chinese Embassy. The second element
is likewise present because such act exposed Filipino
Espionage is a crime committed in times of peace and in citizens to hostile treatment from Chinese citizens in
times of war. China.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 71 of 142
4. Such act of going to the foreign country, to the

Art. 119 – Violation of Neutrality enemy state, is prohibited by the Philippine
government.
Elements:
1. The crime is committed when there is a war but The crime arises only if there is a prohibition from the PH
the PH is not involved; government from fleeing to an enemy country/State.
2. The competent authority issued a regulation
enforcing neutrality; and CRIMES AGAINST THE LAW OF NATIONS
3. The offender violates such regulation.
Art. 122 – Piracy & Mutiny on the High Seas
The violation will only arise if there is a proclamation or
regulation imposing neutrality and a Filipino citizen Elements of Piracy:
violates such declaration or regulation issued by a 1. The vessel is on the high seas or in the Philippine
competent authority. Therefore, absence of such waters;
declaration of neutrality, the crime of violation of 2. The offenders are not members of the complement
neutrality does not arise. or passengers of the vessel;
3. The offenders either:
Russia and Ukraine are in war. DND Secretary Año, in a) Attacked or seized the vessel; or
an interview, was asked what the PH stand is. He said b) Seize in whole or in part the cargo, the
PH should be neutral. Despite the same, W, active in c) equipment, or the personal belongings of the
social media, stated in his social media accounts that passengers or members of the complement.
he is siding with Ukraine, and kept attacking Russia.
Can W be held liable for Art. 119? Essence of piracy is akin to robbery. There must be
No. The statement of DND Secretary Año cannot be unlawful taking with intent to gain.
considered as a proclamation or regulation issued by
competent authority enforcing neutrality. It was not even Elements of Mutiny:
issued by Malacañang. 1. The vessel is either on the high seas or on
Philippine waters;
Article 120 – Correspondence with Hostile Country 2. The offenders are members of the complement or
passengers of the vessel – they are members of the
Elements: crew; and
1. That it is in time of war in which the Philippines is 3. The offenders raise a commotion or disturbance
involved. on the board the ship against the lawful command
2. That the offender makes correspondence with an of the captain or the commander of the ship.
enemy country or any territory occupied by enemy
troops. Essence of mutiny is like that of sedition – a protest against
3. That the correspondence is either — the lawful command of a superior authority.
(a) Prohibited by the Philippine Government; or
(b) Carried out in ciphers or conventional signs; Art. 123 – Qualified Piracy
or
(c) Containing notice or information which The following circumstances would qualify piracy:
might be useful to the enemy 1. Whenever the pirates have seized a vessel by firing
or boarding upon the said vessel;
Article 121 – Flight to Enemy Country o Considered if it is the vessel itself that is
seized. If only the cargoes/personal
Elements: belongings were seized even if there was
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved; boarding/firing, it is not qualified piracy
2. The offender owes allegiance to the Philippine because they did not seize the vessel.
Government; 2. Whenever the offenders have abandoned their
3. The offender attempts to flee to a foreign country; victims without means of saving themselves; and
and 3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder,
homicide, physical injuries, or rape.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 72 of 142
o The commission of these crimes are not

separate and distinct charges. They ELEMENTS:
cannot likewise be complexed with piracy. 1. The offender is a public officer or employee;
They are simply qualifying circumstances 2. He detains another; and
which are absorbed in piracy. 3. The said detention was without legal ground.
o Physical injuries is used in its generic
sense. The law does not state what kind. The offender must be a public elements vested with
Regardless if it is serious physical injuries, authority to effect arrest. Otherwise, the crime is
less serious physical injuries, or slight serious/slight illegal detention, and not arbitrary
physical injuries. detention. However, for both crimes, there must be a
manifest intention on the part of the offender to detain. It
Art. 123 would apply to mutiny as well. Therefore, the must be the principal purpose. Absent the same, it is some
aforementioned qualifying circumstances also apply to other crime.
mutiny. According to legal luminaries, the 2nd and 3rd
circumstances apply to mutiny. Manifest intention to detain: If his intention is to
incarcerate or restrain the liberty of the offended party.
Vessel was going to Cebu. Here comes a motorboat,
where there are 3 men with armalites. They fired and Non-legal grounds:
boarded the vessel. At gunpoint, one of the men, X, 1. Not based on a warrant of arrest
told the capain to stop the vessel. The 3 men (X, Y, and 2. Does not fall under circumstances of valid
Z) took the cash and jewelries of all those onboard. warrantless arrest
After taking the loot, they left. What crime did they 3. Person arrested/detained is suffering from violent
commit? insanity or any disease requiring confinement.
Piracy under Art. 122. First element: Vessel is in PH
waters. Second element: they were strangers to the vessel. Article 125 – Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons
Third element: they seized the personal belongings. Not to the Proper Judicial Authorities
qualified as even if they boarded the vessel, they did not
seize the vessel. ELEMENTS:
1. The offender here is a public officer or employees
Same problem. W had a valuable necklace. He did not vested with authority to effect arrest and detain a
want to give it to X. X hit W’s head with the butt of his person;
armalite a number of times. W fell, btu still refused. Y 2. That offender has detained a person for some legal
and Z joined X in hitting W with their guns. W still ground; and
refused. X grabbed it from his neck. And together with 3. The said public officer or employee fails to deliver
the other loot, they left. What crime did they commit? that person arrested to the proper judicial
Qualified piracy. This is because the act of piracy was authorities within:
attended by physical injuries on one of the passengers. a. 12 hours, for crimes punishable by light
penalties, or their equivalent;
TITLE TWO – CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL b. 18 hours, for crimes punishable by
LAWS OF THE STATE correctional penalties, or their equivalent;
or
Three kinds of arbitrary detention: c. 36 hours, for crimes punishable by
1. Arbitrary detention under Art. 124 - by detaining a afflictive or capital penalties, or their
person without legal ground; equivalent.
2. Arbitrary detention under Art. 125 - committed by
failure of the public officer to deliver the detained In this kind, at the outset, the arrest, even without warrant,
person to the proper judicial authorities within 12, is legal. It is because it is based on the grounds for valid
18 or 36 hours; and warrantless arrest. It becomes illegal if the public officer
3. Arbitrary detention under Art. 126 - by delaying fails to deliver the prisoner to the proper judicial
the release of prisoners despite the judicial or authorities within the period prescribed.
executive order to do so.
In the Rules of Court, any peace officer or private citizen,
Article 124 – Arbitrary Detention even without a warrant, may arrest another when:
Daverick Pacumio
Page 73 of 142
1. In his presence the person to be arrested has able to file the Information on Wednesday morning.
committed, is actually committing or is In their counter-affidavits, the police officers raised
attempting to commit an offense; two arguments: (1) Art. 125 does not apply to violations
2. When an offense has just been committed, there of SPLs like the Firearms Law; (2) the 12, 18, and 36
is probable cause based on personal knowledge of hours do not run when courts are closed. Are they
facts and circumstances that the person to be tenable?
arrested has committed the crime; or First argument is not. Art. 125 applies even to violations
3. When the person to be arrested is an escapee from of SPLs because it applies to the equivalent penalties for
the penal institution or the place where he is light, correctional, and afflictive or capital penalties.
temporarily detained or when he escaped while Moreover, the Firearms Law uses the same nomenclature
being transferred from one penal institution to of penalties as the RPC. Therefore, the RPC is applicable.
another.
Second argument is correct. The charge was filed within
The crime arises because the law mandates the peace the 36-hour limit provided for. The periods do not run
officer to deliver him to the proper judicial authorities during times when courts are closed. Thus, it did not run
within the period prescribed. on Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday because the courts were
closed then.
Deliver: filing the case.
Article 127 – Expulsion
Judicial authority: the proper court.
ELEMENTS:
Article 126 – Delaying Release 1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. The public officer or employee acts either:
The offender is a public officer or employee. There is a a. By expelling a person from the Philippines;
judicial or executive order for the release of a prisoner, b. By compelling a person to change his
however, despite the said order or even a petition for the residence
liberation of a prisoner, the said public officer or employee 3. Offender is not authorized to do so by law.
unduly delays the release of the said prisoner.
A judge compelled X to change his place of residence
Here, the crime arises if despite the judicial/executive because X was sentenced with destierro. Judge is not
order, the public officer failed to comply without justifiable liable as he is authorized by law.
ground.
Article 128 – Violation of Domicile
Police officers were patrolling the area at about 10:00.
They received a call stating that a man was roaming ELEMENTS:
around on board a bike for more than one (1) hour. 1. The offender is a public officer or employee;
The police officers went there. They found the 2. He was not authorized by a judicial order to enter
suspicious man. It is now past 11:00. The police the dwelling and/or make a search therein for
officers went near the man and asked what his papers or other effects;
business there was. The man X said he was just 3. He either:
exercising. As X was talking, his shirt was lifted and 1. Enters the dwelling of another against the
the police officers noticed a pistol on his waist. They will of the latter; or
asked for his license. When X handed the pistol, there 2. Searching for papers or other effects
was no license as it is a homemade gun. The police found therein without the consent of the
officers arrested X. the police officers prepared the owner; or
complaint for violating the Firearms Law. Sunday, the 3. After having surreptitiously entered the
following day, courts are closed. Monday was a dwelling, being discovered and asked to
holiday. Tuesday, there was a storm, therefore, the leave, he refuses to leave.
courts were closed. Wednesday, the storm subsided.
They brought X before the prosecutor for inquest. The The offender is a public officer acting under color of
Information was filed. Counsel of X filed a counter- authority. He is authorized by law to serve a search warrant
charge against the police officers for violating Art. 125 and conduct search, but at the time he conducted the
because from the arrest on Saturday, they were only search, he was not armed with a search warrant.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 74 of 142
In Geroche v. People, the offended party was fast asleep and

Three (3) ways of committing: was roused when the brgy. Chairman and 2 other men
1. By entering any dwelling against the will of barged inside his house. SC: Violation of domicile. The
the owner thereof; or entry was done against the will of the offended party. The
search was without asking for his consent. The entry was
Entry against the will of the owner means that done surreptitiously and they refused to leave when asked.
there must be an opposition or prohibition from Since the said act was committed at night time and the
entering. This can be express or implied. airgun seized which is not used in the commission of a
crime was not immediately returned, the penalty is
An example of implied opposition is when the qualified.
door of the house is closed, impliedly the owner
does not want anyone to enter his house even if he Articles 129 and 130 – Search Warrants Maliciously
is a public officer, unless such public officer is Obtained and Abuse in the Service of Those Legally
armed with search warrant. Obtained; and Searching Domicile Without Witnesses
An example of express prohibition is that there is Under Art. 128, it is violated because a police officer
a note “NO ENTRY”, “NO TRESPASSING, or upon conducted a search in the absence of a search warrant.
seeing the public officer, he immediately closed However, there are instances where the public officer
the door. violated the domicile even if he is armed with a search
warrant. These instances are provided under Art. 129 and
2. By searching papers or other effects found 130.
therein without the previous consent of the
owner; or I. By procuring a search warrant without just cause;
(Article 129)
The consent for the public officer to enter does not
equate to consent to be searched. Even if a public A search warrant is maliciously procured when any of the
officer or employee is allowed by the owner to elements for the issuance of a search warrant is absent.
enter his house, such permission to enter does not
mean his also permitted to conduct the search Requisites for the issuance of search warrant:
unless he is armed with a search warrant. 1. It is required that it is for one specific offense;
2. There must be probable cause;
If the police officer is not armed with search 3. The said probable cause was determined by the
warrant, he must first secure the consent of the issuing judge personally through searching
owner before conducting any search. If the police questions and answers in writing, under oath or
officer proceeded with the search without the affirmation as the testimony given by applicant of
consent of the owner, he becomes liable for the said search warrant or any witnesses he may
violation of domicile and anything seized by him produce;
is inadmissible for being the fruit of the poisonous 4. The applicant of the search warrant and his
tree. witnesses must testify only as to facts personally
known to them; and,
3. By refusing to leave the premises, after having 5. The said search warrant must specifically state the
surreptitiously entered the dwelling place to be searched and the things/persons to be
seized.
It is only upon his refusal when he was ordered to
leave that he becomes liable. If any of these is wanting, the search warrant is procured
without just cause.
The crime of violation of domicile is qualified if the said act
is committed in the following circumstances: II. By exceeding his authority; or, (Article 129)
1. Nighttime, or
2. If any papers or effects seized were not A search warrant is specifically worded because peace
immediately returned to the owner. officer implementing it are not allowed to exercise
discretion. Once they do, they exceeded their authority.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 75 of 142
III. By using unnecessary severity in executing a in evidence since they are the product of an unlawful
search warrant legally procured. (Article 129) search.
Being armed with a search warrant is not a license for the A search warrant has a lifetime only of 10 days from the
peace officer to commit an act of violence/damage in the date of issuance. After ten (10) days, it is expired. If you still
conduct of the search. use the same, it is akin to a search without a search
warrant. Unlike an arrest warrant where, hangga’t hindi
PO1 X has a new neighbor Y, who has a big house. It nahuhuli, effective.
has been 2 months, and PO1 X noticed that Y had
many visitors. PO1 X investigated what Y’s deal was. Y A peace officer may only break open any door if he is
was apparently a very successful contractor and refused entry. If despite announcing their purpose, they
engineer. PO1 X did not believe. He applied for a are refused entry, they may break open any door or
search warrant. He declared under oath that he window. However, they should perform the search orderly.
conducted surveillance and found that Y is engaged in Otherwise, they are liable for making unnecessary severity.
arms-smuggling and there were unlicensed firearms For the damage caused to the properties, there may be a
in Y’s house. The judge issued the search warrant separate charge for malicious mischief. For the injuries
against Y. armed with this, PO1 X and other men went done to any member of the household, there may be a
to Y’s house and served it. Y refused because he did separate charge for physical injuries. Any other crime
not even own a gun. Y called his counsel and allowed committed in the conduct of the search is a separate crime.
the police officers to conduct the search. The police
officers were unable to plant a piece of evidence and IV. Committed by conducting a search in the absence
recover anything because of Y’s presence. What case of the owner of the house, or any member of his
may Y file against PO1 X? family, or two witnesses residing in the same locality.
Violation of Art. 129. The search warrant was procured (Article 130)
without just cause. a search based on a search warrant
without just cause is akin to no search warrant. Police officers went to X’s house. The police officers
asked where X’s family was. X called his wife and
Perjury. PO1 X perjured himself by stating that he children. They were asked to sit at the dining table.
conducted surveillance and that Y is engaged in arms- Police officers conducted a search of X’s bedroom in
smuggling, and had unlicensed firearms in his house. the 2nd floor in the presence of 2 barangay tanods and
Perjury cannot be complexed with Art. 129 even if it recovered a loose firearm. Are the police officers
was a necessary means to commit Art. 129. liable? Is the loose firearm admissible in evidence?
Yes. If the owner of the house was present, he should be
A search warrant was issued against X for illegal the one who shall witness the conduct of the search. No
possession of loose firearms, commanding police need for any person. It is only in his absence that member
officers to search the house of X and to seize and of his family or the two witnesses residing in the same
confiscate 5 .45 calibers, 5 armalites, and bring the locality can witness the conduct of the search.
same before the court. X usually arrives at 11:00PM.
They waited for X because they wanted to serve the The loose firearm is inadmissible in evidence.
search warrant on X himself. The police officers
knocked and conducted their raid. The police officers Article 131 – Prohibition, Interruption, and
found: 5 .45 calibers, no armalites, but they found Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings
ammunitions. They seized the same, inventoried the
same, executed an affidavit of orderly search, and ELEMENTS:
arrested X. X filed a charge for violation of Art. 129, 1. The offender is a public officer or employee
alleging the police officers exceeded their authority. 2. The offender committed any of the following acts:
Are they liable? 1. By prohibiting or by interrupting,
Yes. A search warrant may be served only at day time. It dissolving, without legal ground, the
can only be served at any time of day at night if there was holding of a peaceful meeting, or by
an express statement therein that it can be so served. dissolving the same. (any peaceful
Therefore, it can only be served upon X at day time. Here, meeting);
the police officers served the search warrant at night time
(11:00PM). The firearms seized are, therefore, inadmissible
Daverick Pacumio
Page 76 of 142
2. By hindering any person from joining any and the mass was dissolved. Is X liable under Art. 133?
lawful association or from attending any Is he liable under Art. 132?
of its meetings; or,
3. By prohibiting or hindering any person Not liable under Art. 133. He is a public officer and the
from addressing, either alone or together act was done inside a place of religious worship but his act
with others, any petition to the is not an attack nor did it mock, ridicule the teachings of
authorities for the correction of abuses or the catholic faith. Nor did he cause damage to any object
redress of grievances. of veneration.
Article 132 – Interruption of Religious Worship Not liable under Art. 132. In Art. 132, the public officer
must be an outsider to the religious ceremony he
ELEMENTS: disturbed. Here, X is an insider and a participant to the
1. This is committed by an offender who is again a mass. In Art. 132, the intention to disturb is to prevent the
public officer or employee. offended party from exercising his freedom of religion.
2. Then there is a religious ceremony or
manifestations of any religion that is about to take What crime may be filed?
place or are going on. Other light threats. X’s intention was only to threaten the
3. That the offender prevents or disturbs the said police by placing his hand on his waist.
religious worship or religious ceremony.
TITLE THREE – CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER
If the act was done by violence, threats, the penalty is
qualified. The violence/threats are not distinct charges. Article 134 – Rebellion
Article 133 – Offending Religious Feelings ELEMENTS:

REBELLION is committed when the following elements
Elements are present:
1. Offender is any person; 1. Public uprising and taking up of arms;
2. The acts must be notoriously offensive to the 2. Purpose of the said uprising or movement is to
feelings of the faithful; and attain any of the following:
3. The offender performs the acts: 1. To remove from allegiance to the
a. In a place devoted to religious worship; or Philippine government or its laws:
b. During the celebration of any religious i. Territory of the PH or any part thereof
ceremony. ii. Any body of land, naval, or other armed
forces
The only felony where the offender may be any person. 2. To deprive the chief executive or Congress
wholly or partially of any of their powers
It is offensive to the feelings of the faithful where it pertains or prerogatives
to the teaching of a particular teaching of a religion and the
offender mocks, ridicules, or causes damage to the object the gravamen of rebellion is an armed public uprising
of veneration. which is simultaneous with the act of taking up of arms.
Police officer X heard Sunday mass. The priest was Article 134-A – Coup D’etat
now saying the homily. The priest also inserted
attacks on men in uniform saying that they were
responsible for the many extrajudicial killings in the This is committed when any member of the military or the
PH. Since police officer X was in uniform, everyone police, or those holding public office or employment, with
started to stare at him. X felt embarrassed. He went to or without civilian support, commits a swift attack,
the priest and told the priest to stop attacking men in accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat, or assault;
uniform. The priest ignored X and continuously directed against the duly constituted authorities of the
attacked men in uniform. X placed his hand on his republic of the Philippines, military camp or installations,
right waist where his pistol was located. He said, communication networks, or other facilities or utilities
“continue, o babarilin kita.” The priest left the altar needed for the exercise and continued possession of
powers carried out singly or simultaneously anywhere in
Daverick Pacumio
Page 77 of 142
the Philippines for the purpose seizing or diminishing RTC Makati. they were also charged before the military
State powers. court for Art. 96 of the Articles of War. Counsel for
Trillanes, et al. moved to dismiss the violation of Articles
The gravamen or the essence of coup d’état is a swift of War arguing that they are absorbed by coup d’etat. The
attack directed against the duly constituted authorities of motion was granted by Judge Pimentel. SC: Judge P is
the republic of the Philippines. wrong. The violation of Articles of War cannot be absorbed
by coup d’etat because the theory of absorption is allowed
Rebellion v. Coup D’etat only if the crimes are within the jurisdiction of the same
Rebellion Coup D’etat civilian court.
The gravamen is an armed The gravamen is a swift
or public uprising attack against the duly Ocampo v. Abando – a mass grave was found in Leyte,
constituted authorities of based on mass killings by NPA. 57 counts of murder were
the Republic of the filed against Ocampo, et al. at the time, Ocampo, et al.
Philippines were already charged for rebellion before RTC Makati.
It is a crime of the masses All that is required is that They move that the 57 counts of murder be absorbed by
– it requires a multitude of it be committed by any the rebellion charged. SC: Wrong. There was yet no
people, the participation member of the military, evidence presented in court that the killings were done to
of civilians the police, or any public promote the ideals of the rebels. Therefore, it cannot be
officer or employee; absorbed by rebellion. In order for theory of absorption to
participation of civilians is apply, the said act of committing common crimes must be
immaterial, they may or done in furtherance of rebellion/coup d’etat. Here, the
may not participate in the rebellion case is not even on trial. There was no evidence
said act to show that the killings were done to promote the ideals
The intent is always to The intent is to diminish of the NPA because trial has not even begun in the 57
overthrow the State powers counts of murder cases.
government and replace it
with the government of Justice Leonen concurred with the decision, but wrote a
the rebels separate opinion, opining that the mass killings cannot be
Can be committed only by Not necessarily committed absorbed by rebellion because these mass killings, which
means of force and by means of force and can be considered as genocide, a crime against humanity,
violence because the violence, it can be cannot be absorbed by rebellion because it cannot be the
public uprising must be committed by means of intent of the rebels to kill this number of people. Thus,
carried out by using intimidation, strategy, these acts against humanity like genocide cannot be
firearms strength absorbed by coup d’etat.
If in the commission of rebellion or coup d’etat, the 5:00AM, in Quezon, police officer X was walking to his
offender committed common crimes like murder, arson, police station. He passed by a store. Y was there, an
the commission of these crimes if done in furtherance of or alleged member of the NPA. Y saw X. Y followed X
incident to the same, are absorbed in rebellion or coup secretly. Before X was able to enter the station, Y
d’etat under the theory of absorption/political offense repeatedly stabbed X at the back. Crime charged:
doctrine. Murder. Y’s defense: proper charge is rebellion
because he is a member of the NPA and he did such
X was among the rebels. In doing so, he killed a act to foster the ideals of the NPA. What should be the
number of people, burned houses in furtherance of case filed?
the public uprising. Murder. Mere self-serving statements that the accused is
He shall only be charged with rebellion. The killing and a member of the NPA will not suffice. Mere self-serving
burning of houses are absorbed by rebellion because they statements that the killing was done to promote the ideals
are in furtherance to, and in connection with the crime of of the NPA will not suffice. Further evidence must be
rebellion. presented to prove that the killing was done to promote
the ideals.
In Gonzales v. Abaya, there was the Oakwood Mutiny
where Trillanes, et al. were charged with Art. 134-A before Article 139 – Sedition
Daverick Pacumio
Page 78 of 142
ELEMENTS: 2. He incites others to uprise for any of the purposes

1. That the offender rise; (1) publicly, and (2) of rebellion (incite others to the execution of any
tumultuously of the acts of rebellion)
2. That they employ force, intimidation or other 3. By means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
means outside of legal methods; emblems, banners or other representations
3. That the offenders employ any of those means to tending to the same end.
attain any of the following objectives:
1. To prevent the promulgation or execution Article 142 – Inciting to Sedition
of any law or the holding of any popular
election ELEMENTS:
2. To prevent the National Government, or The elements of inciting to sedition are:
any provincial or municipal government, 1. The offender is not a participant (does not take
or any public officer thereof from freely direct part) in the crime of sedition
exercising its or his functions, or prevents 2. He incites others to publicly uprise for any of the
the execution of any administrative order; purposes of sedition
3. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon 3. By means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
the person or property of any public emblems, cartoon, banners, or other
officer or employee; representation tending to the same end.
4. To commit, for any political or social end,
any act of hate or revenge against private Inciting to rebellion – act is done publicly.
persons or any social class; and Proposal to commit rebellion – act is done secretly.
5. To despoil, for any political or social end,
any person, municipality or province or A rebellion was on-going on different parts of the
the National Government of all its country. There were so many people participating.
property or any part thereof Two (2) truckloads of police officers arrived. The
police officers alighted and tried to arrest all
Just like rebellion, sedition requires public uprising. participants. One of the persons they were able to
However, unlike rebellion where the public uprising must arrest was X. X was frisked, bodily searched, and was
be accompanied by taking up of arms, in sedition, the found possessing a loose firearm. X was charged with:
public uprising need not be accompanied by taking up of (1) rebellion; and (2) illegal possession of loose
arms. It is sufficient that it be done outside lawful methods. firearms.
As to purpose, rebellion: always political; sedition: political Charges are wrong. X should only be charged with
or social. rebellion. The use of loose firearms are absorbed in
rebellion. Sec. 29 (2) of R.A. 10591 provides that If the use
There is such a crime conspiracy to commit rebellion, there of such firearm is incident to, in furtherance of, or in
is conspiracy to commit sedition, there is conspiracy to connection with rebellion or insurrection or attempted
commit coup d’etat. There is proposal to commit rebellion. coup d’etat, such use of loose firearm shall simply be
There is proposal to commit coup d’etat. But, there is no absorbed. Therefore, the proper charge would only be
proposal to commit sedition. Proposal to commit sedition rebellion. The use of the loose firearm shall be considered
is not a punishable act under the RPC, under any other as absorbed.
SPL. There is such a crime as inciting to rebellion, there is
such a crime as inciting to sedition, but there is no such There was a seditious rally. They were against the
crime was inciting to coup d’etat. promulgation of a new law. They asked for permit, but
the LGU refused. The said rally is, therefore, illegal.
Article 138 – Inciting to Rebellion The rally was carried out tumultuously. The police
officers arrested X. he was frisked, and he was found
ELEMENTS: possessing a loose firearm. He was charged: (1)
The elements of inciting to rebellion are as follows: sedition; and (2) illegal possession of loose firearms.
1. It is committed by any person who does not take Are the charges correct?
up arms or is not in open hostility with the Yes. Under Sec. 29 (3), if the use of the loose firearm is not
Government; inherent in the commission of the crime, such use shall
constitute as a separate and distinct charge. The use of a
loose firearm is not inherent in the crime of sedition, since
Daverick Pacumio
Page 79 of 142
the use of such loose firearm is not an element in the crime

of sedition. Sedition does not require a public uprising Art. 145 – Violation of Parliamentary immunity
coupled with taking up of arms. Only two (2) crimes absorb
the use of loose firearms, viz: (1) rebellion; and (2) TWO (2) WAYS OF COMMITTING:
attempted coup d’etat. Sedition does not absorb illegal
possession of loose firearms. 1. FIRST ACT: This one is punished by Prision
Mayor, committed by any person who by means of
Art. 143 – Acts tending to prevent the meeting of force, intimidation, fraud or threat, or any other
Congress means and by said means, he tried to prevent any
member of the Congress either from attending any
Elements: meeting of the Congress or its committees or
1) There is a projected or actual meeting of Congress subcommittees, constitutional commissions or
or any of its committees or subcommittees, committees or divisions thereof, from expressing
constitutional committees or divisions thereof, or his opinions or casting his vote.
of any provincial board or city or municipal • In this first act, the offender can be any
council or board; person for as long as he presents a
2) Offender, who may be any person, prevents such member of Congress from attending any
meeting by force or fraud. meeting of the Congress or its committees
or subcommittees, constitutional
Applies not only to Congress but also to its local commissions or committees or divisions
counterparts. thereof, from expressing his opinions or
casting his vote
Art. 144. Disturbance of proceedings 2. SECOND ACT: In the second act, this is only
Elements: committed by a public officer or employee who
1) There is a meeting of Congress or any of its shall, while the Congress is in regular or special
committees or subcommittees, constitutional session, arrest or search any member thereof,
commissions or committees or divisions thereof, except in case such member has committed a
or of any provincial board or city or municipal crime punishable under this Code by a penalty
council or board; higher than prision mayor.
2) Offender does any of the following acts: • The offender must be a public officer who
a) disturbs any of such meetings, or has effected arrest.
b) behaves while in the presence of any such • Such member of Congress who has been
bodies in such a manner as to interrupt its arrested should be charged with a penalty
proceedings or to impair the respect due not higher than prision mayor.
it. • If the penalty is higher than prision
mayor, the arrest can be effected any time.
• Reason is, according to the Constitution,
Disturbance of proceedings: Committed when there is a these members of Congress voted by the
meeting of Congress, Constitutional Commissions, and the people, elected by the people, cannot be
offender disturbs such proceedings and impairs the respect disturbed in the performance of their
due. functions for crimes which carry penalties
not higher than prision mayor.
In one occasion, the Senate was discussing the
budget. At the time, there was a Zoom committee Congressman X was charged with perjury. Under the
hearing on the budget of the PCOO. All the officers amendatory law for Art. 183, the penalty is prision
were there. The head of office X, while the Senators mayor. The public prosecutor filed an Information
were discussing, kept on roaming around. Senator against Congressman X. a warrant was issued. At the
Drilon received a note from the Sgt. At Arms noticing time Congressman X was in the plenary hall, police
a bottle of wine at X’s table. The committee hearing officers effected X’s arrest.
was dissolved. The police officers are liable for Art. 145. This is because
The person can be heard liable for disturbance of the penalty for perjury is only prision mayor, thus,
proceedings because he behaved in a manner to impair the
respect due.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 80 of 142
Congressman X cannot be arrested while Congress is in its SECOND ASSOCIATION. Associations totally or partially
regular or special session. organized for some purpose against public morals.
• Under the second kind, it could a crime
What if Congressman X physically abused his wife, punishable under the RPC or a violation of a
causing the death of the latter. Parricide is the crime special penal laws, for as long as it is against public
charged, a warrant was issued. X was arrested in the morals, that is, it is against public interest.
plenary hall.
Police officers are not liable because parricide is A, B, C, D, and E are former high-ranking officers of
punishable by reclusion perpetua or death. the AFP. They are retired now. ABCDE sent fillers to
about 30 former soldiers or members of the AFP. They
Prosec G: Penalty here is different from that provided in called for a meeting. The 30 men went to the place
the Constitution. In the Const., it is not higher than PC. In designated. ABCDE proposed to the 30 men that “We
the RPC, it is not higher than PM. So, if this question is cannot allow the BBM Administration. Let’s hold a
asked in Political Law, you answer PC. If it is asked in public uprising to overthrow the current
Criminal Law, you answer PM. administration.” The 30 men said yes. ABCDE told
them to convince as many people as they can in the
Art. 146 – Illegal Assembly public uprising. ABCDE said “This meeting is with the
blessing of the present officers of the AFP. We may not
FIRST MODE. Any meeting attended by armed persons have arms now, but they will provide us with arms.”
for the purpose of committing any of the crimes The former soldiers said yes. The said meeting was
punishable under the RPC. adjourned. On their way out, police officers arrested
The elements are as follows: A, B, C, D, and E and the 30 men. they were prosecuted
1. That there be a meeting, a gathering or group of for violation of Art. 146. Are they liable?
persons, whether in fixed place or moving Not liable under the first act. They were not armed.
2. The meeting is attended by armed persons; and
3. The purpose of the meeting is to commit any of Liable under the second act. All the 30 men were incited
the crimes punishable under the Code and induced to commit rebellion. In fact, they agreed and
said they will be asking persons to participate. Therefore,
Here, it is necessary that the meeting is attended by armed they can be held liable for illegal assembly under the
persons. The law does not mean that all are armed. It is second act.
sufficient that at least one of them is. Arms are not limited
to guns – it is anything that can cause injury. A, B, and C gathered 10 friends. They met in a secured
place. Their objective: commit robbery. The 10 men
Moreover, any crime under the RPC. agreed. Their target: a bank in QC. After they have
come up with the agreement, the police officer
SECOND MODE. Any meeting in which the audience, learned. ABC and the 10 friends were arrested. Are
whether armed or not, is incited to the commission of the they liable of any crime?
crime of treason, rebellion or insurrection, sedition or No. Not liable for Art. 146, first act because they are not
assault upon a person in authority or his agents. armed. Moreso in Art. 146, second act because their
purpose is for robbery. What they did is conspiracy to
No requirement that the attendees are armed. What is commit robbery and conspiracy to commit robbery is not
required is that these persons in attendance must be a crime by itself. There must be an overt act on their part.
incited to commit treason, rebellion or insurrection,
sedition, or assault upon a person in authority. Same problem. ABC asked if the 10 men have arms.
Art. 147 – Illegal Association 5/10 were armed with fan knives. ABC were also asked,
and they showed their home-made caliber .38
FIRST ASSOCIATION. Associations totally or partially revolver. Thereafter, they agreed to commit bank
organized for the purpose of committing any of the crimes robbery. They were arrested.
punishable under the RPC. Liable for illegal assembly under the first act of Art. 146
• Under the first kind, it is exclusive to crimes because this time, they were armed.
punishable under the RPC.
Art. 148 – Direct Assault
Daverick Pacumio
Page 81 of 142
FIRST. Without public uprising, by employing force or o Councilman

