Module 2 and 3 of Criminal Law 1

Module 2:General principles of criminal liability

I.Felony,defined(Art 3.RPC)

Article 3.Definition. Felonies Acts and omissions punishable by law(delitos).

Felonies are committed not only by means of deceit(dolo) but also by means of
fault(culpa).

There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent; and there is fault
when the wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or
lack of skill.

II.Elements of criminal liability

Criminal liability is generally made up of two elements: (1) the guilty act or
omission known as the "actus reus", and (2) the prohibited state of mind or guilty
mind known as the "mens rea". The mental element generally requires the proof of
an intention on the part of the person who commits the criminal act .

Most criminal offences require the co-existence of the above two elements (i.e.
actus reus and mens rea) at the same time. The concept is derived from the Latin
expression “ actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea ”, which means that "the act will
not make a person guilty unless the mind is also guilty".

A.Physical element(actus reus) -Actus reus is commonly defined as a criminal act

that was the result of voluntary bodily movement. This describes a physical activity
that harms another person or damages property. Anything from a physical assault
or murder to the destruction of public property would qualify as an actus reus.

a.act

B.omission

B.Mental element(mens rea)-Mens Rea refers to criminal intent. The literal

translation from Latin is "guilty mind." The plural of mens rea is mentes reae. A
mens rea​refers to the state of mind statutorily required in order to convict a

1
particular defendant of a particular crime.

a.Deliberate intent(Dolo)

i.Elements of Dolo

-The elements of crimes committed by means of dolo are FREEDOM,INTELLIGENCE

and INTENT.

ii.General and specific intent

General intent crimes

-Most crimes require general intent, meaning that the prosecution must prove only
that the accused meant to do an act prohibited by law. Whether the defendant
intended the act's result is irrelevant.

A state's law defines battery as "intentional and harmful physical contact with
another person." This terminology makes battery a general intent crime. The intent
element is satisfied if the defendant intends to cause harmful physical contact and
actually causes it—it doesn't matter whether the defendant actually intended to
hurt or seriously injure the victim. So, if Jill punches Jack in the eye after Jack calls
her an "idiot," she has probably committed a battery. All the prosecution has to
show is that Jill intentionally punched Jack. The prosecutor doesn't need to show
that Jill intended to hurt Jack—the law assumes as much.

Specific intent crimes

Specific intent crimes typically require that the defendant intentionally commit an
act and intend to cause a particular result when committing that act.

A state's law defines aggravated battery as "intentional and harmful physical

contact with another with the intent to maim or disfigure." This is a specific intent
crime because it requires that the defendant not only cause harmful contact, but
also with the purpose of maiming or disfiguring the victim. So, suppose that Denise
says to Vance, "No one will love you once I mess up that pretty face." She then slices
off his nose with a large, sharp razor blade. Since the evidence is likely to establish
that she specifically intended to disfigure Vance, she is probably guilty of
aggravated battery.

iii.Intent distinguished from motive

2
intent is the driving force behind surmising guilt. Even if a crime has been
committed, the accused may eventually be found not guilty due to a lack of intent.
Intent can be described as a willingness to act, and it makes all the difference in a
criminal case.

In a criminal case, a motive is an explanation. Investigators, prosecutors, judges

and the public use motive to explain a person’s actions. Motives can be good or bad
and may not always be present. A motive comes down to the reasons for making a
decision or refusal to act. Even if the prosecution proves that a motive exists, they
must still prove criminal intent to pass a guilty verdict.

Motives are:

The reason behind the action

Not always present in a case

Irrelevant in proving guilt

Motive comes before intent. It’s often referred to as the underlying cause behind
the intent to act. Uncovering motives can determine the reasons for committing the
act. Motives are often used by investigators when narrowing their list of suspects. A
motive has perhaps the greatest effect on a case during sentencing. Motives can
often influence a judge’s opinion to lean toward the maximum or minimum
sentencing guidelines.

iv.Mistake of fact

Mistakes of fact arise when a criminal defendant misunderstood some fact that
negates an element of the crime. For instance, if an individual is charged with
larceny but believed that the property he took was rightfully his, this
misunderstanding negates any intent to deprive another of the property.

US v. Ah Chong,G.R. No.5272,19 March 1910

V.Malum prohibitum as exception to the requirement of mens rea

Mala prohibita, or malum prohibitum in its singular form, is a Latin phrase which
literally translates to, it is wrong as, or because, it is prohibited.These are acts or
omissions which are not inherently wrongful or immoral by themselves; yet,
because of certain statutes or laws prohibiting such acts or omission, they have

3
been considered as crimes or offenses. Hence, they become punishable under such
laws.The act becomes a crime because a criminal statute made it so. Usually, mala
prohibita are crimes or offenses which do not harm people and property. They may
also include breaches of statutes or prohibitions involving minor crimes, such as
but not limited to infractions of ordinances.Therefore, the only question in
determining whether or not the same is malum prohibitum is whether a statute or a
special penal law is violated.Why will, then, such statutes or prohibitions have been
enacted to criminalize those acts or omissions if they are not inherently wrongful
or immoral?It must be noted that the primary feature of crimes mala prohibita is
not their lack of gravity. Nonetheless, they are acts criminalized by statute in an
effort to regulate the general behaviors of society.Perforce, the main objective of
the state is to instill order in the society. Necessarily, it is apt to regulate such acts
or omissions which if remained unattended may subsequently cause chaos to the
communities in general. Then, a greater harm will be unavoidable.Such acts, like
illegally possessing firearms, if remained unregulated or prohibited will result into
proliferation of unlicensed guns in the hands of our citizens. It will eventually
cause harm to our society, as the privilege of owning a gun will no longer be
conditioned by responsible ownership, strict terms, and conditions.

-GARCIA V. CA G.R. No.157171,14 March 2006

B.Constructive intent(Culpa) (ART 3 and 365 RPC)

I.Elements-In evaluating felonies committed by means of culpa, three (3) elements

are indispensable, namely, intelligence, freedom of action, and negligence.

ii.imprudence or lack of skill

iii.neligence or lack of foresight

Art. 365. Imprudence and negligence.— Any person who, by reckless imprudence,
shall commit any act which, had it been intentional, would constitute a grave felony,
shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its medium period; if it would have constituted a less grave felony,
the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods shall be imposed;
if it would have constituted a light felony, the penalty of arresto menor in its
maximum periodical shall be imposed.

"Any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence, shall commit an act which
would otherwise constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor

4
in its medium and maximum periods; if it would have constituted a less serious
felony, the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed.

"When the execution of the act covered by this article shall have only resulted in
damage to the property of