intimidation for the attainment of any of the purposes o Police Officers
enumerated defining the crimes of rebellion and sedition. o Any persons coming to the aid of
a person in authority
SECOND. Without public uprising, by attacking, by
employing force, or by seriously intimidation or seriously 3. That at the time of the assault, the person in
resisting any person in authority or any of his agents, while authority or the agent is engaged in the
in the performance of official duties, or on the occasion of performance of his official functions or the assault
such performance. was on the occasion of such performance of official
function;
Public uprising distinguishes the first and second act.
2 Situations:
ABC wanted to go against a new law to be a. PIA/APIA is actually performing his
promulgated. They were using force and violence. duty/function at the time of the assault.
There was no public uprising. Motive is not necessary.
Crime committed: Direct assault under the first act. b. PIA/APIA is not engaged in the actual
performance of his duty, in which case,
Elements of the second form of direct assault: the motive of the offender is necessary – If
1. The offender makes an attack, employs force, the latter attacked because of his past
makes a serious intimidation or serious resistance; performance, it is direct assault. If the
attack is based on personal reason, it is
Force vs. Person in Authority (PIA): A slight act any other crime (murder, etc.) Basis: “On
of laying hands consummates direct assault. It is the occasion of such performance…” The
even qualified. SC held that this phrase means that at the
time of the assault, the PIA or APIA is not
Force vs. Agent of Person in Authority (APIA): in the performance of his duty but the
The force must be serious or grave in nature. reason of the assault is his past
performance of his duty.
2. That the person assaulted is either a person in
authority or an agent of a person in authority 4. The offender knows him to be a public authority
or an agent of a person in authority
PIA (Art. 152)
• Any person directly vested with Because the essence of the crime is the defiance of
jurisdiction whether as an individual or as a lawful authority.
a member of some governmental
corporation, board, or commission 5. There is no public uprising.
• A barangay captain or chairman
• Teachers, Professors, Persons charged Kailangan ba alam ng tao lahat ng nasa Art. 152? No –
with the supervision of public or duly the fact that the person is performing his functions, the
recognized private schools, colleges, and offender should give him respect. He should know that he
universities, are also deemed to be is a PIA/APIA.
persons in authority
• Lawyers in the actual performance of their You always complex direct assault with the resulting
official functions felony. However, if the resulting felony is a light felony like
slight physical injuries, you cannot complex it (see Art. 48).
APIA (Art. 152, par. 2) It is simply absorbed.
• Any person who, by direct provision of the
law, by election, or by appointment make Qualifying circumstances:
competent authorities charged with the 1. When the assault is done with the use of a weapon
maintenance of public order and the 2. When the said offender is a public officer or
protection and security of life and employee
property such as: 3. When the offender lays hands upon a person in
authority.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 82 of 142
alighted and pushed MMDA officer and fell on the

Nos. 1 and 2 apply regardless of who the victim is, i.e., ground. X then kicked him a number of times on his
whether the victim is a PIA/APIA. However, no. 3 applies chest. A pedestrian helped MMDA. X punched the
only if the victim is a PIA. pedestrian. MMDA suffered serious physical injuries.
Pedestrian suffered slight physical injuries.
Mayor was inside his office. The Mayor was signing MMDA – Direct assault with serious physical injuries.
documents. Here comes X, whose son was sick. He MMDA is APIA. He was assaulted while he was in the
wanted help from the Mayor. X went inside the performance of his functions. Laying of hands will not
Mayor’s room. When the Mayor asked X, “Anong qualify since MMDA is mere APIA.
problema?” X stood up and repeatedly stabbed the
Mayor. The Mayor survived despite the fatal wounds. Pedestrian – indirect assault. When pedestrian came to
What crime was committed? the aid of MMDA, a APIA, the assault is indirect assault
Qualified direct assault with frustrated murder. under Art. 149.
Mayor was a PIA in the actual performance of his duty.
Regardless of X’s motive. The killing is qualified by If the injuries inflicted on APIA is not serious in nature, it
treachery since the stabbing was planned. Further, it is will only fall on violation of Art. 151 or simple disobedience.
qualified because of the weapon.
Art. 151 – Resistance and Serious Disobedience
Mayor decided to go home first before doing work.
When they turned right, there was a motorcycle in Under Art. 151, there are two acts: (1) resistance and serious
front of him manned by X. As a result, the driver had disobedience, and (2) simple disobedience.
to stop. At the exact moment, there was another
motorcycle, manned by Y, who repeatedly fired at the Elements:
Mayor. X and Y were arrested. They turned out to be In resistance and serious disobedience, (1) a person in
the brother of Z, the former ES of the Mayor, whom authority or an agent of a person in authority is engaged in
the latter dismissed and is now facing a case before the performance of his function or gives a lawful order. (2)
Sandiganbayan. X and Y took revenge. What crime/s And the offender seriously, resists or disobeys said order.
committed? (3) BUT, the said resistance or said disobedience does not
Qualified direct assault with murder. The motive on amount to direct assault, indirect assault, or disobedience
the part of X and Y is necessary since the Mayor was to summons.
attacked when he was not in the performance of his duty.
Qualified direct assault since arms were used. Elements of resistance and serious disobedience:
1. A person in authority or his agent
Promulgation of judgement. Judgement on X was to 1. is engaged in the performance of official
be promulgated. After the court interpreter read the duty; or
decision, the moment X heard “GUILTY,” X cried out 2. gives a lawful order to the offender.
loud and punched the Judge on the face. A lawyer 2. Offender resists or seriously disobeys such person
came to his aid and was likewise attacked by X. Judge in authority or his agent.
was severely injured. The lawyer who came to his aid 3. That such resistance or disobedience will not
sustained slight physical injuries. What crime/s? amount to:
As regards the Judge – qualified direct assault with 1. Direct assault (Art. 148)
serious physical injuries. Judge is PIA. Judge suffered 2. Indirect assault (Art. 149); or
serious physical injuries. Qualified because of X’s laying of 3. Disobedience to summons issued by
hands. Congress (Art. 150)
As regards lawyer – direct assault only. Lawyer Elements of simple disobedience:

deemed an agent of a person in authority in helping the 1. A person in authority or his agent
judge. 1. is engaged in the performance of official
duty; or
X was driving his car. He was stopped by MMDA for 2. gives a lawful order to the offender.
violating traffic rules. He could have evaded MMDA, 2. Offender disobeys such agent of a person in
but the latter placed himself in the middle of the road. authority.
MMDA knocked on X’s car. Instead of opening, X 3. Such disobedience is not of a serious nature.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 83 of 142
• If a firearm is discharged and the intent is to kill, but

Resistance and Serious Simple Disobedience the victim was not hit, it is attempted murder or
Disobedience homicide.
The one giving the order is The one giving the order is • If the intent is to threaten another, it is illegal
either a person in only an agent of a person discharge of firearms under Art. 254.
authority or an agent of a in authority
person in authority SECOND, by instigating taking an active part in any
Resistance must be serious It is not required to be charivari or other disorderly meeting offensive to another
in nature serious in nature or prejudicial to public tranquility.
Mallari v. People – Mallari slapped the police officer and THIRD, by causing disturbance of the public peace while
kicked the legs of police officer. Police officer filed a case wandering about at night or while engaged in any other
of direct assault against Mallari. During the trial, he was nocturnal amusement.
asked of what was done, the police officer testified that • Your neighbor who keeps singing videoke/karaoke
“Hindi naman masakit.” SC: Not direct assault. If the who are singing until the wee hours of the
victim is a APIA, the assault must be serious. Otherwise, it morning may be held liable for alarms and
is only Art. 151 – resistance and serious disobedience. scandals under this act. But in reality, pinag-
papasensyahan nalang.
Sydeco v. People – Sydeco objected to a search of his van.
Sabi niya “Plain view lang.” Sydeco was forcibly taken out. FOURTH, by causing disturbance or scandal in public
He was charged with Art. 151. SC: Sydeco is acquitted. All places whether intoxicated or not, provided Art. 153 is not
the elements are absent. First, the police officers, when he violated.
was subjected to a body search, are not performing their
functions and not giving lawful orders. A person can only Art. 153, Art. 151 – Alarms and
be subjected to a search if they are committing an overt act first act Scandals, fourth act
of committing a crime. Here, Sydeco’s act of swerving is There was a deliberate There was no intent. It just
not a criminal act. Second, Sydeco’s insistence on plain intent of the offender to so happened that he
view is a mere exercise of his right to privacy. It cannot be cause serious disturbance caused a disturbance.
serious disobedience but a mere exercise of his right to in public place.
privacy.
Art. 156 – Delivering Prisoners from Jail
Art. 155 – Alarms and Scandals
ELEMENTS:
In a recent case, X was nagwawala. He was challenging The elements of delivering prisoners from jail are:
everyone to a fight. He was breaking all the plants of 1. That there is a person confined in jail or any other penal
the plantitos and plantitas. Police arrived. He entered institution
inside the house. Police officers followed him. Turned • Can be any prisoner, whether a convict or a
out X was high on drugs. X was arrested and frisked. detainee.
They found shabu. What crime/s? 2. That the offender removes him from jail or assist in his
Alarms and scandals under the 4th act. escape from his escape in such penal institution.
• Offender can either be a private individual, a
Illegal possession of drugs. The search was pursuant to public officer, an inmate, a stranger, provided:
an in flagrante delicto arrest (since X was committing he is not the custodian of the prisoner he
alarms and scandals) thus, it is valid. removed. If he is the custodian, the crime is
Art. 223 or 224 (Infidelity in the custody of
PUNISHABLE ACTS: prisoners, or infidelity through negligence,
respectively).
FIRST, by discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or
other explosives within any town or public place calculated Penalty is qualified if there is violence, intimidation, or
to cause alarm and danger. bribery.
• If a firearm is discharged and the intent is to disturb
public peace, it is alarms and scandals. Art. 157 – Evasion of Service of Sentence
Daverick Pacumio
Page 84 of 142
Christmas outside jail. Y said he will try his best to

Here, (1) the offender is a prisoner convicted by final deliver him. December 24, Y visited X. after the visit,
judgment. (2) He must be serving his sentence which Y talked with the custodian of X if it is possible for X
involves deprivation of liberty. (3) And he evades service of to get out. The custodian said no. Y offered the
sentence by escaping during the term of his sentence. The custodian P100,000. The custodian agreed. Problem
offender becomes liable of evasion of service of sentence. is, there is a guard outside. Y also talked to the guard
and offered the guard P100,000. X was able to leave
Offender: prisoner convicted of final judgement and is the penal institution. What crimes?
serving penalty which involves deprivation of liberty. X – evasion of service of sentence under Art. 157.
Therefore, a mere detention prisoner cannot commit Art. Qualified because it was done with connivance with an
157. employee of an institution (the guard).
Deprivation of liberty: Destierro is included. Destierro also Y – delivering prisoners from jail. He is not the
involves deprivation of liberty. The moment he enters the custodian. Corruption of public official by giving
place, he becomes liable for evasion under Art. 157. P100,000 under circumstances for which the custodian will
be liable for direct/indirect bribery.
Qualifying circumstances:
1. When the said escape is done by means of Custodian – infidelity in the custody of prisoners
unlawful entry under Art. 223. The prisoner escaped because he
2. When the said escape is done by means of consented to such escape after receiving P100,000. Direct
breaking any wall, roof, floor, door or window bribery under Art. 210, 1st act because he performs an act
3. When the said escape is done by using picklocks, constituting a crime (infidelity in the custody of prisoners)
false keys, disguise, deceit, violence, or in connection with his official function, in consideration of
intimidation a bribe.
4. When the said escape is done in connivance with
an inmate or employee of the penal institution Guard – Delivering prisoners from jail under Art. 156.
He is not the custodian, but he is a public officer who
Art. 158 – Evasion of Service of Sentence in times of committed direct bribery in accepting the crime. It is a
Calamity qualifying aggravating circumstance only in Art. 156.
ELEMENTS: There was an earthquake. Because of this, the

1. That the offender is a prisoner convicted by final prisoners were allowed to leave. Among those, was X,
judgment a detention prisoner. 2 days after, the President
2. That he is serving his sentence in a penal ordered all prisoners who left to return within 48
institution – hence destierro is not included. hours. X went into hiding. A month after, X was
3. That there is a disorder resulting from – arrested. What is the effect of X’s failure to return?
1. Conflagration X shall be charged with evasion of service of sentence
2. Earthquake under Art. 158 because he left in times of calamity but
3. Explosion failed to return within 48 hours after the declaraton that
4. Similar catastrophe the earthquake has passed. Penalty: 1/5 of the remainder of
5. Mutiny in which he has not participated. his sentence, in no case exceeding 6 months. X cannot also
4. That the offender evades the service of his be given an indeterminate sentence, as he was an escapee.
sentence by leaving the penal institution where he
is confined, on the occasion of such disorder or X, after hearing such announcement, immediately
during the mutiny. returned within 48 hours. Effect?
5. That the offender fails to give himself up to the 1/5 deduction on the term of his sentence.
authorities within 48 hours following the issuance
of a proclamation by the Chief Executive X did not leave, but stayed. 2/5 deduction based on the
announcing the passing away of such calamity term of his sentence.
X is a prisoner convicted by final judgement. every This is special time allowance for loyalty (STAL) under
day, he is visited by a friend Y. one time, it was nearing Art. 98. Note: STAL applies not only to convicted
Christmas, X told Y that he was hoping to spend prisoners, but also to detained prisoners.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 85 of 142
II. Forging the signature of the President.

X was among the prisoners at Bilibid. There were 2 III. Forging the stamp of the President.
factions. Green gang and blue gang. X is a member of
blue gang. There was a riot among green gang and Art. 162 – Using Forged Signature or Counterfeit Seal
blue gang. X did not participate. Instead, X took it as or Stamp
an opportunity for him to leave since all the prison
guards were busy trying to stop the riot. Same ELEMENTS:
afternoon, the Director of Prisons went on a presscon, 1. That the Great Seal of the Republic was
announcing the passing of the riot. X is given 48 hours counterfeited or the signature or stamp of the
to return. X returned within 48 hours. Is X liable for Chief Executive was forged by another person.
any crime? What is the effect of X’s return? 2. That the offender knew of the counterfeiting or
X is liable for evasion of service of sentence under Art. forgery.
157. Not 158 because a riot is not a mutiny. A riot is not a 3. That he used the counterfeit seal or forged
catastrophe nor a calamity because it is a disturbance signature or stamp.
among inmates. A mutiny is an act of protest vs. the lawful
command of a superior authority (The Director of Prisons). X is applying for a job in government. There must be
a recommendation from a politician. To ensure he
Since Art. 157 applies, X’s return does not mean a credit. will be hired, he attached a recommendation coming
from the President. It was on a counterfeited
Art. 159 – Evasion By Violation of Conditional Pardon letterhead of Malacañang, with Pres. Duterte’s
falsified signature. Y was the one who falsified. X
ELEMENTS: attached it to his application. Next to his CV was a
1. The offender was a convict. recommendation from the President. The act was
2. He was granted a conditional pardon by the Chief discovered by the agency. What crime?
Executive/President. Y – Art. 161 because he was the one who forged the
3. He violated any of the terms of the said pardon. signature of President.
BAR Q: Is Art. 159 a substantive offense? X – Art. 162 for using the forged signature.
QUALIFY.
Art. 163 – Making, Importing and Uttering False Coins
If the penalty remitted by the grant of conditional pardon
does not exceed 6 years, for having violated the Acts punished:
conditions of his pardon, a new penalty of prision
correccional shall be imposed on him. Therefore, in this Counterfeiting – There is counterfeiting of coins when
case, Art. 159 is a substantive offense. the offender copies or imitates the peculiar design of a
genuine or authentic coin in order to produce a spurious
If the penalty remitted by the grant of conditional pardon one out of it.
exceeds or is more than 6 years, even if he violated the • Any coin which is genuine may be subject of
terms of his pardon, no new penalty shall be imposed. counterfeiting. It may be in present circulation
Rather, he will be required to serve only the remainder of or an old coin no longer in circulation,
the sentence. In that case, Art. 159 is not a substantive provided it is genuine. Because what is enalized
offense because there is no new penalty imposed. is the imitation of the coin.
TITLE FOUR – CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST Importing false coins – It is committed when the
offender brings into Philippine ports any false or
Art. 161 – Counterfeiting the Great Seal of the counterfeited coins.
Government of the Philippine Islands, Forging the
Signature or Stamp of the Chief Executive Uttering of false coins - There is uttering when the
offender circulates, passes from one person to another,
ACTS PUNISHED: gives from one person to another these counterfeited
coins.
I. Forging the Great Seal of the Government of the
Philippines. Art. 164 – Mutilation of Coins
Daverick Pacumio
Page 86 of 142
Under Art.164, there is mutilation of coins when the X went to a public market having P2,000. After an
offender scratches off or scrapes a part of the metal of hour, she flagged down a tricycle. The P2,000 were
content of the coin, and he gathers the metal dust that he consumed. She gave P40 (Tig-P10) to the tricycle
has taken off from the metal content of the said coin. driver. Sabi ni trike driver, peke daw. Sabi ni X, these
• It is necessary that the coin be one which is in were the change she received from the market. X was
present circulation – one which is in legal arrested for possession of counterfeited P10 coins
tender. Thus, if the coin mutilated is an old under Art. 165. Is X liable?
coin no longer in circulation, or a foreign No. While the first and second elements are present, the
currency coin, mutilation will not apply. This is third element of possession is absent because it requires
because the public will not be deceived because that the offender knows that the thing in his possession is
these coins are not being used in present counterfeited. Here, X did not know that the coins were
circulation. counterfeited.
May Tiktok, sinisindihan yung P20.00 bill. What Art. 169 – How Forgery is Committed
crime?
Not mutilation. The crime is violation of PD 247 – the act TWO WAYS OF COMMITTING FORGERY:
of defacing or mutilating even peso bills issued by the 1.) by giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument
BSP. Since it is a special law, criminal intent is immaterial. payable to bearer or to order mentioned therein, the
appearance of a true and genuine document.
Art. 165 – Selling of False or Mutilated Coins, Without
Connivance 2) By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering by
any means the figures, letters, words, or sign contained
Punishable acts: therein
1. Possession of coin, counterfeited or mutilated by
another person, with intent to utter the same, Arts. 170, 171, and 172 – Falsification
knowing that it is false or mutilated.
Elements: Types of documents that may be falsified:
1. Possession (includes constructive possession) 1. PUBLIC DOCUMENT – prepared and executed
2. With intent to utter, and by a notary public or a competent public official
3. Knowledge that the coin is false or mutilated with the solemnities required by law.
2. Actually uttering such false or mutilated coin, 2. OFFICIAL DOCUMENT – a document issued by
knowing the same to be false or mutilated. a public official in the exercise of his official
Elements: functions.
a. Actually uttering, and 3. COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT – any document
b. Knowledge defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce
or any other mercantile law.
Art. 168 – Illegal Possession and Use of False Treasury 4. PRIVATE DOCUMENT – a document, a deed or
or Bank Notes and Other Instruments of Credit instrument executed by a private individual
without the intervention of the notary public or
Elements: any competent public official by which document
1. Any treasury or bank note or certificate or other some disposition or agreement is proved,
obligation and security payable to bearer, or any evidenced or set forth.
instrument payable to order or other document of
credit not payable to bearer is forged or falsified by If the document falsified is a PUBLIC, OFFICIAL, or
another person; COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT, there is no need to prove
2. Offender knows that any of the said instruments is intent on the part the offender to falsify or intent to cause
forged or falsified; and damage.
3. He either –
a) uses any of such forged or falsified On the other hand, if the document falsified is a private
instruments; or document, there must be evidence that there was damage
b) possesses with intent to use any of such caused to a private offended party or a third person, or at
forged or falsified instruments least, intent to cause damage. Without such damage or
Daverick Pacumio
Page 87 of 142
intent to cause damage, there is no falsification of private his DTRs. He was charged for
document. Art. 171 under the first act and
was liable as such because he
Liwanag v. People – Police officer Liwanag issued a imitated the signature of his
temporary operator’s permit and made an untruthful superiors by making it appear
statements in a narration of facts because he entered that his superiors verified his
therein his son’s name, and not his own name. He also DTRs. Moreover, the SC held her
made a false entry pertaining to the birth date of his son, liable under the 4th act of
i.e., he said the son was born in 1974 but in truth and in falsification because she made
fact, the son was born in 1977, still underage then. He also untruthful statements when she
altered the batch number. Because of these, he was made it appear that she regularly
charged with falsification. In the SC, he admitted all reported for work when she did
elements of falsification are present, but argued he had no not actually show up for work.
intent to injure or cause damage to another person. SC: It For making falsities on her
will not lie. In case of falsification of public or official DTRs, the SC said she is
document, the presence of intent to injure or damage a criminally liable for making
third person is not necessary. The reason is, what is being untruthful statements in a
punished in case of falsification of public, official, or narration of facts.
commercial document is the violation of the public faith
and the destruction of the truth solemnly proclaimed by 2. Causing it to appear that persons have
the document. Therefore, intent to injure or damage is participated in any act or proceeding
immaterial in falsification of public, official, or commercial when they did not in fact so participate.
document.
3. Attributing to persons who have
Art. 171 – Falsification by a Public Officer, Employee, participated in an act or proceeding
Notary Public, or Ecclesiastical Minister statements other than those in fact made
by them
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer, employee, notary 4. Making untruthful statements in a
public, or an ecclesiastical minister. narration of facts
2. He takes advantage of his official position – if he o It is necessary that the offender is
prepares or intervenes in the document he falsifies required by law to state the truth
or is in custody of the document falsified. If the in the document but he did not.
public officer did not take advantage, he is still o In Gallos v. People, there was an
liable under Art. 172 because he acted in a private employee who was hired by the
capacity. Mayor. In his SALN, it was asked
3. That the said offender falsifies a document by if he was in any way related to
committing any of the following modes stated anyone in government within the
therein: 4th civil degree of consanguinity.
1. By counterfeiting or imitating any Gallos said ‘No.’ But Gallos was
handwriting, signature or rubric. related to the Mayor as they were
o Counterfeiting is the act of first cousins. Hence, he is liable
imitating a handwriting, for falsification under the 4th act.
signature, or rubric. It is not the In the same case, in one of the
same as simulating because in SALNs, Gallos also left the boxes
counterfeiting, there is an on the query blank. Is he liable?
original handwriting, etc. and SC: Still yes. One is guilty of
the offender copies the same. In falsification in the
simulating, the offender created accomplishment of an
one out of imagination. information sheet if he withholds
o In Torres v. People, intelligence material facts which would affect
officer Torres took advantage of his appointment to government
his official position by falsifying service. By withholding his
Daverick Pacumio
Page 88 of 142
relation to the Mayor, Gallos 8. Intercalating any instrument or note

committed falsification because relative to the issuance thereof in a
his disclosure could have affected protocol, registry, or official book.
his employment or appointment
to government service. 4. In case the offender is an ecclesiastical minister,
o In Constantino v. People, the the act of falsification is committed with respect to
testator prepared a will. During any record or document of such character that the
the signing, the fourth witness, falsification may affect the civil status of persons.
Dr. Asuncion, was absent. He did
not sign the joint Art. 172 – Falsification by Private Individuals and Use
acknowledgement. Since he did of Falsified Documents
not sign the same, the relative of
the testator asked Dr. Asuncion THREE PUNISHABLE ACTS
to sign the joint
acknowledgement after the I. Falsification of a public, official, or commercial
notarization of the will. document by a private individual
Constantino was charged with ELEMENTS:
falsification under the 2nd act. SC: 1. Offender is a private person or a public officer
Acquitted Atty. Constantino. acting in his private capacity.
When Atty. Constantino 2. Offender commits any act of falsification under
notarized it without the presence Article 171.
of Dr. Asuncion, he was telling 3. It must be done either in a public, official, or
the truth. It was, in fact, Dr. commercial document.
Asuncion who made it appear
that he participated in the joint II. Falsification of private document by any person
acknowledgement despite not ELEMENTS:
being present during the 1. The document falsified is a private one.
notarization and in the signing, 2. There is damage or intent to cause damage
by belatedly signing the joint 3. He commits any of the act of falsification under
acknowledgement after it was Article 171 except paragraph 7 (which can be
notarized. However, Atty. committed only by a public officer).
Constantino may be held
administratively liable for The document falsified is a PRIVATE DOCUMENT. The
negligence for not erasing Dr. offender can be any person. He can be a public officer or
Asuncion’s name when he was employee or he can be a private individual.
not present at the time of the
notarization. III. Use of falsified document
ELEMENTS:
5. Altering true dates
a) In introducing in a judicial proceeding –
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in Elements:
a genuine document which changes its 1. Offender knew that the document was falsified by
meaning another person;
2. The falsified document is embraced in Articles 171
7. Issuing in authenticated form a document or 172 (1 or 2);
purporting to be a copy of any original 3. He introduced said document in evidence in a
document when no such original exists or judicial proceeding
including in such a copy a statement
contrary to or different from that of the b) In use in any other transaction –
genuine original – can be committed only Elements:
by a public officer. 1. Offender knew that a document was falsified by
another person;
Daverick Pacumio
Page 89 of 142
2. The false document is embraced in Articles 171 or in an Information that alleges falsification of public
172 (1 or 2); document. Is the judge correct?
3. He used such document (not in judicial Judge is very wrong. You cannot convict a person for use
proceedings) of falsified document in an information which alleges
4. The use caused damaged to another or at least falsification of public document because they have very
used with intent to cause damage different elements. Use of falsified document is not
necessarily included in falsification of public document.
If the said document is used in any other official
transaction outside judicial proceedings, it is necessary to Same problem. It was proven, X was not the falsifier.
prove damage. He was acquitted. Can the State still prosecute X for
use of falsified document?
If the said falsified document is used in a judicial Yes. Double jeopardy does not lie because the two felonies
proceeding, there is no need to prove damage. have different elements.
X had a falsified cash voucher and was able to collect X was arrested by police in an entrapment operation
from the client of his company. He did not remit said outside NBI. He was selling fake forms of community
collection. He was charged with estafa thru tax certificates or cedulas. In the course thereof, X was
falsification of commercial document. Is the charge caught in flagrante delicto selling fake forms. As a
correct? result, he was charged with falsification of public
No. In Batulanon v. People, the SC held that a cash voucher document. Correct?
is not a commercial document – it is a private document Wrong. The writing must be a document in the legal sense
because it is not a document defined and regulated by the – one which establishes rights and/or extinguishing an
Code of Commerce or any other mercantile law. The crime obligation or evidence facts stated therein. Here, fake
committed depends. If estafa can be committed without forms are mere forms. Fi-fill-upan palang. They do not
falsifying the private document, the proper charge is only create rights and/or extinguish obligations.
estafa because the falsification of the private document is
merely incidental. If estafa cannot be committed without Proper charge: Violation of Art. 176 – possession of
falsifying a private document, the proper charge is instruments which may cause falsification.
falsification of private document because estafa is a mere
consequence. Nevertheless, the crime can never be estafa Art. 174 – False medical certificates, False Certificates
through falsification of private document because there is of Merit of Service, etc.
no such crime as estafa thru falsification of private
document. Note: Estafa may be complexed with Punishable acts:
falsification of public, official, and/or commercial 1. Issuance of a false certificate by a physician or
document. surgeon in connection with the practice of his
profession
X was applying for a license. In order for the same to
be applied, he gave a letter-recommendation from the Note: The crime is False Medical Certificate by a
DENR. DENR Secretary’s signature was there. The physician.
agency noticed that it is a counterfeited signature.
Because of this, they filed against X for use of falsified 2. Issuance of a false certificate of merit or service,
document. Is the charge correct? good conduct or similar circumstances by a public
No. The proper charge is falsification of public document. officer;
Not use because according to the Rules on Evidence, a
person in possession of a falsified document is deemed to Note: The crime is False Certificate of Merit or
be the falsifier thereof. Therefore, since X was in possession Service by a public officer.
of the same, the law presumes that he is the one who
falsified the said document. 3. Falsification by a private person of any certificate
falling within 1 and 2.
Same problem. During the hearing, X was able to
prove he was not the one who falsified, but his friend. Note: The crime is False Medical Certificate or
The judge convicted him of use of falsified document False Certificate of Merit or Service by a private
individual.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 90 of 142
X and Y’s civil wedding. The guests as well as X and Y

WHO CAN BE HELD LIABLE UNDER ART 174: were made to affix their signature on the certificate of
1. a PHYSICIAN OR SURGEON who issues a false marriage. However, the Executive Assistant said that
medical certificate in the practice of his he cannot give the couple a copy yet of the certificate
profession. of marriage, he will just give it on Monday after the
2. a PUBLIC OFFICER who issues a false certificate Mayor has signed it. In the certificate of marriage
of merit, service or good conduct, moral character, handed to the couple, affixed above the printed
etc. mayor solemnizing officer was the signature of the
3. ANY PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL who makes or mayor. What crime/s were committed by the
falsifies a medical certificate or certificate of merit Executive Assistant and the Mayor?
or service or good conduct. A: The executive assistant is liable for the crime of
usurpation of official function under Article 177. He
The person using the same, knowing that these certificates performed an act pertaining to a person in authority – the
were falsified can be held liable under Art. 175 – using false mayor. Under the Local Government Code, only the Mayor
certificate. can solemnize the marriage and the Mayor cannot delegate
it to a mere executive assistant or to any other person.
Art. 177 – Usurpation of Authority or Official Therefore, when the said executive assistant represented
Functions that he can perform the said act, and then thereafter he
indeed solemnized the marriage between X and Y, he
ACTS PUNISHED: performs an act pertaining to a person in authority.
Therefore, he is liable under Art.177.
1. Usurpation of authority – the offender falsely
represents himself to be an officer or agent or The executive assistant is also liable for falsification of
representative of any department of the Philippine public document. He is liable for falsification of public
government or of a foreign government. document by causing it to appear that the Mayor
participated in the said ceremony, when in truth and in
Mere false representation that he is an agent, or officer of fact he was the one who participated. He caused the mayor
the Philippine government or of a foreign government, will to sign the certificate of marriage. Therefore, he is also
suffice. There is no need to perform an act. All that is liable for falsification of public document.
requires is false representation.
The Mayor is liable for falsification of public document
2. Usurpation of official function – the offender under the 4th act – making untruthful statements in a
performs an act pertaining to a person in authority or a narration of facts. In this narration of facts, it was stated
public officer under pretense of official position, and that he was the one who solemnized the marriage between
without being lawfully entitled to do so. X and Y in the presence of the guests when in truth and in
o There must be false pretense on the part of the fact he was not even there at the time of the wedding
offender in doing the act. Otherwise, even if he ceremony. When he affixed his signature, he made
performs an act, he cannot be held criminally untruthful statements in a narration of facts. He has the
liable for Art. 177. legal obligation to state the truth therein. Therefore, he
becomes liable for falsification of a public document under
X and Y went to the Mayor and they wanted to have a Art. 171.
civil wedding ceremony to be officiated by the said
mayor. They presented all the requirements needed. Ruzol v. Sandiganbayan – Mayor Ruzol issued 221 permits
The wedding was set at the end of the month, which to salvage forest products, a function belonging to the
was a Friday. On the day of the wedding, X and Y, as DENR. He was charged with Art. 177, usurpation of official
well as the guests went to the Mayor’s office. However, functions. SC: Must be acquitted. Since Mayor Ruzol
the Executive Assistant to the mayor told X and Y that acted in good faith, he cannot be held criminally liable for
the Mayor was not at the office because he was Art. 177. Good faith is a defense in Art. 177. Ruzol did not
attending a conference of the League of Mayors in possess criminal intent because his only intention is to
another town. Upon seeing the sad reaction of the monitor the salvaging of forest products to prevent illegal
couple, the Executive Assistant said “Do not worry. logging within his jurisdiction.
The Mayor told me to solemnize your civil wedding.”
The Executive Assistant to the mayor then solemnized
Daverick Pacumio
Page 91 of 142
Art. 178 – Using Fictitious Name and Concealing True truthfully stated he is a married man, he stated the
Name name of his wife and children, and his address.
Everything he stated was true, except for his real
ACTS PUNISHED: name and profession. When this was discovered, Atty
I. USING FICTITIOUS NAME – It is committed by X was charged for violation of Art. 178 – using a
any person who shall use a name other than his fictitious name and also concealing a true name. He
real name publicly for concealing a crime, or evade was also charged with violation of CA 142 as amended,
the execution of a judgment, or to cause damage the Anti-Alias Law. Is Atty. X liable of any of these
to public interest. crimes?
Elements:
1. Offender uses a name other than his real Art. 178 – NO. X’s intent in not disclosing his real name is
name; not to conceal a crime, evade the execution of judgment or
2. He uses the fictitious name publicly; to cause damage to public interest. Moreover, Although he
3. Purpose of the offender is either – concealed his real name, he did not conceal his other
i. to conceal a crime, or personal circumstances. He truthfully revealed his civil
ii. to evade the execution of a judgment; or status, the name of his wife and children and his address.
iii. to cause damage to public interest. Therefore, he has no intention to conceal his real identity.
He only wanted to conceal that he is X, a lawyer. Therefore,
II. CONCEALING TRUE NAME – It is committed by he is not liable for concealing true name as he has no intent
any person who shall conceal his name and any to conceal his real identity.
other personal circumstances and the purpose of
the offender is to conceal his real identity. CA 142 – NO. He is not liable for violation of CA 142 as
Elements: amended, the Anti Alias law. As held by the SC in the case
1. Offender conceals – of Ursua vs. CA and Estrada vs. People, an alias is a name
i. his true name; AND or names used or intended to be used by a person
ii. all other personal circumstances publicly and habitually, usually for business
2. Purpose is only to conceal his identity purposes. It is necessary that there must be the element
of publicity and habituality. In both cases, the SC said the
Using Fictitious Name Concealing True Name use of a name other than his real name in a single
Purpose is to conceal a Purpose is to conceal his transaction, absent any showing that he wanted to be
crime, evade the execution true and real identity known by such name, is not within the prohibition of
of judgement or o cause CA 142 as amended. Atty. X’s use of the name “Y” in a
damage to public interest single transaction when investigated by the police without
The law requires publicity No requisite of publicity. any showing that X wanted to be publicly known as “Y” is
not within the meaning of violation of CA 142 as amended.
Bar Q: Atty X, after a day’s hearing, went to a sauna
bath parlor and he was receiving a massage from a Art. 179 – Illegal Use of Insignia, Uniform, or Dress
lady in the said sauna parlor. Suddenly, police officers
armed with a search warrant raided the place because Committed by any person who makes use of any insignia,
based on their surveillance, the place is actually a uniform or dress belonging to an office not held by him or
prostitution den, but in the front, it is a sauna parlor. to a class of person of which he is not a member, and he
When they raided the upper most portion of the makes use of such insignia, uniform or dress publicly and
place, in every room the police were able to arrest improperly.
prostitutes and their customers. Since Atty X was at
the time receiving a massage from one of the lady False Testimony (Arts. 180, 181, and 182)
employees therein, he too was arrested. He was not
caught in the rooms on the upper most portion, he False testimony can either be false testimony in criminal
was at the ground floor receiving a massage. The cases (Articles 180 and 181), false testimony in civil cases
police officers asked his name, Atty X did not divulge (Article 182) and false testimony in other cases.
his true name. He said that his name was “Y”. When
he was asked of his profession/job, he said that he was False testimony in criminal cases can either be:
jobless. When he was asked of his civil status, he (1) false testimony against a defendant (Article 180);
(2) false testimony favorable to defendant (Article 181).
Daverick Pacumio
Page 92 of 142
case against the witness for false testimony against a

Art. 180 – False Testimony Against a Defendant defendant. Will it prosper?
No. the fourth element is absent because there was no final
ELEMENTS: termination of the case because X’s case is still pending
1. That there is a criminal judicial proceeding. appeal. No final judgement yet.
2. That the offender testifies falsely under oath
against the defendant therein. W testified falsely against X. the judge took notice of
3. That the offender who gives false testimony knows material inconsistencies in W’s testimony. The judge
that it is false. acquitted X. will the case proser?
4. That the defendant against whom the false Yes. X was already acquitted. Acquittal is a final
testimony is given is either acquitted or convicted judgement, which is not subject to appeal, albeit subject of
in a final judgment. petition for certiorari under Rule 65.
Art. 181 – False Testimony Favorable to the Defendant X was charged with homicide. After the presentation
of the evidence for the prosecution, X presented W, a
ELEMENTS: false witness. W under oath falsely testified in favor of
1. There is a criminal judicial proceeding. X. despite W’s testimony, X was convicted. X appealed
2. The offender testifies falsely in favor of the his conviction. While on appeal, the heirs of the
defendant. victim filed against W false testimony favorable to the
3. The offender knew that his testimony is false. defendant. Will it prosper?
Yes. There is no need for final termination of the case. right
False Testimony Against the Defendant v. False after the witness had testified falsely in favor of the
Testimony Favorable to the Defendant defendant, he can already be prosecuted for false
False Testimony Against False Testimony testimony in favor of the defendant. Reason: the penalty
the Defendant Favorable to the to be imposed in false testimony against defendant
Defendant depends upon the final judgement imposed against the
There is a fourth element. No such requirement. defendant. In false testimony favorable to the defendant,
Before the offender can be There is no need to wait the penalty is specific.
prosecuted, it is necessary for the final termination of
that the defendant against the case. There is no need Art. 183 – Perjury
whom the false testimony for acquittal or conviction Note: Perjury is now a grave felony punishable by prision
was given was acquitted or by final judgement. mayor.
convicted by final
judgement. There must be ELEMENTS:
final termination of the 1. The offender executed an affidavit or made a
case. statement under oath on a material matter.
X was charged with homicide. A false witness was 2. The statement or affidavit was made before a
interviewed by the public prosecutor. The public competent officer duly authorized to receive and
prosecutor presented the false witness. He was sworn administer oath.
to the witness stand. However, even before such
witness was able to state his name, the wife of the It is necessary that the said oath be given before an
witness said that her husband is a false and paid officer duly authorized to receive and administer
witness. is the false witness liable of false testimony? it.
Not liable for any crime. False testimony is a formal
crime. No attempted or frustrated stages. It is not a The essence of perjury is the violation of the
material crime. solemnity of the oath. Even if the statements were
falsities, if they were not made before an officer
Same problem. The witness testified that he saw the authorized to administer oaths, there is no
act of killing, but he was truly not present. He lied. perjury.
Prosecutor was unaware. The judge convicted X. X
appealed his conviction. Pending appeal, X filed a
Daverick Pacumio
Page 93 of 142
3. That in the said statement or affidavit, the

offender made a willful and deliberate assertion of Ronnie Dayan said he was just forced by the police to
falsehood. execute a statement/affidavit against Sec. De Lima.
He is now recanting it. Sec. Guevarra said he may be
Perjury cannot be committed by means of prosecuted for perjury.
imprudence or by means of negligence. The law Even if Dayan was really coerced, he cannot be held
requires that there must be a deliberate and willful liable for perjury. The statements under oath were not
intent to state falsities in the said affidavit or deliberately done, because he was merely coerced. It was
sworn statement. not willful or deliberate.
Good faith is a defense if he lacks the deliberate Art. 184 – Offering False Testimony in Evidence
intent to state falsities.
Under Art. 184, the mere act of presenting a false witness
4. The said statement or affidavit containing falsity is in court or the mere act of offering a false witness will
required by law. already make the offender criminally liable for violation of
Art. 184.
Based on the first element, there are TWO WAYS OF
COMMITTING PERJURY: This is different from subornation of perjury. In case of
1. The offender either executed an affidavit; or subornation of perjury, before the offender, that is the
procurer of the said false witness, can be prosecuted for
Affidavit means it is under oath. It means it has subornation of perjury it is necessary that the false witness
been notarized. he procured must first be convicted of perjury. If the said
witness he procured was not convicted, he cannot be held
2. Made a statement on a material matter under liable for subornation of perjury. That is different from
oath. Art.184.
Prosec G: Pag sa Bar, sinabing, “He executed an affidavit,” TITLE FIVE – CRIMES INVOLVING DRUGS
matic na under oath yan. ‘Wag niyo na hanapin sa problem
kung under oath or hindi. Matic na yan. R.A. No. 9165 – THE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT
During the preliminary investigation of a case for There was a checkpoint. X was on board his
estafa, the witness for the complainant, under oath, motorcycle. X did not want to. When he passed by,
was asked clarificatory questions by the prosecutor. tinagilid niya yung motor niya. Sumemplang. The
The witness started lying because he was not really police officers helped him. When he was lifted, his
present during the transaction between the shirt was also lifted, showing a weapon. The police
complainant and the respondent. What crime? asked for X’s license. He could not produce it. Since
Perjury. It is not false testimony. The statement under he was caught in flagrante delicto, he was bodily
oath was not made in judicial proceedings. If the statement searched as well as his motor. On his motorcycle,
under oath was made in judicial proceedings, it is false there was a package. When the police opened it, they
testimony. saw chewing gum and saw 6 elongated plastic sachets
of shabu. It was confiscated.
The private prosecutor noticed that the accused’s
testimony is different from his testimony in his Was the search valid?
counter-affidavit before the public prosecutor. Sabi Yes. It was pursuant to an in flagrante delicto arrest.
niya sa testimony niya, he was driving his tricycle and
while driving the said tricycle, the said victim passed What crime is committed?
by. However, in the Counter-Affidavit, what he stated Sec. 5, RA 9165 – Transportation of dangerous drugs. In
was that he was on board a van, not a tricycle. case of transportation, there is no need to prove where the
Magkaiba yung sasakyan. The accused was charged drugs will be transported or brought. It is the movement of
with perjury. Is he liable for perjury? the drugs from one place to another. X was obviously
Yes. Whether it is a van or a tricycle, it is material what hit bringing the drugs from one place to another. Therefore,
the girl, what was it that he was driving at that particular he is liable for transportation.
moment which caused the girl’s death.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 94 of 142
SECTION 5 - Sale, Trading, Administration, Delivering – with or without consideration. The fact that
Dispensation, Delivery, Distribution and dangerous drugs was passed from one person to another,
Transportation of Dangerous Drugs and/or there is delivering.
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals
In case of delivering, the law provides that delivery is the
ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL SALE: act of knowingly passing from one person to another,
1. The buyer and seller are clearly identified. personally or otherwise, or by any other means, the
2. The corpus delicti (the drugs itself) and the price dangerous drugs, with or without consideration. The
must be established. courier should have knowledge that what he is carrying is
3. The corpus delicti must be transferred from the dangerous drugs. If he has no knowledge, it is a valid
hands of the seller to the hands of the buyer. defense which may bring about an acquittal.
W is a known drug pusher. In the planning, they gave Section 11 – Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs
X P1,000 (2 marked P500 bills). Since X was wearing
eyeglasses, to signal the sale is consummated, he ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF
removes his eyeglasses. They went to W’s place. 8 DANGEROUS DRUGS:
police officers participated. The police officers were 1. The offender is found in possession of any item or
in civilian clothing. Kanya-kanyang tago. They were at object identified to be drugs – it is necessary to
a distance of ten (10) meters from the poseur buyer X prove that at the time of arrest, the offender is in
and W. It was only X who went to W. X asked to buy possession of dangerous drugs. The prosecution
P1,000 shabu from W. W went to his house and came has the burden.
back and handed 4 plastic sachets of shabu to X. When 2. He is not authorized by law to possess the same –
X was in possession, his eyeglasses fell down. The Need not be proven by the prosecution. Reason:
police thought the transaction was complete, so The law presumes that any person found in
sinugod na nila si W. W was charged for illegal sale. possession of dangerous drugs is not authorized to
After trial, the judge convicted W. W appealed. In his possess the same. This is because dangerous drugs
appeal, he argued: (1) the public prosecutor failed to are per se contraband or illegal. If the offender is
present the poseur buyer because X did not appear; found in possession, the law presumes he is not
(2) he did not receive money, therefore, there can be authorized to possess the same.
no sale. Are W’s arguments meritorious? 3. That he freely and consciously possesses the said
dangerous drugs – animus possidendi. There is
(1) Meritorious. Although the testimony of the poseur intent to possess on the offender’s part. This must
buyer is not material to bring about conviction because be proven by the prosecution.
other police officers can testify, the police officers were at
such a distance such that it was impossible for them to see A search warrant was issued against X for illegal
the transfer of drugs. The testimony of the police officers possession. The police officers served the same to X.
could only be considered as hearsay evidence. They have X allowed them to go inside. X pointed them to his
no personal knowledge because they were not present room. The search inside X’s bedroom was witnessed
during the actual transaction. Only the poseur buyer can by X and his wife. the police officers found nothing.
testify. When the police got out, they saw a box near the door.
The officers asked about it and opened it. When they
(2) No merit. Even if the P1000 pesos was not handed to opened, they saw a small container and inside, it
him, the price was established when X told W that he is contained dried marijuana leaves and 5 plastic
buying P1,000 worth of shabu. There was an agreement on sachets of shabu. X was charged with illegal
the price. possession. X’s defense: Although the house belonged
to him, there are many people living in the said house,
Prosec. G: In real life, ginagawang style ng pulis sila PO1, i.e., his sisters, brothers, parents. Thus, there is no
mga bagong pulis, ang poseur buyer para hindi na mawala evidence to say that the drugs found belongs to him.
si poseur buyer. Is it tenable?
No. Possession includes both physical and constructive
Sale – there must always be consideration. possession.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 95 of 142
Physical possession: the dangerous drugs were in the 9.35 grams, the imprisonment is 20 years and 1 day to
hand, body, or clothing of the offender. life imprisonment. Is this correct?
No. Since the accused was not caught in possession of
Constructive possession: The drugs were found where dangerous drugs during a party, meeting, gathering, in the
the offender had direct control and custody. company of at least 2 persons, the maximum penalty to be
imposed should not be life imprisonment. It must only be
Here, X had direct control and custody over his house. 20 years and 1 day to 30 years because life imprisonment is
Thus, his defense is not meritorious. imposed based on Sec. 13, RA 9165, i.e., if the person is
found in possession of dangerous drugs during a party,
Peace officers were commanded to seize “an meeting, social gathering, or in the proximate company of
undetermined quantity of shabu and several drug at least 2 persons
paraphernalia.” Counsel of X moved to quash.
According to him, it failed to comply with the Section 12 – Illegal Possession of Drug Paraphernalia
Constitutional requirement of particularity and
specificity. Is this meritorious? If a person is found in possession of drug paraphernalia,
No. The phrase “undetermined quantity…” has satisfied the law presumes that the said person has consumed,
the Constitutional requirement of particularity. It is not administered, injected, or used for himself dangerous
necessary for the court to state how many sachets of shabu drugs.
will be found. How can the court know that?
Section 15 – Illegal Use of Dangerous Drugs
The police officer received a call. There was an asset
on the other end. “Sir, may 5 tao dito naglalaro ng cara ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL USE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS
cruz dito sa kanto ng A Street cor. B Street.” Officer 1. That the offender has been apprehended or
went to the place. They saw 5 men playing cara cruz. arrested for the commission of a crime.
They were all arrested for violating PD 1602. Among 2. The said offender is subjected to a drug test.
them were X and Y. when the men were searched, at 3. After a confirmatory test, he was found positive for
the backpocket of X’s pants found a small plastic use of dangerous drugs.
sachet of shabu, and at the backpocket of Y’s pants
found a small plastic sachet of shabu. All the 5 men There was an entrapment procedure done against X,
were charged with violating PD 1602. However, insofar who was allegedly extorting money from the private
as X and Y are concerned, they were also charged with complainant. On the date of giving of the money
violation of Sec. 11, RA 9165. After trial, X and Y were being extorted, the moment X accepted the money, X
found guilty for illegal possession. Based on the was arrested. The police noticed that X was under the
evidence, the small plastic sachets contained .001 influence. He was brought to the PNP Crime Lab for
gram. Kapiranggot lamang. What penalty should the drug testing. X did not want to submit his urine. The
court impose? police officer insisted. X submitted his urine. X was
Maximum penalty of life imprisonment because under found positive for use. Thus, aside from robbery
Sec. 13, RA 9165, if a person is found in possession of extortion, X was charged with Sec. 15. RTC found X
dangerous drugs during a party, meeting, social gathering, guilty of illegal use. CA affirmed.
or in the proximate company of at least 2 persons, the SC: Acquit. The first element for illegal use, i.e., that the
maximum penalty is imposed regardless of the quantity or offender was apprehended or commission of a crime refers
purity of the drugs seized. Since X and Y were found in the to crimes punished under RA 9165. Only in those crimes
company of 3 other persons, regardless of the quantity of may the offender be subjected to a drug test. Here, X was
drugs found upon them, the maximum penalty of life arrested for robbery extortion. Therefore, the police
imprisonment shall be imposed upon them. officers had no right to forcibly subject him to a drug test.
Otherwise, X’s constitutional right to privacy is violated
The police officers got a report that X just bought (Dela Cruz v. People).
shabu and they went to X still looking at the shabu. X
was arrested. X was charged with illegal possession. X was arrested in the act of selling shabu or
When the forensic chemist weighed the shabu, it possessing shabu. The arresting officers believed that
weighs 9.35 grams. RTC convicted X and imposed he is also using. X was brought to the PNP Crime Lab
upon him the maximum penalty of life imprisonment. for testing. X submitted his urine. He was found
Reason: Sec. 11, par. 2, RA 9165, if the drugs weighed
Daverick Pacumio
Page 96 of 142
positive. What is the effect of such positive finding on Under RA 10640, the following must be present during the
X’s criminal liability for illegal sale or possession? inventory and photographing:
Under Sec. 25, RA 9165, it will be a qualifying aggravating 1) Person from whom the dangerous drugs were
circumstance. Therefore, the maximum penalty taken (accused) or his counsel or representative
prescribed shall be imposed. 2) Elected public official
3) Either a representative from the DOJ OR a
X is an incoming UST Law student. X was subjected to representative from the media.
a drug test. X was found positive. Can you file a case
for violation of Sec. 15 against X? Chain of Custody Rule: the duly recognized marking of
the dangerous drugs from the time of its seizure to the time
X just passed the CPA Board Exam. He applied at SGV. it is brought to the crime lab for testing, to the time it is
He was accepted. Randomly, X was picked for a drug given to the custodian for safekeeping to the time it is
test. He was found positive. Can you file a case for presented to the court as evidence, to the time it is given
violation of Sec. 15 against X? to the PDEA for destruction. The purpose is to ensure that
there is no change, alteration, or contamination of the
PO1 X was assigned in a town. The PNP Chief, as a dangerous drugs. That the dangerous drug seized and
policy, randomly tested the police officers for drug confiscated from the accused would be the very same
testing. X was included. X was found positive. Can X dangerous drug tested at the forensic crime lab and would
be charged with violation of Sec. 15? be the very same dangerous drug presented in court.
In SJS v. DDB, the SC held that Sec. 36, which provides for The police officer received a call that there were 2
mandatory, random, and suspicionless drug testing is Muslim women engaged in selling dangerous drugs.
constitutional. The moment a student or employee enters They planned a buy-bust operation. It was a success.
a school or company, they waived their right to privacy for The Muslim women were arrested for illegal sale. The
being tested for drugs. Thus, the tests done on X in all three plastic sachets were confiscated. The police officers,
(3) scenarios are constitutional. after seizing the dangerous drugs, immediately went
to the Brgy. Hall. There, the inventory and
X is not liable for all three scenarios. Under Sec. 15, RA photographing were made in the presence of the
9165, the law provides that a person apprehended or insulating witnesses. The Muslim women were
arrested who is found positive for use of drugs shall be convicted by the RTC. CA affirmed.
imposed with a penalty. Sec. 15 is unambiguous – the SC: Acquitted. In People v. Abdullah, the marking of the
phrase is “apprehended” or “arrested”. Thus, only those seized drugs must be done immediately after arrest. It
persons apprehended or arrested and found positive for must be at the very scene of the crime. Here, the marking
use may be prosecuted under Sec. 15. In this case, X was not was not done immediately after the arrest. They were
apprehended or arrested (see People v. Sullano). marked and inventoried at the Brgy. Hall. The police
officers’ justification for non-compliance: Unsafe area
Note: If the offender is a first-time offender, the penalty is because it was a Muslim area. SC: SC has previously
only rehabilitation in a government facility. If the offender denounced that the target area was a notorious Muslim
is a second-time offender, there should be imprisonment. community. Islamophobia or hatred against Muslims
cannot be a reason to justify a police officer’s failure to
Section 21 – Procedure in the Seizure and Confiscation comply with Sec. 21.
of Dangerous Drugs (As Amended by R.A. No. 10640)
Police officers received a call. In the call, they tipped
The apprehending team having initial custody of the off X’s location. 2 police officers boarded their patrol
dangerous drugs seized or confiscated must physically cars and hurriedly went at the back of the mall where
inventory the same and photograph the same in the X was. They requested the Brgy. Chairman to go with
presence of the person from whom the dangerous drug was them. They caught X in the act of selling shabu. The
taken or confiscated, or his representative or his counsel or shabu seized were inventoried right then and there.
any representative from the DOJ, or from the media, and They marked it then and there. Thereafter, they were
any elected public official. The inventory, marking, and photographed in the presence of X and the Brgy.
photograph must be done in the presence of these persons. Chairman. During trial, the police officers testified
that if they passed by the DOJ office or the office of
the media representative, it would have been too late
Daverick Pacumio
Page 97 of 142
to arrest X, which supposedly justified the absence of him. During the pre-trial, his counsel stated that his
said witnesses. X was convicted for illegal sale. client is willing to enter into a plea-bargaining
Accused: Sec. 21 was not complied with because the agreement. The judge said “Ok, to what provision?”.
inventory and taking of photographs were not done in The counsel said “My client would like to plead guilty
the presence of the DOJ/Media representative. Is X to violation of Section 12 – illegal possession of drug
correct? paraphernalia.” The judge said “Ok fiscal, could you
SC: No. There are instances when substantial compliance amend the information in the next scheduled
of Sec. 21 may convict: (1) justifiable ground; and (2) hearing?”. During the next scheduled hearing, the
apprehending officers were able to preserve the integrity Information for the crime of illegal possession of drug
and evidentiary value. Here, the police were able to prove paraphernalia was read to him. X pleaded guilty. The
the value of time – time was of the essence. They were able judge imposed upon him the maximum penalty
to prove justifiable ground. Second, the police officers were provided for under Section 12, that is 4 years
able to preserve the integrity and evidentiary value because imprisonment. Since the penalty imposed on illegal
right then and there, the police marked the dangerous possession of drug paraphernalia is 4 years
drugs seized and confiscated. imprisonment, X’s counsel said that they would like
to file an application for probation. The judge denied
Prosec. G: However, in recent cases, the SC has been strict, the application for probation and said “You were
such that, mawala lang ang media or DOJ representative, originally charged for drug trafficking, for drug sale,
acquittal is proper. Most RA 9165 cases has recently been therefore, you cannot avail of the benefit of
for acquittal. probation. Under Section 24, those persons convicted
of drug trafficking or drug pushing cannot avail of the
Section 23 – Plea-Bargaining Provision benefit of probation.” Is the judge correct?
No. In Pascua v. People, the SC held that Sec. 24 and the
X was charged with illegal sale of dangerous drugs. Probation Law is clear – in applying for probation, what is
During the arraignment, the Information was read, essential is not the offense charged, but the offense for
and he pleaded not guilty. During the preliminary which the accused is ultimately found guilty of. Here,
conference, the exhibits were marked. Before the pre- although X was charged with violation of Sec. 5, since he
trial, the counsel of X moved for a plea-bargaining pleaded guilty to Sec. 12, and the judge imposed upon him
agreement. X wanted to plead guilty to a lesser crime the penalty of 4 years, within the probationable penalty –
of illegal possession of drug paraphernalia. The judge he should be allowed to apply for probation.
refused and said “The case filed against your client is
violation of RA 9165. It is expressly provided therein In Taguig, the Chief of Police learned that there was
under Section 23 that plea bargaining is expressly rampant selling of drugs. He assigned 2 neophyte
prohibited.” Under Section 23, no person charged for police officers to disguise as civilians and arrest
violation of RA 9165, regardless of the imposable persons selling drugs. Police officers X and Y, dressed
penalty, can avail of a valid plea-bargaining in civilian clothing, went to the store. Z came to them.
agreement. Is the judge correct? Z told them, “Gusto niyo umiskor?” X and Y said “OO!”
No. Sec. 23 has long been declared as unconstitutional in Z said P200 each. Z showed drugs on the palm of his
Estipona v. Lobrigo. The SC held that that Section 23, which hands. He was immediately arrested.
prohibits an accused charged under RA 9165 from availing Z is liable for attempted sale of dangerous drugs
of the plea- bargaining provision of the Rules of Court is under Sec. 26, RA 9165. Illegal sale has 3 elements – the
unconstitutional because it encroaches upon the powers of third of which is the transfer of the drugs from the seller to
the Supreme Court to provide rules and regulations for the the buyer. The police officers, upon seeing the drugs on the
judiciary. Since under the Rules of Court provided for by palm of Z, they immediately announced that they were
the SC there is plea-bargaining for all persons, all accused police officers and arrested Z. Without the said drugs being
can avail of the said plea-bargaining agreement, even those transferred to the said police officers acting as poseur
prosecuted under RA 9165. buyer, the third element is absent.
Section 24 – Applicability of the Probation law for Section 26 – Attempt or Conspiracy

Drug Traffickers and Pushers
Under Section 26 of RA 9165, the law PUNISHES THE
X was charged with illegal sale of dangerous drugs. ATTEMPTED STAGE AS WELL AS CONSPIRACY in
During the arraignment, the Information was read to certain provisions of RA 9165:
Daverick Pacumio
Page 98 of 142
1. Sale, trading, administration, delivery, to survive.” X, who was 17 y/o, was charged with the
distribution, transportation of dangerous drug. crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs. After trial on
2. Manufacture of any dangerous drug. the merits, the judge found him guilty as charged for
3. Maintenance of a den, dive, or resort where any illegal sale of dangerous drugs and the judge imposed
dangerous drug is used in any form upon him (it should be death penalty), the penalty of
4. Importation of any dangerous drugs. life imprisonment because of the prohibition on the
5. Cultivation or culture of plants which are the imposition of death penalty under RA 9346. X’s
sources of dangerous drugs. counsel filed a MR because according to him, the
judge did not take into consideration that the said
NOTE: The penalty for attempted and consummated are offender at the time of the commission of the crime
THE SAME. was a minor. Therefore, he said that the penalty must
be lowered by 1 degree as minority is a privileged
Section 29 – Criminal Liability for Planting of mitigating circumstance. The judge denied the MR
Evidence because RA 9165 is a SPL thus, circumstances cannot
be considered. Is the judge correct?
The police officers knew that X is involved in selling, No. Under Section 98 of RA 9165, the law provides that the
possession and use of drugs. They knew that X is a provisions of the RPC shall not apply to violations of RA
drug addict. Pero hindi nila mahuli huli in the act of 9165. Therefore, the RPC will not apply, Article 10 will not
selling o possessing si X. Everytime they would arrest apply. EXCEPT If the offender is a minor offender and the
him with so many people, he is not in possession of crime he committed carries a penalty of life imprisonment
dangerous drugs, but they know for a fact he is to death, it shall be considered as Reclusion Perpetua to
involved in drugs. One time the police officers saw X death. Now that the nomenclature of penalty is the same
walking. The police officer got a plastic sachet of as that of the RPC, the court can now consider the
shabu and the police officer immediately bumped X privileged mitigating circumstance of minority.
and in doing so, he surreptitiously inserted the small
plastic sachet of shabu on the back pocket of X’s In this case, X was convicted of illegal sale of dangerous
pants. Thereafter, when X reached the end of the drugs which is punished by life imprisonment to death.
road, there were other police officers. They said “We Since he was a minor offender at the time of the
were informed that you just bought drugs. We are commission of the crime, it should be considered as
going to frisk you”. When they frisked X, indeed, the Reclusion perpetua to death. Now that it has the same
drug planted by the police officer was there. The said nomenclature of penalty as that of the RPC, the court must
act of the police officer of surreptitiously placing the correctly apply the privileged mitigating circumstance of
drugs was seen by 2 witnesses. What crime was minority. Reclusion perpetua lowered by 1 degree is
committed by the said police officer? reclusion temporal. Reclusion temporal is the proper
Planting of evidence under Sec. 29, RA 9165. If what is penalty for X, and not life imprisonment.
planted on an innocent person is dangerous drugs in
order to impute upon him violation of RA 9165, the act is TITLE SEVEN – CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC
expressly punished under Section 29 of RA 9165. If OFFICERS
what has been planted is any other thing outside
drugs, the crime committed is punished under Art 363 All the felonies under Title 7 can either be:
– Incriminating innocent person. • MALFEASANCE – There is malfeasance when a
public officer performs in his public office an act
Section 98 – Limited Applicability of the Revised which is prohibited by law.
Penal Code • MISFEASANCE – There is misfeasance when a
public officer performs an official act in a manner
X, who was 17 y/o, was arrested by the police officer not in accordance with what the law provides.
because he was caught in the actual act of selling • NONFEASANCE – There is nonfeasance when the
shabu. X was brought to the police station. Everything public officer deliberately refuses, refrains or
was found positive. Upon investigation, it was evident omits from doing his official duty which the law
that he acted with discernment. He knew or he was requires him to do.
aware that selling shabu is bad. He saw it on TV, he
heard it on the radio, the president’s campaign Art. 203 – Public Officers
against drugs. However, X said “this is the only means
Daverick Pacumio
Page 99 of 142
REQUISITES TO BE A PUBLIC OFFICER: The offender may also be a public officer who are charged
1. One must be taking part in the performance of public with the prosecution of offenses:
functions in the Government or one must be • Prosecutors; or
performing in said Government or in any of its • Special Prosecutors in OMB.
branches public duties as an employee, agent or
subordinate official, of any rank or class; and Article 209 – Betrayal of Trust by an Attorney or
2. That his authority to take part in the performance of Solicitor
public functions or to perform public duties must be
– ACTS PUNISHED AS BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY AN
a. by direct provision of the law; or ATTORNEY:
b. by popular election; or
c. by appointment by competent authority I. By causing damage to his client, either:
a. by any malicious breach of professional duty
Article 204 – Knowingly rendering unjust judgement b. by inexcusable negligence or ignorance
ELEMENTS: II. By revealing any of the secrets of his client learned by

1. The offender is a judge him in his professional capacity.
2. That he renders a judgment in a case submitted to • Based on the lawyer-client privilege – Note:
him for decision commission of future crimes is not a secret.
3. That the judgment is unjust
4. The judge knows that his judgment is unjust III. By undertaking the defense of the opposing party in the
same case, without the consent of his first client, after
UNJUST JUDGMENT – is one which is contrary to law, or having undertaken the defense of said first client or after
one that is not supported by evidence or both. having received confidential information from said client.
• Based on conflict of interest.
Before a judge may be held liable, it is necessary to prove
that when he rendered the unjust judgement, he acted in Under Art. 209, the law provides that aside from these
bad faith. If the judgement was issued because of the criminal liabilities, the offender can also be charged
judge’s erroneous interpretation of the law, he acted in administratively. The admin. charge and the crim. charge
good faith, he cannot be held liable under Art. 204. Judges may proceed separately.
enjoy judicial immunity from suit.
Accused X convicted for homicide. Penalty: RT
Article 208 – Dereliction of Duty in the Prosecution of maximum. Accused asked counsel to file an MR
Offenses because the judge failed to consider certain pieces of
evidence. Counsel said yes. However, 15 days lapsed
ELEMENTS OF DERELICTION OF DUTY IN THE and the counsel never filed the MR. X’s conviction for
PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES: homicide became final. X was very mad. He believed
1. That the offender is a public officer or officer of the his counsel did not do his duty. When he inquired
law who has a duty to cause the prosecution of, or from his counsel, all the counsel could state was that
to prosecute, offenses. he forgot about it. Can the counsel be charged under
2. That there is a dereliction of the duties of his Art. 209?
office; that is (a) knowing the commission of the Yes. He caused damage to his client by malicious breach of
crime, he does not cause the prosecution of the professional duty – to file a MR because the judge failed to
criminal; or (b) knowing that a crime is about to consider their pieces of documentary evidence. In
be committed, he tolerates its commission. addition, he may also be charged administratively.
3. That the offender acts with malice and deliberate
intent to favor the violator of the law. Article 210 – Direct Bribery
The offender is a public officer who has a duty to cause the ELEMENTS:
prosecution of offenses, viz: 1. The offender be a public officer within the scope
• Person in authority; or of Article 203; and
• Agent of persons in authority.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 100 of 142
2. That the offender commits any of the following refraining from performing the said official duty
acts: constitute a crime, he becomes liable for TWO
1. By agreeing to perform, or by performing, crimes.
in consideration of any offer, promise, gift
or present an act constituting a crime, in Article 211 – Indirect Bribery
connection with the performance of his
official duties. ELEMENTS:
2. By accepting a gift in consideration of the 1. The offender is a public officer;
execution of an act which does not 2. That he accepts gifts;
constitute a crime, in connection with the 3. That the gifts are offered to him is solely and only
performance of his official duty; or by reason of his public office.
3. By agreeing to refrain, or by refraining,
from doing something which it is his In Indirect Bribery, the public officer given by the
official duty to do, in consideration of gift gift/present, is not being tasked to do an act. The gift is
or promise. only given to him because he occupies the position or
because he occupies the public office.
For direct bribery to be committed, the receipt of the bribe
must always be in connection with the performance of his If the public officer accepts the said gift, there arises the
official functions. Absent the same, it is some other crime, crime of Indirect Bribery. In the public officer does not
not direct bribery. accept the gift, he is not liable of any crime.
THREE ACTS PUNISHED: The crime of indirect bribery does not admit of attempted
I. By agreeing to perform, or by performing, in or frustrated stages. This is because the public officer is not
consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present an act being asked to do an act – the gift is given to him by reason
constituting a crime, in connection with the performance of the office he holds. If he accepts the gift, he
of his official duties. automatically becomes liable. If he does not, he is not
• It suffices that the offender accepts or agrees to the liable.
commission of the criminal act. The law does not
require that he actually perform the criminal act Article 211-A – Qualified Bribery
or that he actually receives the gift or present.
• If, after receiving the gift, the public officer ELEMENTS:
actually commits the criminal act, he becomes 1. The offender is a public officer in charge with law
liable for the criminal act under Art. 210 – the enforcement;
penalty for Direct Bribery shall be in addition to 2. The offender refrains from arresting or
the public officer's liability to the crime agreed prosecuting an offender who has committed a
upon. It cannot be complexed. crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or
death;
II. By accepting a gift in consideration of the execution of 3. The offender refrains from arresting or
an act which does not constitute a crime, in connection prosecuting the offender in consideration of any
with the performance of his official duty. promise, gift or present.
• Under this second act, there must be actual receipt
of the gift or present. If the public officer did not It can be committed only by a public officer charged with
receive the same, direct bribery does not result. law enforcement and because of such gift, he does not
arrest an offender who committed a crime punishable by
III. By agreeing to refrain, or by refraining, from doing reclusion perpetua or death.
something which it is his official duty to do, in
consideration of gift or promise. Art. 211-A is an insertion brought by RA 7659. Thus, if it is
• Mere acceptance or agreement to refrain from the public officer who solicited the bribe, the penalty is
doing his official duty is sufficient. He is not death.
required to receive the gift or present.
• If the public officer after agreeing to refrain, Direct, Indirect, and Qualified Bribery is the crime of the
indeed refrain in doing his official duty, and the public officer who accepts the bribe and agrees to the offer.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 101 of 142
The crime committed by the giver is corruption of public Indirect bribery. He is a public officer, who accepted a
officials under Art. 212. very expensive gift given only because of his office.
Especially so because the gift came from a big-time bus
Article 212 – Corruption of Public Officials operator.
ELEMENTS: The case was for homicide. The case was already
1. The offender makes offers or promises or gives or submitted for resolution. The judge set the
presents to a public officer. promulgation of judgement. based on the evidence,
2. That the offers or promises are made or the gifts or the the accused knew he was guilty. X told his counsel to
gifts or presents given to a public officer, under talk to the judge and offer him an amount of money
circumstances that will make the public officer liable to bring about an acquittal. Counsel talked to the
for direct bribery or indirect bribery. judge. The counsel offered P50 million in exchange
for X’s acquittal. The judge accepted. The judge
The offender in corruption of public officials can be any acquitted X. Judge was charged with the following:
person.
Direct Bribery – it will prosper. He is liable for Direct
X was charged with qualified rape before the Bribery. He renders an unjust judgment when the evidence
Prosecutor. It was filed by his 6-year-old daughter. shows that the prosecution was able to prove the guilt of
Prosecutor called for a PI. After the same, the X. However, because of the P50M that he received from the
Prosecutor said the case is submitted for resolution. said accused, he acquitted the said accused. Therefore, he
Thereafter, X came back to the Prosecutor to follow- committed Direct Bribery under the first act. He received
up the resolution. When the secretary said it was not that P50 million in exchange for the commission of a crime
yet out, X asked to talk with the fiscal. X talked with – Knowingly Rendering an Unjust Judgment.
the fiscal. X offered the fiscal P1 million, in exchange
for ‘no probable cause’ or dismissal, despite sufficient Knowingly rendering unjust judgement – it will
evidence that there is probable cause that X prosper. The first element is present because the offender
committed the crime. Is the prosecutor liable for is a judge. The second and third element are also present
Qualified Bribery? because he renders an unjust decision by acquitting X
No. Because the first element is absent. The first element, despite the evidence showing that X is liable for homicide.
i.e., offender is a public officer in charge with law The last element is present because the judge knows that
enforcement refers to police officers. These does not refer his judgement is unjust because of the evidence.
to a prosecutor who just applies and interprets the law, and
does not enforce the law. Violation of Sec. 3 (e), RA 3019 – it will prosper.
The proper charge is direct bribery. The prosecutor Elements:

refrained from doing his official duty (3rd act). 1. The said offender was in charge of his official,
administrative or judicial function;
He is also liable for Art. 208 – Dereliction in the
Prosecution of Offenses because he refrained from The judge is a public officer who is rendering a judicial
prosecuting X. he has the duty to prosecute offenses and function.
he knows based on the evidence that there is probable
cause yet he dismissed the case. 2. That he acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith
or gross inexcusable negligence;
X was the appointed chairman of LTFRB. Everybody
was congratulating X. Among those was W. W is an He acted with manifest partiality – he was partial in favor
owner and operator of 40 buses. He went to of X. He also acted with evident bad faith. The prosecution
congratulate X. after that, W said he is going to leave. was able to prove the guilt yet he acquitted the said
When he was about to leave, X said “You left accused.
something.” W said, “That is for you.” X opened it, it
contained a Rolex watch worth P4 million. This came 3. The said accused caused any undue injury to any party,
to the knowledge of one of the staff and the staff including the government, or gave any private party
informed the head of the DOTC. An investigation was unwarranted benefits, advantage, or preference in the
conducted. What case may be filed against X? discharge of his official functions.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 102 of 142
entrapment operation. He was caught in the act of

He caused undue injury both to the State and to the private receiving the said amount. In fact, for fear, he threw the
complainant. As to the State, he cause disturbance of envelope. Merencillo was charged with: (a) Sec. 3 (b), RA
public order. As to the private complainant, the injury he 3019; and (b) Direct Bribery. SC: Liable for direct bribery.
caused. He is a public officer. The second act is violated because he
refrained from performing his duty (issuance of CAR)
With all these elements being present, the judge is liable without the payment. Liable also under Sec. 3 (b), RA 3019.
for violation of Sec. 3(e) of RA 3019. Elements: 1. the offender is a public officer; 2. who
requested or received a gift, a present, a share, a
Would there be double jeopardy? No. In Merencillo v. percentage, or benefit; 3. on behalf of the offender or any
People, the SC held that an offender can be prosecuted other person; 4. in connection with a contract or
both for violating RA 3019 and direct bribery under the transaction with the government; 5. in which the public
RPC because under Sec. 3, RA 3019, ‘in addition to the acts officer, in an official capacity under the law, has the right
or omissions committed by public officers punished by any to intervene.
law, the acts of graft and corrupt practices can be filed
against him.’ There is also no double jeopardy because Sec. 3 (b) of RA
3019 and direct bribery do not have the same elements.
RA 3019 will always be in addition to any act or omissions Therefore, both cases may be filed against him.
committed by public officers. Hence, double jeopardy will
not arise. In Sec. 3(b), a mere demand for a gift is enough to
constitute a violation. In direct bribery, there must be an
Plunder – it will not prosper. Even if the amount acceptance of a promise/offer/gift/present. Moreover, they
received by the judge was P50M, the aggregate amount also differ in scope. The ambit of Sec. 3 (b) is specific –
necessary in case of Plunder. In order for one to be liable limited only to contracts involving monetary consideration
for Plunder, it is necessary that he commits a series or which the offender has the duty to intervene. Direct
combination of overt or criminal act. In this case, there was bribery is wider in scope.
no series or combination of act but rather he performed
only one act. That one act will not give rise to the crime of Sec. 3 (b), RA 3019 Art. 210 – Direct Bribery
plunder even if he the amount he received is the threshold A mere demand for a gift is There must be an
amount of P50M. enough to constitute a acceptance of a
violation promise/gift/offer/present
There was a manufacturing company in Valenzuela. It The ambit is specific, i.e. Wider in scope because it
was on fire. Many people died. Because of it, Mayor limited only to contracts includes performance of
Gatchalian and several others were charged with involving monetary an act constituting a
violating Sec. 3 (e), RA 3019. SC acquitted Mayor consideration which the crime, execution of an
Gatchalian. SC held that the first element is present offender has the duty to unjust act which does not
because Mayor Gatchalian and the others are public intervene under the law constitute a crime, or
officers discharging public functions. But the second agreeing or refraining
element is absent because Mayor Gatchalian, in granting from doing an official act.
the permits, merely followed the existing memorandum
circulars and ordinances for issuance of business permits. R.A. No. 3019 – THE ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT
The third element is also absent because there was no PRACTICES ACT
undue injury caused. ‘Undue injury’ is equated with actual
damage, which must be produced by the proximate cause. Every public officer must file their SALN.
The proximate cause of the fire was the stockpiling of sacks
of chemicals in an area not intended for such storage. What if the public officer did not file his SALN?
There is no direct causal connection between Mayor • He may be charged for violation of RA 3019
Gatchalian’s issuance of the mayor’s permit and the fire. • He may also face administrative sanctions under
There is also no showing that Mayor Gatchalian gave RA 7613
preference towards the company in issuing the permits.
Public officer stated falsities in his SALNs. What
In Merencillo v. People, Merencillo is a BIR examiner who crime/s?
asked for P20,000 in exchange for the CAR. There was an
Daverick Pacumio
Page 103 of 142
Perjury or falsification of public document. What RA is merely for a preventive measure and not a form of
3019 punishes is the non-filing of the SALN. But when a penalty, the Supreme Court ruled it is constitutional.
SALN is filed but it contains falsities because it is under
oath, the offender can be prosecuted for either falsification (b) Wrong. Even if public officer X has undergone
under Art. 171, by making untruthful statements in a preventive suspension in an admin case, placing him under
narration of facts, or perjury under Art. 183. preventive suspension for violating RA 3019 is mandatory
and ministerial on the SB the moment there is a finding of
Jurisdiction: Sandiganbayan if the public officer charged probable cause.
is of Salary Grade “27” or above. But if the public officer is
of Salary Grade of below “27”, the case is to be filed by the Section 14 – Unsolicited Gifts or Presents of
Ombudsman before the proper trial court. Insignificant Value
SECTION 11 – PRESCRIPTION OF OFFENSES If the gifts given to a public officer are of insignificant value
which is given to the public officer as a token of gratitude
Violation for RA 3019 shall prescribe after 20 years. or as a token of thank you, the said public officer receiving
Therefore, the State has 20 years within which to prosecute it is not liable under RA 3019 as provided for under Section
the said public officer. After 20 years, the State loses the 14 of the law. Insignificant gifts of small value which is
right to prosecute the offender. given as a mere ordinary token of friendship or gratitude is
outside the ambit of RA 3019.
However, the right of the government to forfeit or to
recover ill-gotten wealth does not prescribe. So there are X, public officer, did a good act on an old woman. As
no latches and estoppel insofar as the right of the gratitude, old woman sent a lechon. X ate the lechon.
government to recover ill-gotten wealth is concerned. Are they liable under RA 3019?
There is no time limit. No. Lechon is of insignificant value and was not solicited
by X.
X is a public officer who was charged with Sec. 3 (e).
the OMB found probable cause. It filed the Article 213 – Illegal Exaction
Information before the Sandiganbayan because X
have the Salary Grade of beyond “27”. The ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL EXACTION (ART. 213, PAR. 2)
Sandiganbayan upon review of the case found also
probable cause and so the Sandiganbayan 1. That the offender is a public officer entrusted with the
immediately issued a warrant of arrest. The collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts.
Sandiganbayan also placed X under preventive
suspension. The counsel of X did not question the 2. He is guilty of any of the following acts or omissions:
said warrant of arrest and immediately posted bail.
However, they questioned the act of the (1) Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment Of sums
Sandiganbayan in placing him under preventive different from or larger than those authorized by law; or
suspension. • A mere demand of an amount different from that
authorized by law will the make the offender
X: (a) Sec. 13 is unconstitutional; and (b) since X was liable. It is immaterial whether that amount is
placed under preventive suspension in his admin greater or smaller than that authorized by law. For
case, he can no longer be placed in preventive as long as it is different, a mere demand will
suspension again. suffice. It is not even necessary that he already
(a) Wrong. The constitutionality of Sec. 13 has long been received the same.
upheld as early as the case of Bayot v. Sandiganbayan. It is
constitutional because preventive suspension is not a (2) Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by law,
penalty imposed after trial of the merits. It is only a for any sum of money collected by him officially; or
preventive measure. Its purpose is to prevent the said • All collecting officers are required to issue an
accused public officer from hampering or frustrating his Official Receipt for any sum of money collected by
prosecution by influencing or coercing witnesses or by them.
tampering pieces of evidence or by committing further
criminal acts. Since the purpose of a preventive suspension
Daverick Pacumio
Page 104 of 142
• If the said collecting officer deliberately failed to the same is not forthcoming, the law presumes that the
issue an official receipt, done with malice or said public officer has appropriated, misappropriated or
deliberate intent, he becomes liable. taken the said public funds or property.
• But if the collecting officer issued a provisional
receipt, only in a piece of paper, because he runs There must, however, be an audit: However, the
out of Official Receipt, he cannot be held liable Supreme Court added that mere demand will not suffice.
because it was not voluntary. It was not deliberate. It is necessary that there must be complete, thorough and
reliable audit and in the said complete, thorough and
(3) Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by Way of reliable audit, the following were discovered:
payment or otherwise, things or objects of a nature 1. The public officer indeed receive the public funds
different from that provided by law. or property.
• Receipt of the collecting officer of anything other 2. The said public funds and property was missing, or
than cash will make him liable. there was a shortage, or he cannot produce it, and
• X was getting CTC. He was asked for P200. He 3. The said public officer cannot give a justifiable
did not have P200. Collecting officer asked for reason, a legal excuse for the said shortage or
2 packs of cigarettes. Collecting officer is liable. missing of public funds or property.
Payment should be made by money, not thru
cigarettes. If all of these are present, the Supreme Court says that
there arises the prima facie presumption that there is
In Illegal Exaction, the offender is a COLLECTING PUBLIC malversation of public funds or property.
OFFICER. A public officer who has been entrusted with
duty to collect taxes, licenses, fees or other imposts. Article 220 – Technical Malversation
Article 217 – Malversation of Public Funds or Property ELEMENTS:

1. Offender is a public officer;
ELEMENTS: 2. There is a public fund or property under his
1. Offender is a public officer or employee; administration;
2. He has the custody or control of funds or property 3. Such public fund or property has been
by reason of the duties of his office; appropriated by law or ordinance; and
3. Those funds or property were public funds or 4. He applies the same to a public use other than that
property for which he was accountable; for which such fund or property has been
4. He appropriated, took, misappropriated or appropriated by law or ordinance.
consented, or through abandonment or
negligence, permitted another person to take Malversation and technical malversation are separate and
them. distinct from one another.
Offender: An accountable public officer, i.e., one who, by Malversation under Art. Technical Malversation
reason of the duties of his office, received public funds or 217 under Art. 220
properties, and has an obligation to account for it to the The offender public officer The offender public officer
State. is entrusted with public is entrusted with public
funds and property for his funds and property for his
How may malversation under Art. 217 be committed? custody. administration.
1. By a positive act, or malversation thru deliberate The public funds and The public funds and
intent or dolo - He is the one who appropriates or property must be property must be applied
misappropriates, who took the said public funds accounted later by the to that particular purpose
or property. public officer to the State. for which it has been
2. By a passive act, or malversation thru negligence appropriated by law or
or culpa ordinance.
The public officer took, The public officer applied
Is demand an element? No. Under Art. 217, when appropriated or it to another public use
demand is made by competent officer to an accountable misappropriated the said other than to that which it
public officer to account for public funds and property and public funds and property.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 105 of 142
has been appropriated by and file a new one which is Technical Malversation in order
law or ordinance. to conform to the evidence.
Malum in se Malum prohibitum
Ysidoro v. People – technical malversation is malum
Torres v. People – Accused was charged with malversation prohibitum. Criminal intent is not an element of technical
of public funds under Art. 217. The checks were for the malversation. What is punished is the diverting of funds
salary differentials. the treasurer gave it to principal, the from that to which it has been appropriated by law or
principal encashed the check. However, the principal ordinance to another public purpose. Therefore, good faith
should remit the money to the treasurer. This time, or lack of criminal intent is not a defense.
however, the principal failed to remit the encashed money.
He was then charged for Art. 217. The Information alleged In Abdulla v. People, Abdulla was officer of Sulu State
the accused misappropriated and took the encashed University. There was P40,000 released by DBM in order to
money. He was charged with malversation thru dolo. pay for the salary differentials of teachers. However,
During the hearing, the accused said he did not Abdulla applied it for payment of terminal leave credits.
misappropriate the money. He felt chest pain and took the Because of that, Abdulla was charged with technical
first flight to Manila to be treated by the best doctors. malversation. SC: Not liable. In the absence of a
However, after the treatment, the accused said that he was law/ordinance appropriating the P40,000, the said P40,000
held-up by several men and took the bag which the released by the DBM for salary differentials but used by
accused encashed. Because of this, the judge believed, and Abdulla for other public purposes were sourced from lump
convicted the accused thru malversation thru culpa or sum appropriations.
negligence even if the Information was for malversation
thru dolo. SC: The judge is correct. If the evidence Can Malversation be committed by private
presented reveals that what is present is malversation thru individuals?
culpa, the trial court judge is correct in convicting the Yes. If the said private individuals acted:
accused of malversation thru culpa even if the Information 1. As conspirator of the public officer in the act of
alleges malveration thru dolo. First, the dolo/culpa are committing Malversation.
mere modalities in the commission of the crime. Second, 2. As an accomplice or accessory.
malversation thru culpa is necessarily included in 3. Has been designated as the one in charge or the
malversation thru dolo. custodian of public funds or property whether by
the national or local government and he
Accused was charged with malversation under Art. misappropriated the same.
217. During the trial on the merits, an amount of 4. Has been charged as the administrator of funds
P150,000 appropriated by the Sanggunian was handed and property seized, attached or deposited by
to the City Administrator for the construction of a public authorities and he misappropriated the
mini library. Because of the pandemic, the City same.
Administrator used it to pay for the basic necessities
of his constituents during the ECQ. When audit was Can private funds be the subject of Malversation?
conducted, the entire amount of P150,000. City Yes. If these private funds has been seized, attached or
Administrator was charged by Art. 217. The Accused deposited by public authorities. It becomes in custody of
informed the court that the money has been the law. The moment that it is in custodia legis and it is
earmarked for the construction of a mini library. appropriated, misappropriated or converted then the
However, he invoked good faith – acting based on the offender becomes liable for Malversation.
needs of the constituents. Trial court judge convicted
the City Administrator for technical malversation. RA 7080 – Plunder
Judge is wrong. Malversation under Art. 217 is different
from technical malversation under Art. 220. One is not Definition: Any public officer who, by himself or in
necessarily included in the other. What the judge should connivance with members of his family, relatives by
do is to acquit the accused for the crime of Malversation affinity or consanguinity, business associates, subordinates
and then thereafter, to direct the prosecutor to file a case or other persons, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-
for Technical Malversation. OR the fiscal could move for gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt
the withdrawal of the said Information for Malversation criminal acts as described in Section 1 (d) hereof in the
aggregate amount or total value of at least Fifty million
pesos (P50,000,000.00)
Daverick Pacumio
Page 106 of 142
Article 223, 224, 225

Can plunder be committed by private individuals?
Yes. In Napoles v. Sandiganbayan, the SC held that even Article 223 – Conniving with or consenting to evasion
private persons can commit the crime of plunder if they
connive and conspire with public officers in the predicate ELEMENTS:
crimes of plunder. 1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He has in his custody or charge a prisoner, either
In Section 2 of RA 7080, the penalty for Plunder is reclusion detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment;
perpetua to death. It has the same nomenclature of penalty 3. Such prisoner escaped from his custody;
as the Revised Penal Code. Under Sec. 2, it is provided in 4. That he was in connivance with the prisoner in the
the imposition of penalty, mitigating and extenuating latter’s escape, or is with his consent.
circumstances and the degree of the participation of the
offender, shall be considered by the court. Article 224 – Evasion through negligence
In Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, the Supreme Court said that ELEMENTS:

Plunder is malum in se because it is inherently evil or 1. Offender is a public officer;
wrong to amass or accumulate ill-gotten wealth from the 2. He is charged with the conveyance or custody of a
State. prisoner, either detention prisoner or prisoner by
final judgment;
Voluntary Surrender may be considered if the said amount 3. Such prisoner escapes through his negligence.
has been returned. Restitution can be considered as
analogous voluntary surrender. However, Article 225 – Escape of Prisoner under the Custody of
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES shall NOT be a Person Not a Public Officer
considered.
ELEMENTS:
The degree of participation of the accused is also 1. Offender is a private individual;
considered. 2. Conveyance (or charge) of custody of prisoner or
person under arrest is confided to him;
Jurisdiction: Sandiganbayan. However, in Organo v. 3. Prisoner or person under arrest escapes;
Sandiganbayan, this is only when the public officer is of sg 4. Offender consents to the escape of the prisoner or
27 or above. If the public officer has SG below 27, the OMB person under arrest or that the escape takes place
must file it before the proper trial court. through his negligence.
Prescription: 20 years from the last act or predicate crime X was charged with murder. It is his day of hearing. He
was committed. The crime punishable under this Act shall was brought by the BJMP guard to the court early. The
prescribe in twenty (20) years. However, the right of the jail guard left the prisoner inside the courtroom. The
State to recover properties unlawfully acquired by public girlfriend of X seated with him. Thereafter, X escaped.
officers from them or from their nominees or transferees
shall not be barred by prescription, laches, or estoppel. X – not liable. He is a mere detention prisoner. He cannot
be held liable for evasion of service of sentence.
In GMA v. People, the OMB has presented pieces of
evidence against GMA. GMA filed a Demurrer to Evidence. GF – delivering prisoners from jail. She assisted in the
It was denied by the SB. SC: Granted the Demurrer. In escape of X.
order to prosecute an offender for plunder, the
Information must allege the Main Plunderer. Because if BJMP – evasion through negligence. Were it not for his
you look at the definition of plunder, it is committed by a negligence X would not have been able to leave the hall of
public officer by himself or in connivance. Thus, there justice. The moment a custodian brought a prisoner
must be a principal public officer or a Main Plunderer. For outside the prison cell, it is his duty not to lose sight of such
failure to allege the same, there can be no crime of plunder. prisoner.
Since there was no allegation as to the Main Plunderer, the
amount is P328M, and there was no conspiracy proven, the Articles 226, 227, 228
P328M should be divided by the 10 accused.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 107 of 142
Article 226 – Removal, Concealment, or Destruction of the fiscal moved that it be marked as Exhibits. After
Document marking, the clerk placed the date and signature. The
clerk placed the same in an envelope and sealed it
ELEMENTS: with a tape. The clerk needed to buy stuff. Thus, he
1. Offender is a public officer; opened the envelope containing the marked money
2. He removes, destroys, or conceals documents or and used it to buy. The clerk of court was charged with
papers; malversation of public funds. He argued that it is only
3. Said documents or papers should have been infidelity in the custody of documents, not
entrusted to such public officer by reason of his malversation.
office; Correct. It is not malversation because the P100 bill
4. Damage, whether serious or not, to a third party marked as exhibit is no longer used as medium of
or to the public interest should have been caused. exchange, but a piece of documentary evidence which is
marked and to be used as evidence. It is considered a
Article 227 – Officer Breaking Seal document.
ELEMENTS: Article 235 – Maltreatment of Prisoners

1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He is charged with the custody of papers or ELEMENTS:
property; 1. Offender is any public officer;
3. These papers or property are sealed by proper 2. He has in his custody a prisoner ; and
authority; and 3. The said public officer maltreats commits any act
4. He breaks the seals or permits them to be broken. of maltreatment:
1. By overdoing himself in the correction or
The offender is a public officer entrusted with the said handling of a prisoner or detention
documents sealed b proper authority. And the said public prisoner under his charge either;
officer breaks the seal or permitted others to break the seal 2. By the imposition of punishments not
of the said documents. authorized by the rules and regulations;
3. By inflicting such punishments allowed by
The MERE ACT OF BREAKING of the seal of the document rules and regulations in such a manner
will already consummate the crime. Damage is no longer which is excessive in nature
an element. 4. By maltreating such prisoner to extort a
confession or to obtain some information
Article 228 – Opening a Closed Document from the prisoner
ELEMENTS: In case of maltreatment, the offender is the public officer,

1. Offender is a public officer ; custodian of the prisoner he maltreats.
2. Any closed papers, documents, or objects are
entrusted to his custody; The law used the phrase “physical injuries or damage
3. He opens or permits to be opened said closed caused.” Therefore, the said injury caused to the prisoner
papers, documents or objects; and would not only mean physical abuses. It could also include
4. He does not have proper authority mental and psychological abuse done by the said public
officers against the said prisoner.
The offender is a public officer, and he has been entrusted
with the custody of documents, papers, property closed by The penalty for maltreatment of prisoners is in addition to
public authority. The said public officer opened or permit the physical injuries or damage caused to the said victim.
others to open them without authority. Damage is likewise Therefore, even if the said physical injuries were
no longer an element. manifestations of the maltreatment, you do not complex it.
You do not absorb. It is not absorbed. It is not complexed.
In an old case, there was a hearing for illegal sale. The It produces a separate and distinct charge.
fiscal presented the police officer who was part of the
buy-bust team. The police officer, when confronted X was waiting in the bench. X was arrested. Inside the
with the marked money, the police officer easily police car, X was asking for why he was arrested. The
identified the marked money. Upon identification, police officers Y and Z just boxed and hit him a
Daverick Pacumio
Page 108 of 142
number of times. When they saw his head and mouth

bleeding, they stopped, drove the car, opened the Section 17. Applicability of Refouler. - No person shall be
door, dropped X on the ground. X sustained serious expelled, returned or extradited to another State
physical injuries. Can Y and Z be charged under Art. where there are substantial grounds to believe that
235? such person shall be in danger of being subjected to
No. At the time X was maltreated, X was not yet a prisoner. torture. For the purposes of determining whether such
For X to become a prisoner, he must be booked. Here, grounds exist, the Secretary of the Department of Foreign
there was no booking. Therefore, maltreatment will not lie Affairs (DFA) and the Secretary of the DOJ, in coordination
against Y and Z. Y and Z are, however liable for serious with the Chairperson of the CHR, shall take into account
physical injuries and torture under RA 9745. all relevant considerations including, where applicable and
not limited to, the existence in the requesting State of a
Same problem. X was sitting on a bench. Y and Z consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of
passed by, arrested X. Y and Z said that X was a suspect human rights.
in the robbery with homicide. X asked for the warrant.
no warrant was shown. X was brought to the police TITLE EIGHT – CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
station. There, he was investigated. He was among
those last seen in the vicinity of the house where the Art. 246 - Parricide
robbery took place. X was booked. After an hour, Y
and Z brought X out. When X would not admit, Y and ELEMENTS:
Z repeatedly hit X. Y and Z stopped when X started 1. That a person is killed;
vomiting blood. Y and Z brought X to the hospital. 2. That the deceased is killed by the accused;
Doctor said he sustained serious physical injuries. 3. That the deceased is the father, mother, or child,
What crime/s? whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate
other ascendant, or legitimate other descendant,
Unlawful arrest under Art. 269 – the police officers or legitimate spouse of the accused.
arrested X for the purpose of filing a case against him but
they had no authority to do so because there was no Parricide is a crime based on relationship. The relationship
warrant of arrest. must be legitimate except in case of parents and children.
The relationship must be in the direct line. The
Maltreatment of Prisoners – because X was already relationship must be by blood except in legitimate spouses.
booked. X was maltreated with serious physical injuries
which is not authorized by the rules and regulations Art. 248 – Murder
Violation of RA 9745 – although torture amounts to ELEMENTS:

maltreatment, the offenders may be charged with Art. 235 1. That a person was killed;
and RA 9745 because under Sec. 15, torture shall not be 2. That the accused killed him;
absorbed. It is always separate and distinct. 3. That the killing was attended by any of the
qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article
Serious physical injuries 248; and
4. That the killing is not parricide or infanticide.
Section 16. Exclusion from the Coverage of Special Amnesty
Law. - In order not to depreciate the crime of torture, Qualifying circumstances:
persons who have committed any act of torture shall not 1. Treachery, taking advantage of superior strength,
benefit from any special amnesty law or similar with the aid of armed men, or employing means to
measures that will have the effect of exempting them weaken the defense, or of means or persons to
from any criminal proceedings and sanctions. insure or afford mutiny;
2. In consideration of price, reward or promise;
Y and Z were convicted of RA 9745. They were at the 3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion,
Bilibid. The President issued an Amnesty shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or
Proclamation. Y and Z applied for Amnesty. Should it assault upon a railroad, fall of an airship, by means
be granted? of motor vehicles, or with the use of any other
No. Under Sec. 16, RA 9745, offenders convicted of torture means involving great waste and ruin.
under RA 9745 cannot be granted amnesty.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 109 of 142
4. On occasion of any calamities enumerated in the the police. Husband was charged with parricide. If
preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake, you were the prosecutor, would you indict?
eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, Yes. He killed his own wife.
epidemic, or any other public calamities.
5. With evident premeditation. If you were the counsel of the husband, what would be
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanely your defense?
augmenting the suffering of the victim or Art. 247 - That the DEATH OCCURRED UNDER
outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse (RA EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES. the legally married
7659). spouse was caught or surprised in the act of sexual
intercourse with another person. the legally married
Only one is necessary to give rise to murder. You remove spouse also kills or inflicts serious physical injuries to
any of these, the offender is liable for homicide under Art. either or both.
249.
If you were the judge, how do you rule?
A brother kills his own brother out of envy. The Convict the husband of parricide. But since Art. 247
brother poisoned his other brother. What crime is lies, the penalty imposed is not reclusion perpetua, but
committed? only destierro under Art. 247.
Murder. Because the act of killing was qualified by use of
poison. Not parricide because although the relationship is In People v. Abarca, the husband, while reviewing for the
legitimate and by blood, it is not in the direct line. Bar, went home. When he was about to leave, the bus was
not yet there. The husband went home and then saw his
Step father killed his son. The son was the biological wife having sex with another man. He tried to kill the man,
son of the wife. the father was only the second but the man jumped outside the window. He tried to look
husband because the first husband died. What crime for the man, and took an hour before he could finally get a
is committed? gun and shoot the man. SC: Art. 247 lies. Even if an hour
Homicide. None of the qualifying circumstances under had already lapsed from the time of the surprising to the
Art. 248 preceded the crime because there is an altercation. time of the killing, still, the husband was enveloped with
Moreover, the relationship is not by blood. the pain, jealousy, and shock of seeing his wife having sex
with another man. In Abarca, when Abarca shot the
Illegitimate child was killed by his father. Because of paramour of his wife, he also hit two (2) persons, spouses
bad blood, the father hired W, who killed the son after – they suffered injuries. Thus, Abarca was charged with
conducting surveillance. What crime? frustrated homicide. SC: No. when Abarca shot at the
Father – parricide. Even if the relationship is illegitimate, victim, he was not performing a felonious act. Therefore,
it can still amount to parricide. he cannot be held criminally liable on the felonies on the
two (2) persons. However, even if Abarca was performing
W – murder, qualified by treachery. The act of killing was a lawful act, he was doing so with negligence. Thus, Abarca
planned. was convicted of reckless imprudence resulting in serious
physical injuries.
Even if there was conspiracy as the father is the principal
by inducement and W is the principal by direct SC: Art. 247 is not a felony – it is an exempting
participation, there is no conspiracy because the circumstance, which is a matter of defense on the part of
relationship attendant in parricide is personal to the father the accused who inflicted SPI or killings.
and cannot apply to W.
The husband arrived home. Not feeling well, it is not
Husband came home 8:00PM. One day, he came home the usual time that he arrived. He opened the house.
at 4:00PM. The husband believed his wife was out. he He has a key. Because the house was very silent, he
used his own key to open the house. He went to the opened the bedroom. He wanted to take a rest. Upon
bedroom. Upon opening the door, he saw his wife in opening the bedroom, he was shocked. He saw his
actual sexual intercourse with his own brother. own wife in actual sexual intercourse with the nanny
Enraged, the husband pulled out his fan-knife and of their children. He was very mad. He took his
stabbed his own wife. the brother was able to escape. revolver. Then he fired it at his wife and as well as to
After stabbing and killing the wife, he surrendered to his nanny of his children. Both of them died. What
Daverick Pacumio
Page 110 of 142
case/s should be filed by the public prosecutor against not see. Based on the examination, his right eye
the said husband? suffered serious damage, which will require 2 months
of healing. He wanted to file a case, but he cannot
Article 251 – Death Caused in a Tumultuous Affray ascertain who boxed him on the eye among the people
in the fight. However, he could recall that Y boxed
ELEMENTS: him on the chest. Who shall be liable for X’s SPI?
1. That there be several persons Y. charge: Art. 252.
2. That they did not compose groups organized for
the common purpose of assaulting and attacking Art. 253 – Giving Assistance to Suicide
each other reciprocally
3. That these several persons quarreled and assaulted TWO ACTS PUNISHABLE:
one another in a confused and tumultuous I. By assisting another to commit suicide, whether
manner the suicide is consummated or not; or
4. That someone was killed in the course of the affray II. By lending assistance to another to commit suicide
5. That it cannot be ascertained who actually killed to the extent of doing the killing himself.
the deceased
6. That the person or persons who inflicted serious X was sick with COVID. No hospital would accept X.
physical injuries or who used violence can be The family was advised to buy an oxygen tank. X was
identified. still having a hard time breathing. Next morning,
Victim: Any person. he need not be a participant. while the husband of X was taking care of her, X told
her husband, “I am already 87 years old. I have lived a
Article 252 – Physical Injuries Inflicted in a good life. I want to go already. Please remove the
Tumultuous Affray tubes connecting me to the oxygen tanks.” The
husband refused. The wife insisted. The husband
ELEMENTS: removed the tubes, and X died. What crime?
1. That there is a tumultuous affray Giving assistance to suicide because the initiative to
2. That a participant or some participants thereof take her own life came from X, not from her husband.
suffer serious physical injuries or physical injuries
of a less serious nature only. In Art. 253, if the offender did the act of killing himself, the
3. That the person responsible thereof cannot be penalty is reclusion temporal, the same penalty for
identified homicide.
4. That all those who appear to have used violence
upon the person of the offended party are known. Art. 255 – Infanticide
Victim: Must be a participant in the affray. Moreover, the Infanticide is the act of killing of a child less than three (3)
injuries suffered must be serious or less serious. If slight, days old or less than seventy-two (72) hours whoever be
Art. 252 will not lie. the offender.
X was sleeping. Suddenly, he heard noises. He heard a The offender can be any person.
fight. He went near it. After a few minutes, he fell on
the ground. He has a stab wound on the chest. There If done by the mother herself, and the purpose is to conceal
was an icepick. He was brought to the hospital, but he dishonor, it is a mitigating circumstance which will lower
still died. Based on the investigation, no one saw who the penalty.
stabbed X on the chest. However, there was one
witness who saw one of the participants Y kicked X on Art. 256 – Intentional Abortion
the lower part of his body. Who shall be prosecuted?
Y. the charge is death in a tumultuous affray since the Intent of the offender is against the fetus.
actual perpetrator cannot be ascertained, Y shall be liable,
as he is the one who used violence. This may be committed in any of the following
manner:
X was awakened by the commotion. He saw 15-20 1. When the offender employs violence upon the
people engaged in a fight. X went out. he joined. X fell offended party who is a pregnant woman in order
on the ground. His right eye was so injured, he could
Daverick Pacumio
Page 111 of 142
to expel the fetus from the womb of the said although she has just given birth, they went to the
woman. forest, dug the ground, and buried the baby alive.
2. When the offender administered abortive What crime/s is/are committed? Both by X and her
drugs/beverage on the said pregnant woman in mother?
order to expel the fetus from the womb of the said Infanticide. The said child was less than 3-days old. The
woman without the consent of the latter. killing of said child is, therefore, infanticide.
3. When the offender administered abortive
drugs/beverage on the said pregnant woman with Concealment of dishonor is a PMC, which lowers her
the consent of the latter in order to expel the fetus penalty by 2 degrees.
from the womb of the said woman.
On the 3rd day, the mother and X killed the baby.
It is necessary that the fetus died. If the fetus did not die, X – parricide. The child is already 3 days old.
there may be frustrated or attempted intentional
abortion. Parricide v. Infanticide
Art. 257 – Unintentional Abortion Parricide Infanticide

Relationship is controlling Age of the victim is
The intention of the offender is against the woman. He controlling
may or may not know that the said woman is pregnant. The offender must be the The offender can be any
Because of the violence he enforced, the baby inside the father, mother, child, person, whether a relative
womb of the woman died. whether legitimate or or a total stranger.
illegitimate, legitimate
It can be committed only in one manner: by employing other ascendant,
physical violence on the person of the woman. legitimate other
descendant, legitimate
There is no frustrated or attempted stage. This is because spouse.
there is no intent against the fetus. Concealment of dishonor Concealment of dishonor
is not a mitigating is a mitigating
X lived in a far-flung area in Mindanao. He lives in a circumstance. circumstance
small barangay. the neighbor said, “uy ang laki ng Conspiracy would not lie Conspiracy would lie
tiyan mo. Bakit araw-araw ang laki ng tiyan mo.” X
said “di naman ah.” “Ay buntis ka! Buntis ka!” X said, X led a stressful life. In less than 7 months, she was
“di ako buntis. Wala akong boyfriend.” Days passed, already experiencing labor pain. The baby was about
the stomach became bigger. The neighbor said, to go out. the mother of X helped in delivering the
““you’re pregnant!” Inside the house, the mother said baby. Upon seeing the baby, X wanted to strangle it to
“why is your stomach very big? Are you pregnant? X conceal her dishonor. The mother prevented X. the
told her mother NO. She is not pregnant. She has no next day, X suffocated the baby. The baby died. What
boyfriend. She has no man in his life how could she be crime is committed?
pregnant. So, the mother said, “let us go to town. I’ll Infanticide.
bring you the health center. Then, she was brought to
the health center. The doctor said she is pregnant. She Same problem. X delivered the baby in less than 7
was crying. She could not accept it. According to her, months. Thereafter, X immediately killed the baby.
the baby came from the evil spirit. On the 9th month, What crime?
time of delivery of the said baby. They did not inform Intentional abortion.
the neighbors that indeed she was pregnant. Only she
and her mother know that in reality she was pregnant. X was watering the plants outside. The fence was filled
At the time of deliver, it was the mother of X who help with flowering plants. X was watering the plants.
her deliver the said baby. The baby was healthy. X told According to neighbor Y, X was spreading rumors that
the mother, “we have to get rid of the baby! The Y’s daughter had an abortion. X denied it. Y became
neighbors did not know the said pregnancy. I told mad at X and slapped X. he also kicked X. it was a bad
them that my stomach was just big. We have to get rid fall. Y left. Unknown to Y, X was 3 months pregnant. X
of the baby.” Thereafter, they cut the umbilical cord. began bleeding. X’s baby died. What crime/s?
On that very same night, the mother of X, as well as X,
Daverick Pacumio
Page 112 of 142
X – serious physical injuries. Mutilation is a crime which can only be committed by

means of deliberate intent. It is a crime which cannot be
Baby of X – unintentional abortion. Immaterial that Y committed by mere negligence or imprudence. There must
knew that X was pregnant. always be deliberate intent to mutilate, to cut off or to
severe a part of the body of a person.
The act of kicking X resulted to 2 less grave felonies.
Therefore, Art. 48 applies. Serious physical injuries with Two ways of committing MUTILATION:
unintentional abortion. 1. By intentionally depriving/mutilating (totally or
partially) another of a part of his body which is an
Same problem. X, at the time, was 9 months pregnant. essential part for reproduction.
When Y slapped X, X lost balance and started • Man – penis.
bleeding. When Y saw X on the ground, Y left X. Y then • Woman – ovarium.
chased X and hacked X on the chest repeatedly. X and
her baby died. X and Y are married. They had been married for 20
X – murder. In the first scene, Y slapped X. therefore, spur years. Despite their marriage, the husband is still
of the moment. in the second scene, Y, armed with a bolo, fond of women. He always has a mistress. Y tolerated
hacked X. there was already treachery. it. In their 20th anniversary, Y told her husband to
come home early as she will prepare X’s favorite. X
Baby – intentional abortion. Y saw X bleeding. X is also came home early. Unknown to the husband, the wife
9 months pregnant. The intent was not only against the was trying to get him drunk. When the husband was
woman but also against the baby inside her. very drunk, the wife took him to the bedroom. The
wife then took a knife and cut the penis of her
Complex crime of murder with intentional abortion husband.
pursuant to Art. 48. Intentional mutilation.
Art. 259 – Dispensing of Abortives 2. By intentionally committing other mutilation that is, by
depriving him (totally or partially) of any other part of his
if a pharmacist issued an abortive drug without any body with intent to deprive him of such part of his body.
prescription coming from the physician, he shall be held
liable for DISPENSING OF ABORTIVES under ART. 259. X and Y were fighting. In the course of said fight, X
raised his bolo and told Y, “I am going to kill you.” He
Art. 260 – Duel hacked Y, Y parried the blow with his right hand. The
bolo landed on Y’s right arm. Y’s right arm was
A duel is a combat fought between two or more persons severed. What crime?
based on a previous agreement to engage in a fight. Not intentional mutilation. X’s intent was to kill Y, not
to cut off Y’s arm. Therefore, it is attempted homicide.
Before a fight/combat may be considered to be a duel,
the following elements must be present: THREE KINDS OF PHYSICAL INJURIES
1. There must be a previous agreement to engage in 1. Serious Physical Injuries
a fight. 2. Less Serious Physical Injuries
2. There must be two or more seconds for each 3. Slight Physical Injuries
combatant.
3. The weapons to be used and other terms of the Art. 263 – Serious Physical Injuries
fight must be agreed upon by the said seconds.
Under Article 263, the following acts are punished as
In case of a duel under Art. 260, the mere act of engaging serious physical injuries:
in a duel, even without killing/inflicting physical injuries 1. When the injured person becomes insane,
on the adversary, just by entering into a duel, makes the imbecile, impotent, or blind as a consequence of
offender criminally liable. One of the acts punished under the physical injuries inflicted; or
Article 260. 2. When the injured person:
a. Loses the use of speech or the power to hear
Art. 262 – Mutilation or smell or he loses a hand, a foot, an arm or
a leg; or
Daverick Pacumio
Page 113 of 142
b. Lose the use of any part of his body; or The following circumstances will qualify Less Serious
c. Becomes either incapacitated for the work in Physical Injuries:
which he is habitually engaged. 1. When there is a manifest intent to insult or offend
3. When the injured person: the victim of the injury;
a. Becomes deformed; or 2. When there are acts adding ignominy to the
b. Loses any other part of his body or the use of commission of the crime;
the part of his body; or 3. When the offended party is the offender’s parents,
c. Becomes ill or incapacitated for the work in ascendants, guardians, curators or teachers;
which he is habitually engaged for a period of 4. When offended party is a person of rank or a
more than 90 days. person in authority, provided it will not amount to
4. When the injured person becomes ill or direct assault.
incapacitated for the work in which is a habitually
engaged for a period of more than 30 days. Article 266 – Slight Physical Injuries and
Maltreatment
The moment by reason of the physical injuries inflicted on
the victim, he becomes ill or could not work for a period of There are three kinds of slight physical injury:
more than 30 days, it is immediately serious physical 1. Physical Injury that would be needing medical
injuries. intervention or would incapacitate the victim from
labor for a period of 1 to 9 days;
If by reason of the physical injuries inflicted by the accused 2. Physical Injury that will not be needing medical
on the victim, the said victim becomes deformed, there is intervention or would not incapacitate the victim
physical disfigurement of the said victim's physical from labor at all;
appearance, which is permanent. It is located in a 3. Ill-treatment of another by deed.
conspicuous and visible part of his body, it cannot be cured
or healed through the natural healing process. Therefore, ABCDE has a common enemy W. they decided to get
it causes deformity on the part of the said victim, do not even. They had no intent to kill W. they wanted to
consider anymore the healing period. What is considered cripple W. they knew that W drinks every Sunday and
is the fact that the injury has caused deformity on the part goes home around 10:00PM. The moment W came
of the said victim. Therefore, even if the said medical passing by, ABCDE, armed with a piece of wood,
certificate states that the said wound would heal within a attacked W. they attacked his right leg. When they
period of 2 weeks or 30 days which amount only to Less saw W fell on the ground and was already bleeding,
Serious Physical Injuries, but since the scar will produce ABCDE left. W was incapacitated for labor for 3 or
deformity as it was located on the face of the victim, do more months. What crime/s?
not consider the healing period. Qualified serious physical injuries. Here, the infliction
of the SPI was attended by treachery, abuse of superior
The following circumstances will qualify Serious strength.
Physical Injuries:
1. When the infliction of serious physical injuries is Wife learned that her husband has a mistress. Wife
attended by any of the qualifying circumstances offered the mistress money to leave the husband.
for murder under Article 248; and Mistress refused. When the mistress stood up, the
2. When the victim of the serious physical injuries is wife followed her. The wife sprayed on the mistress
any of the persons enumerated for the crime of toxic substances which caused burns on her face.
Parricide. Thereafter, the wife left. The mistress is now very
ugly. The doctor said that the burns will be healed
Article 265 – Less Serious Physical Injuries within 30 days. however, the scars are permanent,
unless she undergoes plastic surgery. What crime?
There is Less Serious Physical Injuries: Serious physical injuries. The healing period is 30 days,
1. When by reason of the injuries inflicted on the however, the face of the mistress was deformed. It resulted
victim, he/she would be needing medical in a disfigurement.
intervention for a period of 10 to 30 days; or
2. When the injured victim would be incapacitated X boxed Y. Y lost his 2 front teeth. Thereafter, a case
from labor for a period of 10 to 30 days. of SPI was filed by Y against X. after the prosecution’s
evidence, the defense presented. During the
Daverick Pacumio
Page 114 of 142
presentation, the counsel called on Y, and inquired, 1. The offender is a man and the offended party is a
“How have you been?” When Y showed his teeth, he woman;
gave a beautiful smile. He had his teeth implanted. 2. The offender had carnal knowledge of the woman
SC: Not liable for SPI. Only sliight physical injuries. against her will;
The basis that when it is the 2 front teeth is lost and will 3. Such act is accomplished under any of the
cause deformity is a very old case. based on the evidence following circumstance:
presented, Y placed implants on the place where the teeth a) By using force, threat or intimidation;
were lost. Thus, there was no deformity. Only slight b) When the offended party is deprived of
physical injuries. reason or otherwise, unconscious;
c) By means of fraudulent machination or
In said case, the SC held that it should not have reached grave abuse of authority;
the SC. d) When the offended party is under 12 years
of age or is demented, even if none of the
Father and son had an altercation over business circumstances previously mentioned is
matters. The father accused the son of wasting money. present.
The son answered back. The father lost control of
himself. The son got mad. The son tried to stab his II. RAPE BY SEXUAL ASSAULT
father, but the father evaded the blow. The son then
repeatedly boxed his father. He stopped when the ELEMENTS:
mother arrived and stopped the son. The father was
incapacitated for labor for a period of 2 weeks. What 1. The offender is any person and the offended party is
crime? also any person;
Qualified less serious physical injuries. Less serious 2. The offender committed any of the following acts of
because 14 days incapacity. sexual assault upon the victim:
a) By inserting his penis into another person’s mouth
Qualified because the son inflicted the same on his own or anal orifice; or
parent. b) By inserting any instrument or object into another
person’s genital or anal orifice.
X filed a case for SPI vs. Y. However, when the 3. The act of sexual assault is attended by any of the
prosecutor reviewed the complaint, there was no following circumstances:
attached medical certificate to show the healing a) By using force, threat or intimidation;
period of the injuries. There was only a picture b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or
showing the bruise sustained by X. what crime? otherwise unconscious; or
Slight physical injuries. There was no basis for SPI, c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave
because he failed to attach the medical certificate, which abuse of authority;
would have shown the healing period or period of d) When the woman is under 12 years of age or
incapacity of the victim. Therefore, it is only slight physical demented, even if none of the circumstances
injuries. previously mentioned is present.
Note: Physical injuries are formal crimes. They have no In case of rape by sexual assault, the offender may be any
attempted/frustrated stages, because they are punished person. The victim may be any person. It could be man to
based on result. a woman or man to man. It could be a woman to a man or
a woman to another woman because it is any person to
Article 266-A – Rape another person.
People v. Jumawan three kinds of rape: Note that the acts of sexual assault is by inserting his penis
1. Rape by carnal knowledge; into another person’s mouth or anal orifice; or by inserting
2. Rape by Sexual Assault; any instrument or object into another person’s genital or
3. Marital Rape anal orifice.
I. RAPE BY CARNAL KNOWLEDGE III. MARITAL RAPE
ELEMENTS:
Daverick Pacumio
Page 115 of 142
In the case of People vs. Jumawan, rape exists even in case three (3) years, and the sexual act in question is proven to
of marital relationship because rape is not about sex. Rape be consensual, non-abusive, and non-
a is violation of the human dignity of a woman. Therefore, exploitative: Provided, further, That if the victim is under
when the husband penetrates the wife by means of thirteen (13) years of age, this exception shall not apply.
violence, threats or intimidation, by means of force, rape "As used in this Act, non-abusive shall mean the absence
exists because it must be consensual. of undue influence, intimidation, fraudulent
machinations, coercion, threat, physical, sexual,
The father arrived home. The daughter was 20 years psychological, or mental injury or maltreatment, either
old. The daughter was sleeping. The father was drunk. with intention or through neglect, during the conduct of
He went directly to his daughter’s bedroom. The sexual activities with the child victim. On the other hand,
father started undressing the daughter. The daughter non-exploitative shall mean there is no actual or attempted
was awakened and she saw her father. She was crying. act or acts of unfairly taking advantage of the child's
She did not struggle. The father had carnal knowledge position of vulnerability, differential power, or trust during
of his daughter. The following morning, the daughter the conduct of sexual activities."
informed her aunts of the father’s acts. What crime?
Rape. Section 2. Articles 337 and 338 of Act No. 3815, otherwise
known as "The Revised Penal Code" are hereby amended
Father’s defense: The sexual intercourse was to read as follows:
consensual because the daughter did not put up a
struggle. "Article 337. Qualified seduction. - The seduction of a
No merit. This is incestuous rape. Here, you do not look minor, sixteen and over but under eighteen years of age,
for employment of force, threat, or intimidation because it committed by any person in public authority, priest, home-
is the overpowering and overbearing moral ascendancy of servant, domestic, guardian, teacher, or any person who, in
the father which takes the place of force, threat, or any capacity, shall be entrusted with the education or
intimidation. custody of the minor seduced, shall be punished by prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods.
Art. 266-A (1) (d) – Statutory Rape
"The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon
In statutory rape, you must prove: any person who shall seduce his sister or descendant,
a) Age of the victim (under 12 years); and whether or not she be a virgin or over eighteen years of age.
b) Carnal knowledge. "Under the provisions of this Chapter, seduction is
committed when the offender have carnal knowledge of
R.A. No. 11648 any of the persons and under the circumstances described
therein."
Section 1. Article 266-A (1)(d) of Act No. 3815, otherwise
known as "The Revised Penal Code," as amended by "Article 338. Simple seduction. - The seduction of a minor,
Republic Act No. 8353 known as "The Anti-Rape Law of sixteen and over but under eighteen years of age,
1997," is hereby further amended to read as follows: committed by means of deceit, shall be punished
by arresto mayor."
"Article 266-A. Rape; When and How Committed. - Rape is
committed: Section 3. Sections 5(b), 7, 9, and 10(b) of Republic Act No.
7610, otherwise known as the Special Protection of
"1) By a person who shall have carnal knowledge of another Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination
person under any of the following circumstances: Act are hereby amended to read as follows:
"x x x" "Section 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse. -

Children, whether male or female, who for money, profit,
d) When the offended party is under sixteen (16) years of or any other consideration or due to the coercion or
age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances influence of any adult, syndicate or group, indulge in
mentioned above be present: Provided, That there shall be sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct., are deemed to be
no criminal liability on the part of a person having carnal children exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse
knowledge of another person sixteen (16) years of age when
the age difference between the parties is not more than ."x x x
Daverick Pacumio
Page 116 of 142
X and Y are BF GF. Y was 15 years old. X was 18 years

"(a) x x x old. Age difference is not more than 3 years. Y had sex
with X.
"(b) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse or NOT STATUTORY RAPE. This is because the age
lascivious conduct with a child exploited in prostitution or difference is not more than 3 years and the sexual act is
subjected to other sexual abuse: Provided, That when the consensual, non-abusive, and non-exploitative because it
victim is under sixteen (16) years of age, the perpetrators was consensual, as X and Y are BF and GF.
shall be prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 2, for rape
and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, otherwise X and Y love each other. X is 20 years old, Y is 12 years
known as "The Revised Penal Code", for rape, or lascivious old. They eloped. They lived together for 2 weeks. The
conduct, as the case may be: Provided, That the penalty for girl was examined. Every night for 2 weeks, they had
lascivious conduct when the victim is under sixteen (16) sex. Is the man liable for any crime?
years of age shall be reclusion perpetua in its medium Yes, 14 counts of statutory rape. This is because the girl
period; and is under 13 years of age. Even if it was consensual, it is still
statutory rape. Every act of rape = 1 criminal Information.
x x x."
X is a mental retardate. She is 25, but has the mental
"Section 7. Child Trafficking. - Any person who shall capacity of a 9-year-old. Suddenly, here comes Y. Y
engage in trading and dealing with children including, but went to X. Y had carnal knowledge of X for a box of
not limited to, the act of buying and selling of a child for chocolates. The mother noticed blood stains on X’s
money, or for any consideration, or barter, shall suffer the underwear. X narrated to her mother what Y did to
penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua. The her. A case of qualified rape was filed against Y. In the
penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period when the Information, it was alleged that Y had carnal
victim is under sixteen (16) years of age. knowledge of X, 25 years old, but has mental capacity
of 9 y.o. child. The facts alleged in the Information
x x x." were proven. Convict?
No. Simple rape only. The accused cannot be convicted of
"Section 9. Obscene Publications and Indecent qualified rape. The circumstance that will qualify rape is
Shows. - Any person who shall hire, employ, use, persuade, the fact that the offender knows of the mental retardation
induce, or coerce a child to perform in, obscene exhibitions and such fact of knowledge is alleged in the Information
and indecent shows, whether live of in video, or model in and proven during trial. Here, there was nothing in the
obscene publications or pornographic materials, or to sell Information which indicates that the accused knew of X’s
or distribute the said materials shall suffer the penalty mental retardation. The fact that they were neighbors will
of prision mayor in its medium period. not suffice. It must be alleged that the accused knew that
the victim was suffering from mental retardation.
"If the child used as a performer, subject, or
seller/distributor is under eighteen (18) years of age, the Of what crime? Simple rape based on the
penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period. chronological age (25 y.o.)? or mental age (9 y.o.)?
Latest juris: mental age. The basis shall be the mental
x x x." age, not the chronological age, because it is the mental age
which is indicative of capability to give consent. Thus, Y
However, under RA 11648, statutory rape is committed should be convicted of statutory rape.
when the offender has carnal knowledge of a minor under
16 years old. The moment the victim of rape is under 16, What if there were 3 girls. The 3 girls were at the park,
regardless of consent, it is immediately statutory rape. happily talking, chatting to each other when suddenly
Because the victim under 16 cannot give a valid consent. here comes the barangay tanod. The Barangay tanod
Exception: when the age difference between the accused went to them and asked them “Why are you here? It is
and the victim is not more than 3 years and the sexual act already almost 12:00 o'clock and you're still here.
is consensual, non-abusive, and non-exploitative. Don't you know the curfew regulation? The curfew
Exception to the exception: If the victim is under 13 years ordinance? You are violating that. You're all under
old. arrest, we're going to bring you to the barangay
station.” Y and Z, however were able to run away. X
was the only one left and so X was brought by this
Daverick Pacumio
Page 117 of 142
barangay tanod to the barangay where in there was

the chariman. After X was brought to the chairman 2. Special Complex Crime of Rape with Homicide
and the chairman was informed of what happened,
the chairman merely lectured X of her violation and When by reason or an occasion of the rape, the crime of
told her not to do it again and to stay at home during homicide is committed. This is punished by death penalty.
nighttime because there is a curfew ordinance. After
lecturing on X, the barangay chairman told the People v. Villaflores: the Supreme Court said that the law
barangay tanods to bring her home to her parents used the phrase “by reason or on the occasion of rape,
safely. homicide is committed”.
One of the barangay tanods told the others “I have a “By reason of rape, homicide is committed”
tricycle. Let me bring her home.” and so the other • it means that the original criminal intent of the
tanod said “Yes, you can just bring her home since you accused is to rape the victim and in the course of
have a tricycle.” and so, the barangay tanod told X to the said rape, he has to kill the very victim of rape.
board the tricycle. On their way to the house of X, the
moment they reached the bridge, the barangay tanod "On occasion of rape, homicide is committed”
stopped the tricycle and at gunpoint told X to alight. • it means that the original criminal intent of the
At gunpoint, he told X to undress herself. The girl offender is to rape the victim and on the occasion
couldn't do anything but follow as gun was pointed to of the said rape, he has to kill someone. That
her. After she undressed herself, the said barangay someone may be the rape victim herself or another
tanod inserted his penis into the said girls genitalia. person. For as long as said act of killing occurred
After inserting the penis, the said barangay tanod on the occasion of the said act of rape. The law
removed it and after five minutes, the barangay tanod does not require it to be the victim of rape, it could
again inserted his penis into the genital of the girl. be any person.
Thereafter, he removed it. After another 5 minutes,
the barangay tanod inserted his penis into the girl’s People v. Laog: 2 girls went to apply for a job. A man
genital, satisfying himself he remove his penis. waylaid them and brought them to a secluded area. The
Thereafter, at gunpoint, he told the girl to dress man undressed X. Y became hysterical, as her cousin was
herself again and and that she would be brought being raped. Laog hit Y until Y died. Laog then hit X with a
home. He warned the girl not to tell it to anybody. lead pipe and had carnal knowledge of X. he again hit X but
However, the girl informed her parents. As a result X survived. Original charge: Murder for Y; and Rape of X.
three counts of rape were filed against the barangay SC: Rape with homicide. The original criminal intent was
tanod. Convicted by the RTC for three counts of rape. to rape X. on the occasion of the rape, he has to kill her
On appeal, his argument was if ever he should be held companion Y because Y was being hysterical.
liable, it should only be for one count of rape and not
for three counts of rape, citing People v. Aron. Is the R.A. No. 7610
said accused barangay tanod liable for only one count
of rape or for the for three counts of rape? X was 10 years old. He has a text mate, Y. Y arrived in
SC: 3 counts of rape. There are 3 criminal intent to Manila. Since Y has nowhere to go, he slept in the
penetrate the girl, and 3 penetrations. Each act of house of X and his mother. Come night time, X felt
penetration were separated by a period of 5 minutes. pain on his stomach. When he looked, he saw Y
inserting his finger inside his anus. Upon seeing it, he
In Aron, it is evident that the accused had only one (1) removed the finger. Y, instead, fondled, X’s penis. Y
criminal intent to penetrate. was charged with rape by sexual assault. Y’s argument:
(1) The boy was unsure what was inserted inside his
In the crime of Rape, there are two instances where in anus. Therefore, it cannot be rape by sexual assault;
a special complex crime arises: (2) Since the boy was unsure whether there was full
penetration, it should be acquittal.
1. Special Complex Crime of Attempted Rape with SC: No merit. In rape by sexual assault, the private
Homicide. complainant does not have to prove what was inserted
inside his anal orifice. It suffices that something was
When rape is attempted and homicide is committed by inserted. On the second argument, like in rape by carnal
reason or on occasion thereof.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 118 of 142
knowledge, it is not necessary that there be a full 16 years old

penetration. It suffices that it was inserted. Age of Under 16 or below 18, 18 years
victim/Cri years old or 18 under old and
In People v. Recalde, Recalde was convicted of rape by me or special above
sexual assault in relation to Sec. 5 (b), RA 7610 – purpose: committed demented circumstanc
to increase the penalty because rpae by sexual assault is es
only punished by prision mayor; whereas RA 7610 punishes Acts of Acts of Lascivious
it by reclusion temporal in its medium period. lasciviousne lasciviousne conduct
ss ss under under Sec. 5
Under Sec. 5(b), RA 7610, those who have sex with a child committed Art. 336 in (b) of R.A.
prostitute, and the victim is under 16 years old, the against relation to No. 7610:
offender shall be prosecuted for rape under the RPC but children Sec. 5 (b) of Reclusion
the penalty should be reclusion temporal. exploited in R.A. No. temporal in
prostitution 7610: its medium
RA 11648 increased the age. or other Reclusion period to
sexual abuse temporal in reclusion
In People v. Tulagan a sexual assault was committed its medium perpetua
against the victim. Issue is: what is the proper period
nomenclature of the crime? In this En Banc case, the SC Sexual Rape under Rape under
held that the proper nomenclature of the crime and the assault Art. 266-A Art. 266-A (1)
penalty depends on the age of the victim. committed (1): in relation to
• If the victim of sexual assault is under 16 years against Reclusion Art. 266-B:
or is demented: Proper nomenclature: Sexual children perptua, Reclusion
assault under Art. 266-A (2) in relation to Sec. 5 exploited in except when perpetua
(b), R.A. No. 7610. Penalty: RT medium. prostitution the victim is
• If the victim of sexual assault is 16 years above or other below 7
but under 18: Proper nomenclature: Lascivious sexual abuse years old in
conduct under Sec. 5 (b), R.A. No. 7610. Penalty: which case
RT in its medium period to RP. the death
• If the victim of sexual assault is 18 years old or penalty
above: Sexual assault under Art. 266-A (2). shall be
Penalty: Prision mayor. imposed
Rape by Rape under Rape under Rape
Prosec. G: Tulagan is controversial in the sense that in this carnal Art. 266-A Art. 266-A (1) undue
case, the SC stated that if the victim is under 16 years old, knowledge (1) in in relation to Art.
the penalty is lower than if the victim is above 16 but under relation to Art. 266-B: 266-A
5
18. However, the SC held that it is not their fault – this is Art. 266-B: Reclusion (1):
what the law provides. The remedy, therefore, is with Reclusion perpetua Reclusio
Congress. Unfortunately, Congress did not read this perpetua, n
Decision even if a copy of the Tulagan Decision was given except when Perpetu
to Congress. the victim is a
below 7
The following are the guidelines issued by the Supreme years old in
Court, through Justice Peralta, in People v. Tulagan, as which case
amended by R.A. No. 11648: the death
penalty
Designation of the Crime & Imposable Penalty shall be
imposed
5
This is because sexual assault of a minor under 16 years of age is punishable by reclusion temporal in its medium period to
only punishable by reclusion temporal in its medium period; reclusion perpetua.
whereas sexual assault of a minor 16 years of age and below 18 is
Daverick Pacumio
Page 119 of 142
Rape by Sexual Lascivious Sexual Yes. Sec. 5 (b), RA 7610. All the elements of Sec. 5 (b), RA
sexual assault conduct Assault 7610 are present. First, X committed sexual intercourse on
assault under Art. under Sec. 5 under Y. Second, Y is a child exploited in prostitution because she
266-A (2) in (b) of R.A. Art. indulges in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct for
relation to No. 7610: 266-A money, for profit, or for any other consideration. Third, Y
Sec. 5 (b) of Reclusion (2): is a minor (17 years old).
R.A. No. temporal in Prision
7610: its medium mayor Father was informed that his daughter was bullied.
Reclusion period to Father went to the boy, slapped the boy, and hit the
temporal in reclusion back of the boy. A case for RA 7610 Child Abuse under
its medium perpetua Sec. 10 (a) was filed vs. the father.
period No. In the case of Bongalon v. People and Jubalte v. People
and similar other cases, the Supreme Court said that not
Sec. 10 (b), RA 7610, as amended by RA 11648 all acts of inflicting violence, not all acts of laying hands on
a child would amount of violation of RA 7610. It is only
"Section 10. Other Acts of Neglect, Abuse, Cruelty or when the said act of laying of hands, there is on the part of
Exploitation and Other Conditions Prejudicial to the Child's the accused, the intent to debase, degrade or demean the
Development. - intrinsic worth and dignity of the child as a human being.
The physical harm in this case done by the father happened
"(a) x x x at the spur of the moment, in the heat of anger, and
indicative only of his fatherly love.
"(b) Any person who shall keep or have in his company a
minor sixteen (16) years of age or under or who is ten (10) 17 year old minor was walking. Suddenly, a group of
years or more his junior in any public or private place, men suddenly stopped her. Thereafter, they inflicted
hotel, motel, beer joint, discotheque, cabaret, pension injuries on her. The group of men were charged with
house, sauna or massage parlor, beach, and/or other RA 7610. During the hearing, when one of the accused
tourist or similar places shall suffer the penalty of prision was asked why he hit the girl, the accused said,
mayor in its maximum period and a fine of not less that “Napagtripan lang.” The group of men then cited the
Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00): Provided, That this case of Bongalon v. People, arguing that they are not
provision shall not apply to any person who is related liable because they had no intention to debase,
within fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity or any degrade, or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of
blood recognized by law, local custom and tradition or acts the child as a human being. Are they liable?
in the performance of a social, moral or legal duty. SC: Liable under Sec. 10 (a), RA 7610. In Delos Santos v.
People, the SC said that the accosting and laying of hands
X was 22 years old. Y is a sampaguita vendor, who was done by Delos Santos on the victim was deliberately
only 17 years old. He offered X sampaguita. Y also intended to debase, degrade, or demean the intrinsic worth
offered herself to X for P1,000. Suddenly, the police and dignity of the child based on the accused’s own
arrived. X was arrested and charged under Sec. 10 (b), statements. The words “Pinagtripan” evince an intention to
RA 7610. Is X liable? degrade. Moreover, the acts were not done at the spur of
No. Under Sec. 10 (b), RA 7610, as amended, it punishes a the moment – the fact that they said “Pinagtripan”
person who shall keep in his company a minor 16 years old indicates planning.
or under or is 10 years or more his junior in any public or
private place, hotel, motel, etc. Here, X cannot be held R.A. No. 9262 – Violence Against Women and Their
liable because Y was neither kept nor in the company of X. Children Act
It was Y who approached X. Second, Y was neither 16 years
old, as Y was 17, and X is not 10 years senior of Y as X is only X and Y are living together for 2 years. Thereafter, X
22 and Y is only 5 years younger than X. told Y, I want out of the relationship. Y asked why. X
said, “Basta.” X packed up. She was about to leave. At
Same problem. X accepted Y’s offer. After accepting the doorstep, Y said X cannot leave. Y pushed X and X
Y’s offer, X had sex with Y. Thereafter, X paid P1,000 to fell on the ground. Y begun attacking and wounding
Y. Is X liable under RA 7610? X. When X was bleeding, Y left. X filed a case for
violation of RA 9262. Y said: The law will not lie against
Daverick Pacumio
Page 120 of 142
me because I am a woman. RA 9262 only lies if the However, according to J. Caguioa, Sec. 5 (i) (psychological
accused is a man. Is she correct? violence), and Sec. 5 (e) (economic abuse), are acts mala in
No. The Supreme Court said the law used the word se, not mala prohibita. Therefore, there must be a
“person” “committed by any person against a woman with concurrence of both the actus reus and mens rea. To bring
whom he has or had a sexual or dating relationship. When about conviction for violation of Sec. 5 (i) or Sec. 5 (e), it is
the law used the word “person”, the SC said that it includes not enough for the woman to experience emotional
not only a husband, it includes not only a former boyfriend, anguish or for the partner to deny financial support. In
it could be a lesbian. order for criminal liability to arise, there must be evidence
that the accused willfully and consciously denied
Garcia v. Drilon: There is no merit in the argument that the financial support for the purpose of inflicting mental
law singles out husbands, fathers, or men as culprit. The and emotional anguish. The actus reus = denial of
offender within the meaning of “person” includes both a financial support. The mens rea = intent to inflict mental
man and a woman. and emotional anguish. Here, there was no actus reus nor
mens rea. Acharon had a valid reason for not providing
In Melgar v. People, X and Y had a common-law financial support, i.e., he got into an accident and his
relationship. Man left the woman. The man failed to give boarding house burned. It is obvious, therefore, that there
support to their common child. Despite the woman’s pleas, was no willful and deliberate intention on the part of the
the man did not. Not only that, there was a property, which husband to inflict mental or emotional anguish against his
could have been used for support, but Melgar sold it. The wife. Thus, Acharon was acquitted.
woman filed a VAWC case vs. Melgar. SC: Economic
abuse may include deprivation of support for a common X and Y are married. X is having an extra-marital affair
child between the accused and the victim, whether the with Z. Y filed a Sec. 5 (i) (Psychological Violence) case
child be legitimate or not. Under Sec. 5 (e), which punishes vs. X. Is X liable?
economic abuse, the deprivation of financial support to the Yes. In Araza v. People and XXX v. People, the SC convicted
child is considered as an act of violence against women and the husband. The Supreme Court said that Sec. 5 (i)
children. Here, Melgar is liable for violating Sec. 5 (e) of RA penalizes forms of psychological violence inflicted against
9262. First, the accused and the private complainant had a women and their children. The elements of Sec. 5 (i) are:
romantic relationship which resulted to the birth of the 1) The offended party is a woman and/or his child;
child. Second, Melgar acknowledged paternity over such 2) The woman is a wife, or a person with whom the
child. However, Melgar failed to provide support for said offender has/had a sexual and/or dating
child. The intent of the accused not to support the child relationship or a woman with whom such offender
became apparent when the accused sold to a third party had a common child;
the property which was supposed to answer for the 3) The offender causes on the woman mental or
support. Therefore, Melgar is liable for economic abuse emotional anguish, through acts of psychological
under Sec. 5 (e), R.A. No. 9262. violence.
In a recent case by the SC, Acharon v. People, written by J. Psychological violence therefore is necessary to bring
Caguioa, X and Y got married. They had a child. The man about a conviction. And if you will look at Sec. 3 (c), RA
had to leave for Brunei. They borrowed money. Acharon 9262, psychological violence refers to acts or omissions
said he will pay it by installments. After paying 71,000 of causing or likely to cause mental or emotional suffering on
the loan, Acharon stopped sending money to X. according the victim such as, but not limited to intimidation,
to the employer of the accused, he was having an affair in harassment, stalking, damage to property, public ridicule
Brunei. X filed a VAWC case vs. Acharon. The Information or humiliation, repeated verbal abuse and marital
alleged that the wife suffered mental and emotional infidelity. It includes causing or allowing the victim to
anguish brought about by denial of financial support. The witness the physical, sexual or psychological abuse of a
reason for the charge, therefore, was denial of financial member of the family to which the victim belongs, or to
support. However, the charge was for Sec. 5 (i), RA 9262, witness pornography in any form or to witness abusive
psychological violence because it was alleged that because injury to pets or to unlawful or unwanted deprivation of
of said denial of financial support, the woman suffered the right to custody and/or visitation of common children.
emotional and psychological anguish. SC: Acquitted Therefore, marital infidelity is one of the modes for causing
Acharon. Sec. 5 (i) considers as VAW, those acts causing psychological violence. Psychological violence is the means
mental and emotional anguish, etc., including denial of employed by the perpetrator, whereas the emotional or
financial support. Here, the charge was for just that.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 121 of 142
mental suffering of the woman brought about by such acting under official capacity. Here, Ronalyn was forcibly
marital infidelity are the effects. taken and detained. These acts done by Borja were
obviously unrelated to his functions. Therefore, it is not
AAA v. BBB: The husband had to go to SG. He had an extra- arbitrary detention, but Art. 267. Second, Ronalyn’s
marital affair in SG. When the wife learned about it, she conviction for dangerous drugs has nothing to do with the
got depressed. The wife filed a case for psychological abuse charge for kidnapping against Borja.
under RA 9262 here, in PH courts. Will the case prosper?
SC: Yes. Even if the alleged affair causing the wife mental X brought his brother Y at the gym. The youngest
anguish is committed abroad, the PH courts have brother called X. Nawawala si Y. X went to the gym and
jurisdiction. What RA 9262 criminalizes is not the marital the person there informed that Y was kidnapped.
infidelity per se, but the psychological violence which is Thereafter, X received a phonecall asking for ransom
caused to the woman here in the PH. Under Sec. 7, RA in exchange for the life of Y. Thereafter, they found Y
9262, VAWC may be considered a transitory offense. dead despite the fact that ransom has been paid.
Hence, even if the man’s extra-marital affair happened in Proper nomenclature?
Singapore, the courts of the PH have jurisdiction because If the victim was detained for purposes of extorting
it was the wife who was suffering psychological anguish ransom, and the victim dies during detention, the proper
here in the PH. nomenclature is the special complex crime of kidnapping
for ransom with homicide. Proper penalty: Death.
TITLE NINE – CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY
AND SECURITY Under the last paragraph of Article 267 as amended by RA
7659, when the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of
Article 267 – Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention the detention or is rape or subjected to torture or other the
dehumanizing acts, the maximum penalty prescribed by
ELEMENTS: law which is death shall be imposed.
1. The offender is a private individual;
o So, can a public officer commit The following circumstances will qualify the penalty
kidnapping and serious illegal detention? to death penalty:
Yes, if the public officer is acting in his 1. If the kidnapping or detention is for the purpose
private capacity. of extorting ransom from the victim or any other
2. The offender kidnaps another or in any manner person; or
deprived him of his liberty; 2. When the said victim is killed or dies as a
3. That the said kidnapping or detention is illegal, consequences of the detention or raped or is
without legal grounds; subjected to torture or the humanizing acts, the
4. That the said kidnapping or detention is attended maximum penalty prescribed by law shall be the
by any of the following circumstances: one imposed.
a. when the said kidnapping or detention
should have lasted for more than 3 days; Araneta v. People – 3 children, 11 years old, and a woman
b. if it is committed by simulating public were kidnapped in order to extort ransom. Accused were
authority; charged with kidnapping for ransom under one (1)
c. if any serious physical injuries shall have Information. SC, before convicting them, held that the
been inflicted or threats to kill have been Information is wrong. Since there were 4 victims, there
made; or should be four (4) distinct Informations. This defect was
d. when the person kidnapped or retained is only deemed waived by the failure of the defense to object
a female, a public officer or a minor. on the ground of this defect.
In People v. Borja, the police and his cohorts forcibly took X was attending a party. She was in the Brgy. Hall
the woman and went around QC for 5 hours. They charged covered court. X felt the need to eat candies. She went
Ronalyn with illegal sale of drugs. Ronalyn filed a case for outside to buy some candies. On her way back, Y
Art. 267 vs. police officer Borja. Borja: (1) he is a public forcibly took X to his tricycle. They went from place to
officer, the offender under Art. 267 is a private individual; place. Y held X captive 39 days. During such period of
(2) the apprehension was legal as Ronalyn was involved in time, Y raped X 27 times. What crime?
drugs. SC: GUILTY. A public officer who detains a person Kidnapping with rape. Since it is a special complex
for purposes of extorting ransom cannot be said to be crime, regardless of the number of times the victim had
Daverick Pacumio
Page 122 of 142
been raped, they are all absorbed in the single indivisible 4. The crime is committed without the attendance of
offense of kidnapping and serious illegal detention with any of the circumstances enumerated in ART. 267.
rape. It is Serious Illegal Detention because the victim is a
female and so it is Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Voluntary release of the victim may be considered as
Detention with rape, and regardless of the fact that the said a privileged mitigating circumstance if the following
woman was raped allegedly 27 times. requisites concur:
1. It is necessary the release has been made within 3
If the kidnap victim dies or is raped = Special Complex days from the commencement of the said
Crime with maximum penalty of death (RP without kidnapping;
parole). 2. It must have been made without the offender
having attained or accomplished his purpose;
Special Complex Crime of Rape w/ Homicide v. 3. It must have been made before the institution of
Kidnapping w/ Homicide the criminal proceedings against the said offender.
Special Complex Crime Kidnapping w/
of Rape or Attempted Homicide X abducted and detained Y. Y was his mortal enemy.
Rape w/ Homicide When X was on his way home, he became afraid of the
Regardless of who the It must be the victim of consequences of his actions. X went back to the place
victim of the killing is, for kidnapping or detention where he brought Y, and released Y the very same day.
as long as the homicide who must be killed or who is X liable for any crime?
occurred by reason or on must die or who must be Slight illegal detention. His release of Y will mitigate his
the occasion of the rape. raped. criminal liability by one (1) degree. None of the
circumstances in Art. 267 are present in this case.
Mother was doing the laundry outside. She has her Therefore, it is only slight illegal detention. In case of slight
daughter, who was 8 years old. The said daughter was illegal detention, the release before 3 days from the
out playing within the view of her mother. 6:00PM, commencement of the kidnapping.
the mother finished. She looked, wala na yung anak
niya. She asked the other children where her daughter Article 269 – Unlawful Arrest
was. The children did not know. Mother became
worried. The following morning, there was their 8- Unlawful arrest is committed by: any person who shall
year-old child crying. Her clothes were dirty, and arrest another in order to deliver him to the proper
there were bloodstains on her clothes. The daughter authorities although he is not authorized by law to do so.
narrated that the accused raped her twice. The
mother filed a case for kidnapping with rape. The offender in an unlawful arrest can be any person. He
SC: No. The accused is liable for 2 counts of statutory rape, can be public officer or employee or he can be private
not kidnapping with rape. The original intent was not to individual.
detain the daughter, but to rape the girl. The detention was
simply incidental to the rape. What was his purpose in arresting? What was his purpose
in detaining another person?
Article 268 – Slight Illegal Detention
In order to deliver him to the proper authorities. That is in
Slight illegal detention is committed by: any person who order to file a case against him, yet he's not authorized by
shall kidnap or detain another or in any other manner law to do so.
deprive him of his liberty when the said detention is illegal
absent of any of the circumstances under Art 267; it will If the offender who arrest another for the purpose of
only be slight illegal detention. delivering him to the proper authorities is a public officer,
know based on the facts what was his intent:
Elements:
1. Offender is a private individual If the intent of the said public officer is to detain him, it
2. He kidnaps or detains another, or in any other will be arbitrary detention.
manner deprives him of his liberty
3. The act of kidnapping or detention is illegal. If the intent of the said public officer is to file a case against
him although it is without legal ground, although he is not
allowed by authority, it is unlawful arrest.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 123 of 142
No. Under the first act, by failing to render assistance to

If it's a private individual, there is no problem. But if it is a any person whom the offender found in an uninhabited
public officer, distinguish whether it is arbitrary detention place in danger of dying, it must be the offender who found
or unlawful arrest. the victim. Here, X is in danger of dying. However, it was
not the hospital who found X in danger of dying. In fact, it
Article 270 – Kidnapping and Failure to Return a was the family who brought X to the hospital. Therefore,
Minor Art. 275 does not even apply.
Kidnapping and failure to return a minor is committed by: X was on his way home. While on his way home, it was
any person who had been entrusted with the custody of a about 7:00PM, there was this man, who was bloodied.
minor, shall deliberately fail to restore the said minor It was obvious that the man was a victim of a hit-and-
deliberately to his parent or guardian or person who has run. X saw the man. The man saw X. the man asked
custody over the minor. help from X. X became afraid. Instead of going to the
man, X went away. The man was found by other
What is punished by law is the deliberate failure of the people and brought to the hospital. The man
offender to restore the said minor to his parents or survived. Is X liable under Art. 275?
guardian. He must be the one entrusted. No. Although he found the man dying, the street cannot
be considered as uninhabited. In fact, he was brought to
Article 271 – Inducing a Minor to Abandon his Home the hospital by other persons.
In inducing a minor to abandon his home, the offender X was driving his car. He was driving his car within
induces the minor to leave the place of his parents, LTO rules and regulation when suddenly the tire of
guardian or any person having custody of the minor, to the his car hit a stone and the stone flew. The stone hit the
damage and prejudice of the child. head of a bystander. The head started to bleed. Is X
liable for the injuries sustained by the man?
Arts. 270 and 271 can be committed by parents of the child. X is not liable for the injuries sustained by the man. He is
However, although it can be committed even by the exempted, it is an exempting circumstance. It is purely an
parents of the said minor, the penalty would only be accident, it is an exempting circumstance under the 4th
arresto mayor, it is lower. paragraph of Article 12. He was performing a lawful act
when he caused injury to another without fault, without
Article 275 – Abandonment of Persons in Danger and intent on his part, it just so happened that his car hit a
Abandonment of One’s Own Victim stone and the stone flew and hit the head of the said
woman that caused bleeding. He's not liable.
ACTS PUNISHED:
1. Failing to render assistance to any person whom Let us add facts: when X saw that the head of the
the offender found in an uninhabited place woman was bleeding, instead of alighting to bring the
wounded or in danger of dying when he can render woman to be nearest clinic or hospital, this time he
such assistance without detriment to himself, increased speed and left. Is X liable of any crime?
unless such omission shall constitute a more X is liable for abandonment of one's own victim under
serious offense. Article 275. X is not liable for injuring the said woman. X is
2. Failing to render help or assistance to another liable for failing to give help to his own victim whom he
whom the offender has accidentally wounded or has accidentally injured. For failing to render assistance, he
injured. becomes criminally liable.
3. Failing to deliver a child under 7 years of age
whom the offender has found abandoned, to the X was driving recklessly, he was in a hurry. He hit and
authorities or to his family, or failing to take him bump a pedestrian. The pedestrian was thrown and
to a safe place. died. Upon seeing that, he immediately sped away. He
did not alight to bring the said victim to the hospital.
X was sick with COVID. He was brought to different Is X liable for abandonment of persons in danger or
hospitals. All of the hospitals denied admission of X. abandonment of one’s own victim under Article 275
the family had to go to a very far hospital. On the way and reckless imprudence resulting in homicide under
there, X died. Can the hospital be charged with Art. Art. 365?
275?
Daverick Pacumio
Page 124 of 142
Yes, liable for both crimes. Under Art. 365, the failure of The place entered into is a The place entered into is a
the offender to give first aid help to the victim is a dwelling. It is inhabited. closed premise or estate. It
qualifying aggravating circumstance which increases the is uninhabited.
penalty under Art. 365 last par. Therefore, the fact that the The prohibition to enter The prohibition to enter
accused failed to render help can either be a qualifying may either be express or must be express.
aggravating circumstance or as a separate and distinct implied.
charge under Art. 275. There is no double jeopardy because The offender entered The offender entered
the first (Art. 275) is an intentional felony, whereas the against the will of the without securing
other (Art. 365) is a culpable felony. Thus, if the prosecutor owner. permission from the
did not include the QAC in the Information for Art. 365, it owner or the caretaker
may constitute a separate and distinct charge for Art. 275. thereof.
Accused found a boy. He looked like he was lost. He Note: A public officer may commit trespass to dwelling if
was only 6 years old. He was looking for his parents. X he committed the crime in his private capacity.
took his wallet and gave to the boy P50. X then left. Is
X liable? X was walking. While walking, 5 men surrounded him.
Yes. X is mandated by Art. 275 to bring the boy at least to They have a piece of wood which they were waving. X
a safe place, if not the parents, or to the nearest police ran as fast as he could. As X turned to the right, X saw
station and local authorities. For X’s omission, he becomes a house. X entered the house. He was peeping through
criminally liable under Art. 275. the window, waiting for the men to pass by. X got out
after the men passed by. X was caught by the owner of
Arts. 280-281 – Trespass to Dwelling & Trespass to the house. X said he was forced to enter out of fear.
Property The owner filed a case for trespassing vs. X. is X liable?
No. Under Article 280, there are certain instances where in
Trespass to Dwelling the offender doesn't become criminally liable:
1. When the said offender enters another person’s
When the offender is a private individual, he enters a property in order to prevent some injury to
dwelling of another and said entry is done against the will himself, to the occupant of the said dwelling or to
of the owner. another person;
2. When the said act of entering in another person’s
Entry is said to be against the will of another when there is place was done in order to render service to justice
a prohibition to enter, which can either be express or or to humanity; or
implied. 3. When the place entered into is a cafe, tavern, inn
or any other similar public places.
When violence or intimidation has been done, the penalty
is qualified. It is qualified trespass to dwelling. Here, X entered the dwelling of another to prevent some
injury to himself.
Trespass to Property
THREE KINDS OF THREATS:
The offender enters the closed estate or fenced premise of 1. Grave Threats
another. At the time of entry, it was uninhabited. 2. Light Threats
3. Other Light Threats
The prohibition to entry is made manifest yet the offender
entered the said place without securing permission from Article 282 – Grave Threats
the owner or the caretaker thereof.
PUNISHABLE ACTS:
Trespass to Dwelling v. Trespass to Property 1. Threatening another with the infliction upon his
Trespass to Dwelling Trespass to Property person, honor or property or that of his family of
The offender is a private The offender can be any any wrong amounting to a crime and demanding
individual person. he can be a private money or imposing any other condition even
individual or a public though not unlawful, and the offender attained his
officer/employee purpose.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 125 of 142
2. By making such threat with the infliction upon his ipapakagat ko kayo sa aso!” A charge for RA 7610 was
person, honor or property or that of his family of filed against Y.
any wrong amounting to a crime and demanding SC: No. In Escolano v. People, the SC held that the mother
money or imposing any other condition even is not liable because the statements made by the mother
though not unlawful and without the offender were all made out of annoyance and frustration. The
attaining his purpose. mother had no intent to debase and degrade. The mother
3. By threatening another with the infliction upon only wanted to stop the children from their unruly
his person, honor or infliction upon his person, behavior. If ever the woman is liable, the mother is only
honor or property or that of his family of any liable for other light threats. Hindi naman niya pinakagat
wrong amounting to a crime, the threat not being sa aso yung mga bata. Here, the woman did not pursue
subject to any demand of money or imposition of with the threat. She only made such statement.
any condition.
Article 285 – Other Light Threats
The wrong threatened to be committed will always
amount to a crime. There are 3 instances or punishable acts under light
threats:
May/may not be subject to demand for money or 1. By threatening another with a weapon or by
imposition of another condition. drawing such weapon in a course of quarrel, unless
it be in lawful self-defense;
Article 283 – Light Threats 2. By orally threatening another, in the heat of anger,
with some wrong constituting a crime, without
Light threats is committed if a person threatens another persisting in the idea involved in his threat.
with the commission of any wrong which does not amount 3. By orally threatening another, in the heat of anger
to a crime. But it always coupled with a demand for money with some wrong not amounting to a crime.
or the imposition of any other condition even though not
unlawful, regardless of whether the offender attain or does Even if the wrong threatened to be committed would
not attain his purpose. amount to a crime, if it was done by the offender in the
heat of anger and he did not persist with the idea thereof,
The wrong threatened to be committed does not amount the crime committed his only other light threats.
to a crime.
Article 286 – Grave Coercion
Always subject to a demand for money or the imposition
of a condition Two kinds of Grave Coercion:
a. Preventive coercion – There is preventive coercion
Both grave threats and light threats – the essence is when the offender by means of violence, threat or
intimidation. The wrong threatened to be committed is intimidation prevents another from doing an act not
not now, but in the future. prohibited by law. He prevents another from doing a lawful
act by means of violence, threats or intimidation.
If the threat is committed in writing or through a
middleman (third person) under Article 282, the penalty is b. Compulsive coercion – When the offender compels
qualified. another to do an act against his will whether it be right or
wrong by means of violence, threats or intimidation.
X gave a call to Y. X told Y that “Gagawin mob a
pinapagawa ko? O hindi ka na sisikatan ng araw?” Whether it is right or wrong, no person can compel
Because of that, Y filed a case of grave threats vs. X. is someone to do something against his will by means of
X liable? violence, threats or intimidation, otherwise he will be the
Yes. In case of grave threats, the crime is consummated as one criminally liable.
soon as the threat came to the knowledge of the victim.
In case of coercion, the promise to do a wrong is NOW.
There was an apartment. Children ABC were bullying Hence, coercion cannot be committed in writing. It is
the daughter of Y. the daughter informed Y. ABC always done personally. It cannot be through a middleman.
threw catsup sachets on Y. Y told ABC, “Mga bobo
kayo, mga wala kayong utak! Ipapahabol ko at ANTI-WIRETAPPING LAW (RA 4200)
Daverick Pacumio
Page 126 of 142
The following acts are punishable: Dungo v. People – hazing is malum prohibitum. Hazing is
1. It shall be unlawful for any person, without not wrong by itself, but the law deems it contrary to public
securing the consent of all the parties to any policy. Therefore, criminal intent is immaterial and good
private communication or spoken word, to tap any faith is not a defense.
wire or cable, or by using any other device or
arrangement to secretly overhear, intercept or X was a student at the Philippine Merchant School. As
record such private communication or spoken a neophyte, he is subjected to indoctrination rites.
word by using a device commonly known as a During the indoctrination rites, however, X died
Dictaphone or dictagraph, walkie talkie, tape because his body could not tolerate the trauma and
recorder, or other similar devices. physical injuries inflicted on him by the members of
2. Knowingly possessing any tape record, wire the fraternity. The officers of the fraternity were
record, disc record, or any other such record, or charged as principals before RTC Zambales. Since
copies thereof, of these private communications or PMS is a public institution, the school authorities
spoken words. were charged as accomplices for hazing before the
3. 3.) Replaying these any tape record, wire record, Sandiganbayan. RTC dismissed the case outrightly.
disc record to another person. The judgement became final. The counsel of PMS filed
4. 4.) Communicating the contents of the said tape before the Sandiganbayan a MTQ, arguing: (1) since
record, wire record or disc record, in writing or the crime against the officers (principals) had been
verbally to another person. dismissed with finality, it follows that the case vs. the
5. 5.) Furnishing transcriptions of these tape record, accomplices must be dismissed; and (2) the OMB
wire record or disc record whether totally or failed to allege an important element of hazing.
partially to any other person. Sandiganbayan denied. Are the grounds meritorious?
SC:
X and Y are talking to each other. Y was recording (1) Unmeritorious. The case vs. the accomplices may
everything, unknown to X. is Y liable? proceed independently of the case against the principal so
Yes. In Ortañez v. CA, the SC held unless there is showing long as the crime can still be proven. Here, the crime may
of consent, such recording is illegal and the person who still be proven.
made such recording is liable under RA 4200. In said case,
the SC held that if the conversation was recorded using a (2) Meritorious. The Information lacks the element
mobile phone, the best evidence both parties agreed to its stating that the act of inflicting injuries which caused the
recorded can be found in the recording. In said case, there victim’s death is done as a pre-requisite for admission in a
was no such consent or agreement. fraternity or organization. Thus, the Information should be
quashed. In People v. Bayabos, the SC held that the use of
In Ramirez v. CA, the SC held that RA 4200’s intent is to the word ‘hazing’ by the OMB will not cure this defect.
penalize any person unauthorized to make such recording. What distinguishes hazing from crimes against persons, in
The use of the word “any” means that even a person privy the latter there was intent to kill, mutilate, or injure. In
to the conversation will be liable under RA 4200. hazing, the act of inflicting physical injuries was done only
as a pre-requisite to membership. There is no deliberate
ANTI-HAZING LAW (RA 11053) intent to kill. Thus, the case should be dismissed.
Hazing is totally prohibited. What is only allowed is the ANTI-TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS ACT (RA 9208)
conduct of initiation rites. However, there must be no
form of violence inflicted on any neophyte or recruit. Police officers got information that there was a
woman who has been offering the services of minors.
X was a neophyte in a fraternity. During the conduct They planned an entrapment procedure. Police
of the same, aside from the officers and members, officer X pretended to be a customer. He approached
there was W, a woman, who was just watching. She did the woman and asked for minor girls to spend the
not participate in the act of inflicting injuries. X died. night with. The woman said yes. The police officer
Is she criminally liable? asked for 4 girls. On the date and time, the woman
Yes. Mere presence at the scene of the crime, without offered to X and 3 other police officers the sexual
informing the authorities, or preventing the hazing, makes services of 4 girls who were minors at the price of
you criminally liable as principal. P1,000 each. The moment they were given to X and his
Daverick Pacumio
Page 127 of 142
friends, the police officers arrested the woman. The

woman was charged with qualified trafficking in Homicide – includes all kinds of killing, i.e., murder,
persons. Woman: Not liable because the girls were parricide, infanticide, and even accidental death.
merely offered, and were not caught in the act of Homicide is a generic term which includes all acts of
having sexual intercourse with the police officers. Is killing. There is no crime of robbery with murder,
it meritorious? parricide, etc.
No. Under Sec. 4 (e), RA 9208, it is unlawful. The crime of
trafficking is consummated even if no sexual intercourse Regardless of the number of persons killed, we have a
took place because the mere act of the woman offering the single indivisible offense. This applies too in robbery with
services of the minors already consummates the crime. In rape, intentional mutilation, arson, and serious physical
Ramirez v. People, the crime of trafficking persons as injuries.
prostitute is analogous to the crime of seduction. It is even
worse because there is a pimp who takes advantage of 2. robbery with rape
minors.
3. robbery with intentional mutilation
TITLE TEN – CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
4. robbery with arson
Art. 293 – Robbery
5. robbery with serious physical injuries
Robbery is committed by any person, who with intent to
gain shall take any personal property belonging to another 6. robbery with unnecessary violence
by means of violence against, or intimidation of any
person, or using force upon anything. 7. simple robbery
ELEMENTS OF ROBBERY: If the physical injuries inflicted would only amount to less
1. That the offender unlawfully takes a personal serious or slight physical injuries, or robbery is
property – the mere act of taking raises a accompanied only by intimidation, it is only simple
presumption of intent to gain. Note: If it does not robbery.
belong to another person it cannot be said that
there is intent to gain on the part of the offender. You should consider the hierarchy in Art. 294. If there is
The law requires that there must be intent to gain. robbery with homicide and rape is also committed, robbery
2. That the said personal property belongs to another with rape is absorbed in robbery with homicide.
person
3. There must be intent to gain in the taking of the X and his family were about to sleep. Suddenly, there
said property were three (3) men, ABC. They called on X to get out.
4. That the said taking is either by means of violence X knew it was the voice of A, his enemy. The moment
against, or intimidation of any person, or using X peeked out, ABC fired at X and killed him. ABC then
force upon anything tied the wife and children of X and ransacked all their
valuables.
Two ways of committing robbery:
1. Robbery with violence against or intimidation 2 crimes:
(Art.294)
2. Robbery with the use of force upon things (1) Murder of X. Based on the facts, the original intent of
(Art.299) ABC was to kill X, not to rob.
Art. 294 – Robbery with Violence Against or (2) Simple robbery.

Intimidation of Persons (RVAI)
Jeepney was filled with passengers. It was flagged
The following special complex crimes arise: down by XYZ. XYZ boarded the jeepney. XYZ, armed
1. robbery with homicide with knives, told the passengers, “Holdap to! Lagay
niyo mga gamit niyo dito sa bag o sasaksakin naming
Original criminal intent is to commit robbery. The intent kayo.” Police officer W is on board his mobile patrol
to rob must precede the act of killing. behind the jeepney. He followed the jeepney. XYZ saw
Daverick Pacumio
Page 128 of 142
W. they took the bag and thereafter alighted from the when X found that there was no money, X stabbed the
jeepney. However, W arrested them. Z pulled a gun owner. What crimes?
from his backpack and, as he was about to shoot W, Attempted robbery with homicide. It is obvious by the
they grappled for the gun. In the course of their accused’s act of asking for money that his intent was to rob.
struggle, the gun fired and Z died. Police officer W However, he could not take anything because there was no
then arrested X and Y. X and Y were charged with money. And on the occasion of the same, he stabbed the
special complex crime of robbery with homicide. X victim.
and Y: What we did was only to rob. They should not
be liable for the death of Z because it was police X was on her way home. While on her way home, she
officer W who shot Z. Is the argument correct? passed by an eskinita when suddenly a man waylaid
No. Under Art. 294, the law provides that any person guilty her who pointed a fan knife and asked for her bag. X
of robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation gave her bag. However, as she was about to leave, the
of any person shall suffer the penalty when by reason of man prevented X from leaving. The man then brought
robbery the crime of homicide has been committed. People X to a vacant lot and had carnal knowledge of the
v. Casabuena holds that “any person” includes any one of woman. As the man was about to leave, he realized
the robbers themselves. Under Article 294, the law that the woman saw his face and might report him to
provides, “any person committing robbery with violence the authorities. Therefore, the man stabbed the
against or intimidation of any person,” Supreme Court said woman repeatedly. He left with the woman’s bag.
the word “any” is inclusive of anyone including a robber. What crime/s?
Therefore, even if it is a robber who has been killed, it is Original criminal intent – rob. By reason or on occasion
still robbery with homicide. The law does not distinguish thereof, he raped the woman. And by reason or on
any person. Therefore, neither shall the court distinguish. occasion, he also killed the woman. Therefore, the crime is
robbery with homicide according to the hierarchy in Art.
Same problem. Before XYZ could take anything from 294. The rape is simply absorbed in the robbery with
the passengers, XYZ panicked and got out of the homicide.
jeepney because they saw W. W tried to arrest them
and tried to grapple with Z for the gun. In the course Same problem. Woman was on her way home. The
of the struggle, the gun fired, hitting Z, who died. X man waylaid the woman and covered the mouth of the
and Y were charged with attempted robbery with woman and punched the woman’s chest. He carried
homicide. Is the charge correct? the woman to a vacant place. The man had carnal
No. Art. 294 differs from Art. 297. Under Article 297, if by knowledge of the woman. As he was about to leave,
reason or on occasion of attempted or frustrated the man took notice of the woman’s jewelries. The
robbery, a crime of homicide is committed, the law used man took the bag but as he was taking the earrings of
phrase, “the person guilty of such offenses” shall be the woman, she tried to push the man. She fought
punished. Therefore, under Article 297, the law expressly back. The man stabbed the woman. Thereafter, he
requires that the person guilty of the attempted took the jewelries. What crime/s?
robbery must also be the one guilty of the homicide Original criminal intent – to rape. The man carried the
or killing because the person guilty of such offenses - woman and raped her.
attempted robbery and homicide. Otherwise, it will not be
the special complex crime of attempted robbery with As an afterthought, he saw the jewelries and wanted to take
homicide. So, in this case since it was a mere attempted them. However, the woman put up a fight. So, the man
robbery, in the course thereof, Z was killed, since X&Y were stabbed the woman repeatedly. The crime is robbery with
not responsible for the said of killing their fellow robber Z, homicide because the act of robbery as accompanied with
they could not be held liable for the special complex crime the act of killing. In this case, rape will no longer be
of attempted robbery with homicide under Article 297. absorbed by robbery with homicide because the original
They can be liable only for ATTEMPTED ROBBERY. criminal intent of the offender was to rape, and the robbery
was simply an afterthought. However, in order to commit
According to the witness, he was on his way home the robbery, he had to kill the woman.
when suddenly, he saw a commotion in a nipa hut. He
hid behind a tree. According to the witness, he saw X Same problem. Woman was on her way home. The
asking the owner of the house about money. X was man waylaid the woman and covered the mouth of the
seen ransacking the house of the owner. Thereafter, woman and punched the woman’s chest. He carried
the woman to a vacant place. The man had carnal
Daverick Pacumio
Page 129 of 142
knowledge of the woman. After the rape, the man was

about to leave. As he was about to leave, he stabbed THIRD ACT: Under the third act, what makes this robbery
the woman to death. After killing the woman, he was by using for upon things is the act of the offender of
about to leave. However, before he left, he took all the bringing outside the closed or sealed receptacle or
jewelries of the woman. What crime/s? chest because outside forces to be employed in order to
Original intent – rape. In the act of rape, he killed the take the things inside this closed or sealed receptacle or
woman. Therefore, rape with homicide. chest.
As an afterthought, he also committed the crime of theft. Supreme Court said, outside these three instances the
It is not robbery because at the time of taking, the woman crime committed is THEFT.
is already dead.
XY&Z, they went to the house of an overseas Filipino
Art. 299 & Art. 302 – Robbery with Use of Force Upon worker who just arrived here in the Philippines. And
Things (RUFT) so, XY&Z went to the place looking for W, the overseas
• They differ only in the place of commission. Filipino worker. But the sister said, she's not here she
went to POEA. XY&Z said, “but we are members of the
3 ways of committing robbery with use of force upon POEA and we come here in order to ask certain
things: information from her.” So, the sisters, “oh you are
1. When a person enters the dwelling, house, public members of the POEA. Come inside!” And so, XY&Z
building or edifice devoted to worship where were allowed to get inside. Once inside, however, X
personal property is taken through: said he wanted to make a phone call. Later, he wanted
1. An opening not intended for entrance or to go to the restroom until later, XY&Z held on the
egress; sister and tied the sister. After tying the sister, they
2. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or ransacked the house. What crime/crimes had been
breaking any door or window; committed by XY&Z?
3. By using false keys, picklocks or similar XY and Z are liable for the complex crime of ROBBERY
tools; or WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION
4. By using any fictitious name or (RVAI) under Article 294 and RUFT under Article 299.
pretending the exercise of public
authority, RUFT – because they pretended to be officers of POEA.
2. When the offender manages to enter said
inhabited place, dwelling, public place or place RVAI – because once inside, they slapped and tied the
dedicated to religious worship without any sister. They employed slight physical injuries and
unlawful entry, or is an insider, and once inside, intimidation on the sister.
he used force in opening in order to:
a. Break doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other Of what crime should they be convicted of?
kind of locked or sealed furniture or Complex crime of Art. 299 complexed with Art. 294, 5th
receptacle act. The RUFT is a necessary means to commit RVAI. You
3. When the offender manages to enter said have to complex it so that the greater penalty would be
inhabited place, dwelling, public place, or place imposed on the said offender because if you complex it
dedicated to religious worship without any under article 48, the penalty for the most serious crime
unlawful entry, once inside he took the sealed shall be the one imposed in its maximum. So, in that case,
receptacle outside to be opened or forced open. the crime committed would be robbery with violence
against or intimidation of person complex with
FIRST ACT: Under the first act, what makes it robbery by robbery by use of force upon things under article 299
use of force upon things is the element of unlawful entry. (Napolis v. CA and People v. Fransdilla).
The entry was done through any means not intended for
entry. The UBELT was already in silence. It was already two
o'clock early morning. No people around. Students in
SECOND ACT: Under the second act, what makes this their dormitories were already fast asleep. Total
robbery by use of force upon things is the employment of silence in the same area. Here comes X. X went to this
force and violence in breaking a closed door, close stall. It is rice in a box stall. He broke lock,
wardrobe, chest. entered inside, took anything that he could take, took
Daverick Pacumio
Page 130 of 142
everything valuable that he could sell. Thereafter, he intimidation of persons, and without use of force upon
left. The following morning, someone inform the things.
police authorities that the said stall had been broken
open. And so, the police officers went there. They saw Theft is likewise committed by:
that it was ransacked, missing everything. They 1. Any person who, having found lost property, shall
informed the owner. The owner arrived and the owner fail to deliver the same to the local authorities or
said, “everything was gone.” They looked at the to its owner;
footage of the CCTV and they discovered it was X. X 2. Any person who, after having maliciously
was arrested. What crime/crimes is/are committed by damaged the property of another, shall remove or
X? make use of the fruits or object of the damage
X is liable for RUFT under the first act under Article 302. caused by him; and
Supreme Court said this is considered to be a private 3. Any person who shall enter an enclosed estate or
building. This is considered to be an uninhabited place a field where trespass is forbidden or which
because at the time everyone, people were gone. Everyone belongs to another and without the consent of its
was fast asleep. Therefore, it is still robbery by use of force owner, shall hunt or fish upon the same or shall
upon things under the first act by gaining in entry through gather cereals, or other forest or farm products.
and unlawful means. Unlawful means that is breaking the
lock of the door. However, it is not under Art. 299. It is In Pante v. People, the private complainant, a foreigner,
under Article 302. was inside his car. He was counting his dollars. The money
was on his lap. The man forgot all about the money. He
X was walking. While walking, here comes Y, on board alighted from the car. Natapon yung pera. Here comes 2
his motorcycle. When he was nearing X, Y grabbed X’s minors, who took the money of the foreigner. The minors
necklace. Y was arrested. He was charged with RVAI then went to Pante to give some of the money. The officers
under Art. 294, par. 5. The Information alleged, “the went to Pante, who was charged with theft. Pante’s
Accused snatched the necklace of the victim.” Would defense: He was not the one who stole. It was the minors.
you convict the accused a charged? Is Pante liable? Yes. The word “finder” is not limited to the
No. The Supreme Court said the word “grab” or “snatch” actual finder because the gist of the offense is the furtive
(Y grabbed the necklace of X, Y snatched the necklace of taking and misappropriation of the thing found. When the
X) doesn't mean that there was force or violence employed. minors gave the money to Pante and he failed to give it to
The word “grab/snatch” only means suddenness of the act the proper authorities, Pante is considered the finder in
of taking. It describes that the act of taking was done law who, failing to deliver said money to the authorities or
suddenly. However, it doesn't necessarily mean that there the owner, becomes liable for theft.
was force or that there was violence employed. So, in this
case, it is merely theft. Art. 310 – Qualified Theft
Art. 308 – Theft Theft is qualified in the following instances:

1. If theft is committed by a domestic servant;
Theft is committed by any person who, with intent to gain 2. If committed with grave abuse of confidence;
but without violence against or intimidation of persons nor 3. If the property stolen is a (a) motor vehicle, (b)
force upon things, shall take personal property of another mail matter, or (c) large cattle;
without the latter's consent. 4. If the property stolen consists of coconuts taken
from the premises of the plantation
Theft is committed by any person who with intent to gain 5. If the property stolen is taken from a fishpond or
shall take the personal property belonging to another fishery;
without the consent of the owner, without violence against 6. If property taken on the occasion of fire,
or intimidation of persons, and without use of force upon earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any
things. other calamity, vehicular accident or civil
disturbance.
In case of theft, just robbery there is the actual taking of
personal property belonging to another. Thus, an act of If their offender who takes the personal property of the
taking must be done with intent to gain. However, unlike master is the domestic servant of the said master, the crime
robbery, taking must be done without violence against or committed is immediately qualified. No need to prove the
presence of grave abuse of confidence According to the
Daverick Pacumio
Page 131 of 142
Supreme Court, the domestic servant is separated from of the said carnapping, the penalty now is LIFE
grave abuse of confidence under Article 310 by the IMPRISONMENT. So, you call it only one designation and
disjunctive word “or.” Therefore, they are separate and that is carnapping. They only differ in the penalty to be
distinct from each other. The moment the offender is a imposed. Note that it is necessary the person who is
domestic servant, all that the prosecution has to prove is killed is the owner, driver or occupant of the
that he is indeed in domestic servant. Such will suffice to carnapped motor vehicle. The law says the carnapped
bring about the crime of qualified theft. No need to prove motor vehicle. Therefore, if the one who is killed, if the one
cream abuse of confidence. who is raped, is not the owner, the driver or the occupant
the carnapped motor vehicle, it will give rise to a separate
X is a domestic servant in the house of Y and Z. she has and distinct charge. You cannot just simply be considered
been entrusted by Y and Z. because of such trust, she as carnapping.
knows where the key to the vault is. Y and Z had to
leave for Hong Kong to attend a conference. X was left X, after a long drive, wanted to smoke. He got out of
in the house. A day after, X received a phone call from the car. He was smoking. His eyes were closed. Y saw
her mother. The mother told X that her father is very the situation, entered the car, and drove the car.
sick. X went to her savings bank, and saw that her Carnapping.
savings would not suffice. X called her boyfriend, who
had no money. X, the boyfriend, and the security Same problem. He was about to take away the car
guard planned the taking. The boyfriend went inside when suddenly X notice Y. X went to the car and he
the house and they took all the valuables of Y and Z. told, “get out of my car! get out of my car!” However, Y
what are the criminal liabilities? repeatedly boxed and kicked X. X fell on the ground.
X – qualified theft. Y took away the car. What crime is committed by Y?
Still carnapping.
BF – simple theft. None of the qualifying circumstances is
present insofar as the BF is concerned. Same problem. This time, Y stabbed X and took away
the car.
Security guard – qualified theft. In People v. Nielles, the Carnapping. The nomenclature is still carnapping. They
qualifying circumstance of grave abuse of discretion means differ only in the penalty. under RA 10883, the law
that there was a relationship of guardianship, provides that when the owner or the driver or the
independence and vigilance between the guard and the occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed or
owner of the house. Here, there was such a relationship dies as a consequence of the said carnapping, or is
because the security guard was employed to prevent raped, the penalty is LIFE IMPRISONMENT. The
thievery. penalty now is life imprisonment. Before under RA 6539,
before the penalty is RECLUSION PERPETUA TO DEATH,
ANTI-CARNAPPING ACT (RA 10883) of the same nomenclature as the RPC. Hence, you can
complex it or you can say qualified carnapping. Now, NO.
Elements: Because now the penalty is life imprisonment. So, it is still
1. Actual taking of motor vehicle; carnapping. Violation of our RA 10883 but the penalty now
2. The vehicle belongs to another; would be life imprisonment.
3. There is intent to gain in the taking of the vehicle
of another; and Estafa
4. Said taking is taking without the consent of the
owner or by means of violence or intimidation or Three kinds of estafa:
by means of force upon things. 1. Art. 315 – Swindling and Other Deceits
2. Art. 316 – Other Forms of Swindling
The penalty increases when carnapping is committed 3. Art. 317 – Swindling of a Minor
without the consent of the owner. Without violence 4. Art. 318 – Other Deceits
against or intimidation of persons, the penalty is 20 years
and one day to 30 years. If committed by employing force Art. 315 – Swindling and Other Deceits
and violence, the penalty is 30 years and one day to 40
years. But, if in the course of the commission of the There are two elements of estafa common to all kinds
carnapping, the owner, the driver, or the occupant of of estafa:
carnapped motor vehicle is killed or dies as a consequence
Daverick Pacumio
Page 132 of 142
1. The offender defrauded another by reason of Second, Y misappropriated the jewelries. The third
abuse of confidence or by means of deceit. element is present because X is prejudiced in the amount
a. Abuse of Confidence of P500,000. The fourth element is demand. In Corpuz v.
b. Deceit People, the SC held that in case of Art. 315 1 (b), demand
2. Damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary may come in any form. It need not be any formal, written
estimation is caused to the offended party or to a demand. It may be via phone call. Any kind of demand, oral
third person. or writing, will suffice. Demand as a fourth element is
immaterial when there is sufficient evidence that the
Par. 1 – ESTAFA WITH UNFAITHFULNESS OR ABUSE offender misappropriated the goods. Demand is not
OF CONFIDENCE indispensable in the conviction of estafa – it may come in
any form.
a) By altering the substance, quantity, or quality or
anything of value which the offender shall deliver by X is the principal in the school. For the enrollment
virtue of an obligation to do so, even though such season, the owner told X that in addition to her
obligation be based on an immoral or illegal duties, she is authorized to collect matriculation fees.
consideration. Thereafter, X should forward all payments she
received together with the voucher slip to the school.
However, after receiving the fees, X started not going
b) By misappropriating or converting, to the prejudice to school. Because of this, an audit was conducted and
of another, money, goods, or any other personal based on the audit, X failed to remit the matriculation
property received by the offender in trust or on fees she received. Because of this, the owner tried to
commission, or for administration, or under any other talk to the principal but X would not attend any
obligation involving the duty to make delivery of or to meeting. Thus, X was charged with Art. 315 1(b). is X
return the same, even though such obligation be liable?
totally or partially guaranteed by a bond; or by No, only qualified theft. In estafa under Art. 315 1 (b),
denying having received such money, goods, or other mere receipt will not suffice. It is essential that the
property (ESTAFA THROUGH MISAPPROPRIATION juridical possession be also transferred to the offender.
OR CONVERSION) Juridical possession is a possession in the concept of an
owner; it is a real right over the property during the time
X has been selling jewelry. Y lost all businesses and he that the property is in his possession, he has better right
needed to earn. Y decided to go to X and ask the latter even than that of the owner of the said property. Here, X
to be hired as seller of the jewelry by commission acted only as temporary custodian of the funds. Thus, she
basis. The condition would be that Y will sell the only had physical or material possession.
jewelry, he will return the unsold jewelry after selling
and then give the earnings minus the commission. Y The mother went to the store selling second-hand
told X that he was a reliable person. X agreed and the laptops. the owner showed the mother different
jewelry costs 500,000 without the commission to be laptops, and allowed the mother to bring one home
returned after 30 days. After a month, none of the for a trial period. If she returns it within 7 days, it
jewelry were returned and, as well as the earnings. Y means she is not buying it. However, if she does not,
made a demand. X made a phone call, and Y agreed to it means she is buying it. The mother chose a laptop
return the jewelry. Y wouldn’t pick the phone and brought home two (2). The mother did not return
anymore. X decided to drop by the house of Y to pick the laptops within 7 days. The owner gave the mother
up the jewelries and Y refused. X filed a case of Estafa a call and asked for payment. The mother did not pay,
under Article 315 1B. Is Y liable of Estafa under Article nor return the laptop. The owner filed a case for estafa
315 1B? X delivered the jewelries in trust and in under Art. 315 1(b). is the charge correct?
commission basis. However, he failed to return the No. not even theft. If what is transferred is only physical
jewelry. There was demand and damage, lost 500,000 or material possession and he fails to return the same, it is
pesos. Y contended that he cannot be held liable theft. If both physical and juridical possession has been
because he did not receive any demand letter. Is Y transferred, it is estafa. Here, what is present only is the
liable? relationship of a vendor-vendee, a creditor-debtor, not
Yes. All the elements are present. First, he received money entrustor-entrustee. Here, the mother had a 7-day trial
or property in trust or on commission. X entrusted to Y the period to try the laptop. When she failed to return the
jewelries with the obligation to return it or its proceeds. laptop, the laptops are considered sold to the mother. The
Daverick Pacumio
Page 133 of 142
obligation of the mother, therefore, is to pay for the price above such signature in blank, to the prejudice of the
of the laptop. Therefore, estafa or qualified theft would not offended party or of any third person.
lie – it is only a civil action for collection of sum of money
for the mother to pay the purchase price. Par. 2 – ESTAFA BY MEANS OF FALSE PRETENSES OR
FRAUDULENT ACTS EXECUTED PRIOR TO OR
Estafa through Falsification of Commercial SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE COMMISSION OF THE
Document FRAUD
X went to the bank and he was very close to the bank FIVE PUNISHABLE ACTS:
teller because he was a client for a very long time. He
would deposit and he would go to such bank teller. a) By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending to
When X withdrawn money, the bank teller told X to possess power, influence, qualifications, property,
just leave the passbook with him. X agreed and left credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions, or
the passbook with the teller. The following morning, by means of other similar deceits.
X had a change of mind and realized the passbook was
not so heavy, why would he even give him. X went to X has a son who wanted to enter the police force. This
the bank to get the passbook. He went to the bank came to the knowledge of Maria. Maria told X that her
teller and demanded the passbook back. X told him husband is connected with the police. Maria asked
that the passbook is at home and he will bring it to money but did not return.
him. X said to bring it tomorrow. X, the following day, Estafa thru false pretenses. Were it not for Maria’s
returned and demanded again the passbook. representation that she has the capacity to facilitate X’s
son’s entry to the police force, X was made to part with his
The bank teller said that he forgot about it again and money.
he will return it the next day. X left the bank very sad.
The bank manager noticed X and asked the problem. Syndicated estafa
X narrated the events. The bank manager confronted
the teller and then the teller said that he already gave ABCDE formed an investment corporation. They
the passbook to the bank manager. The manager grew solicited investments from barangays. They told their
suspicious and secretly investigated. When he looked audience that there is a guaranteed return of
at the bank account of X, there were four withdrawal, investments at 50% interest per month. They were
and when he looked at the withdrawal slip, the said able to induce people to invest in their corporation.
signature of X was different from the specimen about 21 people were convinced. They invested their
signature of X. It was forged. It is evident from the money. They invested in ABCDE, and were given their
said withdrawal slip and the bank teller participated respective certificates of investments, as well as
in the transaction because of the latter’s signature at postdated checks representing the 50% monthly
the verification. In order to make sure of his interest. On the maturity date of the first check, all of
suspicion, the bank manager went to the house of X them deposited the same on the bank. However, they
and checked if X made some withdrawals from his were dishonored. They sent notices of dishonor to
bank accounts. X denied and added that the signature ABCDE. ABCDE disappeared. What crime?
was not his. X and the bank teller was brought 21 counts of syndicated estafa. For each 21 counts,
together by the bank manager and the teller admitted ABCDE shall suffer life imprisonment (People v. Aquino).
to the crime. What are the crimes committed? Under PD 1689, the following elements are: that the
4 counts of estafa thru falsification of commercial offender any acts of estafa under 315 and 316.The elements
document. Each act of withdrawal would amount to are in this case, they committed violation of estafa under
Estafa, and the withdrawal slip was falsified to make it look 315 2A through means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts
like X withdrew the money. The withdrawal slip is a executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission
commercial document defined under the Code of of the fraud. By such acts, they were able to induce the
Commerce. persons to part with their money and such pretense are
concommittance with defraudation. Second, it is
syndicated estafa because syndicated estafa is committed
c) By taking undue advantage of the signature of the when 5 or more people committed the act. The third
offended party in blank, and by writing any document element is when there is defraudation of money,
contributed by stockholders, rural banks, cooperatives,
Daverick Pacumio
Page 134 of 142
samahang nayon, farmer’s association or solicited by d) By postdating a check or issuing a check in payment
corporations and associations from the general public. In of an obligation when the offender had no funds in the
this case, the money was solicited by ABCDE from the bank OR his funds deposited therein were not
general public. sufficient to cover the amount of the check.
People v. Aquino – according to the SC, it is settled that X went to Y. He told Y that he needed money for the
where one states that the future profits/income of an online schooling of his son. X told him that he had
enterprise is of a certain sum, but he knows that there will nothing to serve as collateral except postdated
be none, this is an actionable fraud. An actionable fraud checks. It will be funded at the 15th day of the month.
arises when the accused has knowledge that the venture X gave him the postdated checks and Y gave him the
would not yield the promised results yet, despite the same, needed money. On the said 15th month, Y went to the
he continued with the said act of misrepresentation, which bank, tried to deposit the check but it bounced. Y sent
caused prejudice to the offended party. a notice of dishonor to X and X failed to make good on
the check. Y filed a case for ESTAFA under Art. 315 2(d)
Same problem. They were looking for investors and and BP 22. Will both cases prosper?
found W won from lotto 100 million. They went to W Yes.
and induced him to invest in his company and said
good things about their company. W agreed and gave Estafa – were it not for X’s false pretense at the time of the
10 million and ABCDE gave him certificate of issuance of the check, Y would not have parted with his
investment plus 50% interest in form of postdated money.
check. W on the maturity of the check, earned from
the check and became richer. W further invested 50 BP 22 – every check that bounced and the drawer fails to
million. ABCDE gave him certificate of investment make good thereon, there is violation of BP 22.
plus 50% interest in form of postdated check. Again,
W earned from the transaction. He earned 50% of 50 Same problem. Y said X can pay when he is able. X told
million. W decided to invest everything. So again he Y he is going to pay by the end of the month. Y agreed.
was given the same documents. W deposited the End of the month, X did not pay Y. Y gave X a call, “Oy.
check and it bounced. He sent notice of dishonor to Magbayad ka.” X said he will drop by Y’s house. X told
ABCDE but received it bank, “Return to Sender”. W Y that he did not have cash. He gave, instead a
filed a case of syndicated estafa. Are A, B, C, D, and E postdated check, with a guarantee that it will be
liable of syndicated estafa? funded on the 15th day of the month or the maturity
No. First element, the offender must have committed any date. Check was dishonored for insufficiency of funds.
acts of estafa under RPC Article 315 and 316. In this case, X failed to make good on the check despite the lapse
the committed crime is under Estafa Article 315 2A. Were of 5 days from receipt from notice of dishonor. Y filed
it not for their guarantees, W would not have parted with a case for ESTAFA under Art. 315 2(d) and BP 22. Will
his 50 milion. The second element is that it must be both cases prosper?
committed by 5 or more persons. In this case it is No.
committed by 5 people. Third element is that the money
that was misappropriated were contributed by Estafa – no. Estafa does not prosper in case of issuing a
stockholders, rural banks, cooperatives, samahang nayon, check in payment of a pre-existing obligation. This is
farmer’s association or solicited by corporations and because the obligation already exists.
associations from the general public. SC said since the
victim based on the facts presented is only 1 person, that BP 22 – will prosper. For every check that bounced, even
one person does not represent the enumerated persons. SC in the payment of a pre-existing obligation, there is a
said the accused shall be held liable only of Estafa under violation of BP 22.
Article 315 2A.
Estafa under Art. 315 2(d) v. BP 22
b) By altering the quality, fitness, or weight of BP 22 Estafa by postdating a
anything pertaining to his art or business. check
Issuance of worthless Deceit is an element
c) By pretending to have bribed a Government checks
employee
Daverick Pacumio
Page 135 of 142
The drawer will be held The The drawer and X to file his counter-affidavit. Upon X’s receipt of the
liable endorser can be held liable subpoena, he became afraid. X then went to Y and
if he knows that the checks issued to Y a replacement check constituting the
are fraudulent value of the check that bounced + interest. When Y
The offender is given 5 The offender is given three deposited the check, it was a good check. Everything
banking days days from the receipt of had been paid. Nevertheless, since X failed to file a
notice of dishonor counter-affidavit, the prosecutor filed an Information
Crime against public Crime against property for BP 22 against X. X’s defense: Nabayaran niya na.
interest MeTC still convicted X since the payment was made
Malum prohibitum Malum in se beyond the 5 banking days.
SC: Acquit. Unlike estafa by postdating a check, a violation
BATAS PAMBANSA BILANG 22 (Bouncing Checks of BP22 is a crime against public interest. Public interest is
Law) no longer damaged if the bounced check was replaced.
Therefore, the prosecutor should not have filed the
Checks covered by BP 22: The mere act of issuing a Information the moment the prosecutor learns of the
worthless check either as a deposit, guarantee, or evidence payment. However, this ruling applies only to BP22 cases.
of pre-existing debt, or a mode of payment, will make one It will not apply in estafa by postdating a check. In the
liable for BP 22. latter, even if payment was made before the filing of the
case, for as long as beyond the 3-day period, there is already
X has an indebtedness to Y. Y is living in Pampanga. estafa. This is because what is punished in estafa is the
In payment of his obligation, X went to Y and X issued element of deceit and defraudation in the issuance of the
the check to Y in Pampanga. Thereafter, Y, armed with check, which cannot be cured by payment.
said check, went to Makati because the depositary
bank is in Makati. Y deposited the check issued by X
in Makati. The check bounced. Notice of dishonor e) By obtaining any food, refreshment or
sent. X failed to make good. Y filed a case for BP 22 accommodation at a hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding
before the MeTC Makati. Does it have jurisdiction? house, lodging house, or apartment house and the like
Yes. Violation of BP22 is a transitory or continuing offense without paying therefor, with intent to defraud the
which means that some acts material and essential thereto, proprietor or manager thereof, OR by obtaining credit
the moment it is committed in any at a hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house, lodging
province/city/municipality, the offender may be house, or apartment house by the use of any false
prosecuted therein. The deposit of the check in Makati is a pretense, OR by abandoning or surreptitiously
material element therefore granting MeTC Makati removing any part of his baggage from a hotel, inn,
jurisdiction. restaurant, boarding house, lodging house or
apartment house after obtaining credit, food,
Demand: Unlike in Art. 315 1(b) where demand may be in refreshment or accommodation therein without
any form, demand in estafa by postdating a check and in paying for his food, refreshment or accommodation.
BP 22, demand, notice of dishonor, must always be in
writing. While notice of dishonor is not an element of the Par. 3 – ESTAFA THROUGH FRAUDULENT MEANS
said crimes, it is material because it is only upon receipt of
the same that the drawer is given the chance to make good THREE PUNISHABLE ACTS:
on the check. If the drawer made good on the check within
3 or 5 days, as the case may be, the drawer is not liable for a) By inducing another, by means of deceit, to sign any
estafa or BP 22. document
X issued a check to Y. on the maturity date, Y b) By resorting to some fraudulent practice to insure
deposited it. The check was dishonored. Y sent a success in a gambling game
notice of dishonor to X. X ignored it. 3 days lapsed, 5
days lapsed, months lapsed, X did not make good. Y c) By removing, concealing, or destroying, in whole or
filed a BP 22 case vs. X. the moment the case was in part, any court record, office files, document, or any
raffled to the investigating prosecutor, the other papers
investigating prosecutor sent a subpoena to X, asking Arson
Daverick Pacumio
Page 136 of 142
ARSON is the malicious destruction of the property by Intestate Estate of Gonzales v. People – the absolutory
means of fire. cause in Art. 332 does not apply in case the said crimes
therein are complexed with other crimes. If we will read
X, wanted to burn the house of Y. X pulled a cart the Information, the crime charged is Estafa. If you will
containing cases of straws. He placed it all over the look at the contents and allegation, it is expressly stated
house of Y. He was about to set it on fire when that the estafa is committed through falsification of public
suddenly Y arrived and immediately stopped X. What document by falsifying an SPA. Therefore, even if the title
are the crimes committed? reads Estafa, but the allegations and the contents of the
A: Attempted arson. The act of X placing straws around the Information says that the crime committed is estafa
house of Y and about to set it on fire these are over acts through falsification of public documents, 332 will not
directly connected to the crime of Arson however, by apply because estafa is complexed with falsification of
reason by of accident or other causes other than by public document and the crime for which the estafa is
spontaneous desistance of the offender, the crime was not complexed, it is against public interest (Title IV). It cannot
produced. be absorbed.
People v. Malngan (En Banc) – there is no such crime as TITLE ELEVEN – CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
arson with homicide. If the intent of the offender is to kill,
and said killing is done by means of fire, it is murder Art. 333 – Adultery
qualified by use of fire. If the offender kills a person and
placed the deceased person and set the house on fire to ELEMENTS:
conceal the crime. 2 crimes: (a) murder; and (b) arson to 1. That the woman is married;
conceal the commission of murder. If the intent of the 2. She has sexual intercourse with a man who is not
offender is to burn the house of another, and in burning her husband; and
said house, he did not know someone was inside and said 3. As regards the man whom she has sexual
person died, the crime is simple arson. The killing is intercourse, he must know her to be married.
absorbed, and increases the penalty to RP to Death.
Offender: Married woman and her paramour or lover
People v. Soria – the helper died when the house was Offended party: Husband
burned by the offender. SC held that the crime is arson Who can file the case: Husband. Adultery is a private
with homicide. This is penned by our very own former CJ crime which cannot be prosecuted by the state de officio.
Peralta. He, however, did not explain why it became arson There must be first a complaint filed by the offended party
with homicide. and that is the husband.
Prosec. G: Malngan prevails over Soria. Against whom shall the husband file the case: Both his
wife and the lover of his wife.
Art. 332 – Exemption from Criminal Liability in Crimes
Against Property Adultery is a formal crime. It has no attempted or
frustrated stages because adultery is punished upon the
If the crime of THEFT, SWINDLING (or estafa) or carnal union of a married woman with another man, not
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF is committed and it is caused her husband. It is a crime based on result. It can be proven
mutually by the following persons: not only by means of direct evidence but also by
• Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives circumstantial evidence.
by affinity in the same line.
• The widowed spouse with respect to the property Art. 334 – Concubinage
which belonged to the deceased spouse before the
same shall have passed into the possession of Concubinage can be committed in any of the following
another; and means:
• Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and 1. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling;
sisters-in-law, if living together. 2. Having sexual intercourse under scandalous
• Will this apply to qualified theft? Yes. Theft is circumstances with a woman, not his wife;
simply qualified. 3. Cohabiting with her in any other place
Offender: Legal husband or concubine

Daverick Pacumio
Page 137 of 142
Offended party: Wife

Who can file the case: Wife In case of abduction, whether it is forcible abduction or
Against whom shall the husband file the case: Both consented abduction (Art. 343) sexual intercourse is not an
husband and concubine. element.
In case the concubine didn't know that the man is a If after abducting the said woman, the man had carnal
married man, it is a matter of defense on her part. If she knowledge of her against her will and by means of force,
proves that she didn't know that the man is a married man violence or intimidation, the said man is also liable for the
she can be acquitted of concubinage. The penalty of a crime of rape because sexual intercourse is not an element.
concubine is only destierro.
The tricycle driver passed by the house of X. He had
Seduction courted X for months but X now has a different
• There must always be sexual intercourse. boyfriend. He saw X at the doorstep of the house. The
• In rape, the sexual intercourse is against the will of tricycle driver pushed the gate and carried X. The
the victim. woman was shouting for help and the tricycle driver
• In seduction, the sexual intercourse is done by covered her mouth. At the outset of taking the
means of abuse of authority, confidence, woman, there was on his part lewd design. He brought
relationship, or deceit. the woman inside a small house and there he tied the
said woman. Thereafter, he gave the woman food but
Art. 337 – Qualified Seduction X wouldn't eat. The next day X told the tricycle driver
to release her. The tricycle driver said “No, I will only
ELEMENTS: release you if you will marry me” The woman said “No
6 that will never happen specially with what you have
1. The offended party must be a minor;
7 done!” That afternoon, again, the driver gave food to
2. She must be over 16 and under 18 years of age;
X. He release X from being tied. The driver left.
3. The offender is a person in public authority, priest,
Thereafter, he returned and by means of force and
house servant, domestic, teacher, guardian or any
violence had carnal knowledge with X. X pleaded but
person, in any manner, shall be entrusted with the
he was successful in having carnal knowledge with
education or custody of the woman seduced;
her. On the third day of her captivity, again, the
4. The offender had sexual intercourse with of the
tricycle driver had carnal knowledge with X. On the
said offended party; and
4th day of her captivity again, the tricycle driver had
5. There is abuse of authority, confidence or
carnal knowledge of X by means of violence or force.
relationship on the part of the offender
On the 5th Day X was able to escape. What crime is/are
committed by the tricycle driver?
Art. 338 – Simple Seduction
(1) Rape thru forcible abduction; (2) Rape; and (3)
Rape. If by reason of the forcible abduction, the said man
ELEMENTS:
8 would have carnal knowledge of the woman against her
1. Offended party is over 16 and under 18 years of will, the said act of rape has to be complex with forcible
age; abduction because forcible abduction was a necessary
2. She must be of good reputation, single or widow ; means in order to commit the first act of rape. However,
3. Offender has sexual intercourse with her; and the succeeding acts of rape would no longer be complex
4. It is committed by means of deceit. because forcible abduction would no longer be necessary.
Therefore, in this case, the said driver would be charge
Deceit – usually comes in the form of a broken promise of with: 1) Rape through forcible abduction; 2) Rape and 3)
marriage. Rape.
Art. 342 – Forcible Abduction Same problem. The tricycle driver abducted X.
Carried X from the house and at the outset there was
It is the taking away of a woman against her will. At the lewd design and brought X inside a house. That very
outset there was a lewd design on the part of the said man. same night he tried to have carnal knowledge with X.
6 8
As amended by R.A. No. 11648. As amended by R.A. No. 11648.
7
As amended by R.A. No. 11648.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 138 of 142
X Put up a fight. X was able to grab a lead pipe and a Correct. Because in order to bring about the special
piece of wood. With these two weapons X was able to complex crime of kidnapping and serious illegal detention
attack the driver and escape. She went to the police with rape, it is necessary that the rape must be
station and filed 2 cases against the driver. One is consummated. In this case. rape is only attempted;
forcible abduction. The other one is attempted rape. therefore, it will constitute a separate charge. Two cases
If you were, the public prosecutor, would you indict shall be filed against X: 1) Kidnapping and serious illegal
the tricycle driver as charge? detention and 2) Attempted rape.
If you were the public prosecutor you have to indict the
tricycle driver with only one charge and that is forcible Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention with Rape
abduction. The attempt to rape the victim is absorbed by v. Forcible Abduction with Rape
the crime of forcible abduction because the attempt to rape Kidnapping with Rape Forcible Abduction with
the victim is a manifestation of the lewd design element of Rape
forcible abduction. Therefore, it is simply absorbed. A special complex crime, a A complex crime under
composite crime; a single, Article 48 because the
If rape is not consummated but merely attempted you do indivisible offense. forcible abduction is a
not complex it with forcible abduction. It is just absorbed. necessary means to
Because it is just a manifestation of the lewd design commit the act of rape.
element of forcible abduction. At the outset the intent of At the outset the intent of
the offender is to detain the offender is with lewd
X was on his way to his work when he passed by a the victim. design.
grocery store and saw there waiting for a ride the wife If there are multiple acts of If there are multiple acts of
of his enemy, Y. X upon seeing the wife of Y went to rape committed on the rape, you only complex
her, covered her mouth and forcibly brought the wife victim, all these acts of forcible abduction with
to his van. He tied her hands and brought her to a rape are absorbed in this the first act of rape. The
secluded place. X wanted to detain the said wife in single indivisible offense it succeeding acts of rape
order to get even with Y. He wanted Y to be so being a special complex would constitute separate
disturbed looking for his wife. He decided to keep the crime and distinct charges.
wife for at least a week or two. That night, however, Rape must be
he found the wife of Y very attractive and by means of consummated. If rape is
force and violence had carnal knowledge with the said only attempted, it will
wife. On the next night, again, he had carnal constitute a separate and
knowledge of the said wife. On the third night again, distinct charge.
he had carnal knowledge of the said wife until the wife
was able to escape. What crime or crimes is/are X was 13. X’s brother in law came inside her bedroom.
committed by X? The brother-in-law undressed X and had carnal
X is liable for kidnapping and serious illegal knowledge of X despite X’s cries. 2 weeks after, the
detention with Rape. A special complex crime under brother in law abducted X and brought X in the house
Article 267. When the victim of kidnapping is raped, we of his parents. Inside the room, X was raped. X
have a special complex crime under Article 267. Here, at informed her parents. The brother in law was
the outset, the obvious intent of X is to detain the wife in charged: (1) qualified rape; and (2) forcible abduction
order to get even with his enemy Y. However, while the with rape. RTC convicted the brother in law. CA
woman is detained, X had carnal knowledge of the said affirmed.
woman three times. Regardless of the number of times the SC:
victim had been raped we only have one single, indivisible
offense composite crime of kidnapping and serious illegal (1) Qualified rape – correct. There is minority and
detention with Rape. relationship.
Same problem. On the next day, X tried to have carnal (2) Forcible abduction with rape – wrong. This is
knowledge with the said wife. But the wife put up a another count of qualified rape. Forcible abduction is
fight and was able to escape. X was charged with two absorbed in the crime of rape if the real objective of the
crimes. First, kidnapping with serious Illegal accused is to rape the victim. Here, based on the evidence,
detention. Second, attempted rape. Are the charges it is evident that the victim’s abduction was for the purpose
correct?
Daverick Pacumio
Page 139 of 142
of raping her again. Forcible abduction is merely incidental collaterally attack the validity of a void ab initio marriage
(People v. Cayanan). for a criminal prosecution for bigamy. This applies only if
the first marriage is void ab initio. It cannot apply in case
TITLE TWELVE – CRIMES AGAINST CIVIL STATUS OF the first marriage is voidable.
PERSONS
X and Y, both men, wanted to get married. The priest
Art. 349 – Bigamy would not marry them. The judge wouldn’t either.
They found a minister. The minister is authorized by
2 ways of committing bigamy: a religion to solemnize a religious ceremony. The
Bigamy shall be committed by any person who shall: minister solemnized the marriage. Crime?
1. contracts a second or subsequent marriage X and Y – Illegal marriage.
before the former marriage has been legally
dissolved, Minister – performance of illegal marriage ceremony.
2. or who shall contract a subsequent or second
marriage before the absent spouse has been TITLE THIRTEEN – CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
declared presumptively dead, meaning in a
decision made in an appropriate proceeding. Art. 353 – Libel
Castro v. People – accused was charged with bigamy. Here, Libel – is public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of
the SC said a judicial declaration of nullity is required after a vice or defect, whether real or imaginary on any person
a valid subsequent marriage is contracted. The accused’s and it is necessary that in the commission of the said crime,
reliance on his religion will not exculpate him. The there was malice on the part of the said offender.
marriage contract does not indicate that the accused is a
Muslim. This was just a deceptive scheme of the accused in ELEMENTS:
order to prevent or escape criminal liability. 1. There must be an imputation or allegation of a
crime, or a vice of defect, whether real or
Pulido v. People – Luisito Pulido, who was 16 at the time of imaginary, or any act or omission, condition,
marriage, married his teacher (22) in 1983. In 2007, Luisito status or circumstance which tend to dishonor or
stopped going home to their conjugal home. Nora discredit a natural or juridical person.
confronted Luisito. He admitted he had another woman. 2. That there must be a publication of the said
When Nora made further inquiries, she discovered that her defamatory statement or article – satisfied the
husband had entered into another marriage with another moment a third person has read the libelous
woman in 1995. Nora was able to get a marriage certificate article.
from the civil registry. There, Luisito indicated he was 3. The identity of the person defamed must be
single. Nora filed a case for bigamy against Luisito and his established or identified - satisfied the moment a
second wife, Rowena. Luisito’s defense: both his first and third person reading or hearing the malicious
second marriages are null and void. As to the first – there statement can pinpoint to the offended party as
was no valid marriage license as he was then 16. As to the the subject thereof.
second – there was no marriage ceremony. According to 4. The existence of malice
the second wife, she did not know that Luisito was already
married. RTC: Convicted Luisito, but acquitted Rowena.
CA: Affirmed. MALICE IN LAW – Prosecution need not prove malice. It
SC: Acquit. The SC revisited and examined its earlier is the defense who must prove that in stating the
rulings requiring the judicial declaration of a prior void ab defamatory statements, there was no malice on the part of
initio marriage before it may be considered a defense in a the offender because the law presumes malice in law.
bigamy case. SC abandoned the same. A void ab initio
marriage is a valid defense in a bigamy charge even without MALICE IN FACT – There are certain statements wherein
judicial declaration of absolute nullity of marriage. In th the law does not presume malice. In this kind of malice, it
latter part of the Pulido decision, the SC held the parties must be proven by the prosecution. It is available in
are not required to obtain a judicial declaration of nullity privilege communication.
of a void ab initio first or second marriage in order to raise
it as a defense in bigamy. Art. 40 did not amend art. 349 of Two (Exceptions) Kinds of Privilege Communications
the RPC. Therefore, it does not deny the accused to 1. Absolute Privilege Communication
Daverick Pacumio
Page 140 of 142
sustaining only slight physical injuries because the

2. Qualified Privilege Communication or Conditional husband covered the wife. X was arrested and after
Privilege Communication investigation, X was charged with two crimes before
the office of the public prosecutor, one is reckless
Absolute Privilege Communication – totally no actionable. imprudence resulting slight physical injuries for the
injuries sustained by the wife and the other one is
Ex: A senator stating slanderous remarks against a well- reckless imprudence resulting in homicide and
known businessman in a privilege speech. The damage to property for the death of the husband and
businessman cannot file a case against such senator. the damage caused on the car. These are the two cases
filed against X before the office the public prosecutor.
Qualified Privilege Communication – actionable. Since the victim for reckless imprudence resulting
slight physical injuries the wife is alive and there it is
A communication made by one person to another in the subject for inquest by the fiscal and after inquest, the
exercise of his legal, professional, or moral duty fiscal immediately filed a case before the
Metropolitan Trial Court, reckless imprudence
A fair and true report made in good faith without any resulting slight physical injuries. Insofar as the case
comment in a legislative or judicial proceedings or any for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide and
statements made before said proceedings damage to property, since the victim of the homicide,
since the husband died and likewise since the damage
Any statements made regarding performance or functions to property must still be assessed, it is subject to our
of public officers. preliminary investigation and not merely for inquest
purposes and therefore it stayed in the office of the
Tulfo v. People – Raffy Tulfo was a writer of a tabloid article. public prosecutor for 60 days. Meanwhile while the
He wrote allegedly malicious articles about Atty. So, an public prosecutor was resolving the case for reckless
officer of the BOC. SC: The prosecution failed to prove that imprudence resulting in homicide and damage to
the defamatory statements were made with actual malice, property, the case for reckless imprudence resulting
i.e., knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard slight physical injuries, the case was set for
of whether it was false or not. it can be deduced from arraignment, when X was arraigned, upon advice of
Tulfo’s article that it is within the purview of a qualified the counsel, X pleaded guilty your honor and so X was
privilege communication as it pertained to Atty. So’s convicted and imposed with a penalty for reckless
exercise of his official functions. influence resulting in slight physical injuries. After 60
days, here comes the resolution for reckless
Maglasang v. People – accused sent a letter to Comodore imprudence resulting in homicide and damage to
Velasco. The letter allegedly contained malicious property, it was filed before the same court the MTTC.
imputations against Galileo. However, the private Upon the filing of the case, the counsel moved to
complainant failed to present the letter. Hence, he was quash the said information on the ground of double
acquitted. SC: The best evidence rule requires that the jeopardy According to him, his client X was already
original letter be presented as evidence. Mere photocopies been convicted of reckless imprudence resulting in
will not suffice – they are unacceptable. J. Caguioa slight physical injuries, therefore, the said client X
concurred. The essence of his concurring opinion is: As can no longer be charge prosecuted and convicted for
early as 1931 in Fiscal v. Reyes, the SC held that the best another crime arising from the very same reckless
evidence rule applies in cases of libel. The purpose is to imprudence otherwise double jeopardy attaches.
ensure that the exact contents of a writing is brought to the Denied by the MTC until the case reaches the SC.
court to prevent any alteration. If the said malicious The SC said the counsel is correct. The information has to
statement is contained in a written document, the real be quashed case. Case dismissed. Supreme Court said that
letter must be produced. Otherwise, it will be an acquittal. it is settled in jurisprudence that reckless imprudence,
simple imprudence and simple negligence are crimes by
TITLE FOURTEEN – QUASI-OFFENSES themselves when either was convicted of reckless
imprudence resulting to slight physical injuries he can no
Art. 365 – Imprudence and Negligence longer be convicted of another crime arising from the very
same reckless imprudence. What you punish is the
X was driving his car. He hit and bumped another car. imprudence, the negligence not the resulting felony.
The driver died, the husband, the wife survives
Daverick Pacumio
Page 141 of 142
Therefore, the said case for reckless imprudence resulting

to homicide and damage to property was quashed. It was
dismissed.
Another thing you have to remember in article for 365, as

the Supreme Court said this a number of times, what you
are punishing is the imprudence the negligence therefore
do not say homicide through reckless imprudence, that is
wrong, you are not punishing the homicide. You are
punishing the imprudence these are quasi-offenses,
therefore reckless imprudence resulting in homicide,
reckless imprudence resulting in multiple homicide,
reckless influence resulting in multiple serious physical
injuries. What you are punishing is the imprudence.
Daverick Pacumio
Page 142 of 142

Criminal Law Review Notes (Prosec. Victoria C. Garcia)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Criminal Law Review Notes (Prosec. Victoria C. Garcia)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Law Review Notes (Prosec. Victoria C. Garcia)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Culled primarily from the lectures of Prosecutor Victoria C. Garcia

GENERAL PRINCIPLES process or giving him the opportunity to be

Territoriality ART. 22: Penal laws shall be given retroactive

No. It is not a penal law because it does not define a

2 philosophies Mixed/Eclectic: If you mixed the characteristics of

mankind. It may be punished in the competent tribunal

WHEN MOTIVE IS NOT MATERIAL: 2. Culpable Felonies:

MALUM IN SE MALA PROHIBITA Garcia v. CA: The act of decreasing a political

No. The first element is immediately absent because the

Consummated felonies as well as those which are

Article 11 The primordial element is unlawful aggression. Without

Elements: IV. STATE OF NECESSITY

husband beats hits the wife. the following morning,

6. UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR 7. LAWFUL OR INSUPERABLE CAUSE

Elements: (URG) Elements: (RFL)

Distinguish ordinary mitigating from privileged II. MINORITY OR SENIORITY

I. INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING OR EXEMPTING Seniority is a privileged mitigating circumstance. An

compliance and submissiveness of the accused before

3. That abuse of confidence facilitated the

4. In contempt of or with insult to public

together in the acted together in the

from his last release/conviction for theft, he imposition of an

Elements: Disguise - ways and means resorted to by the accused

3. Difference in physical characteristics such as charged with murder qualified by treachery.

XIX. WALL, ROOM, FLOOR, DOOR, WINDOW BE

Accomplices. cooperate in the execution of the offense by

The following are criminally liable for light felonies: Elements

PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT 1. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender

Elements; 3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the

Fencing No merit. Even if Y’s deceased body cannot be found,

• As accessory: Follows the duration of the

Penalties common to the three preceding classes: Payment of costs

4/5 credit – if the detention prisoner does not agree in

1. Right to vote and be voted; of private crimes (Art.

• There must be an express statement that in case

b) Resulted to 2 or more grave or less grave

consummated principals an attempted a period in accordance with the provisions of

One mitigating and no Reclusion temporal in its Indeterminate Sentence Law

1 aggravating Reclusion Prision mayor in 2 mitigating Reclusion perpetua (As

1 privileged mitigating Maximum: Prision Sec. 41, RA 10591

Minimum: Prision Objectives

To get the minimum term: The minimum term shall DISQUALIFICATIONS

CONDITIONS IMPOSED UPON OFFENDER UNDER EFFECT OF PROBATION

SERVICE OF SENTENCE known, from discovery by offended party, authorities

absentia ensued. X was adjudged guilty. The police

3. Correctional penalties, in ten years; with the VALID MARRIAGE

COMMENCEMENT PERIOD MODES FOR PARTIALLY EXTINGUISHING

COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE Period of Deduction

b. Purpose of executing a treasonable design

4. Such act of going to the foreign country, to the

o The commission of these crimes are not

In Geroche v. People, the offended party was fast asleep and

Article 133 – Offending Religious Feelings ELEMENTS:

ELEMENTS: 2. He incites others to uprise for any of the purposes

the use of such loose firearm is not an element in the crime

FIRST. Without public uprising, by employing force or o Councilman

alighted and pushed MMDA officer and fell on the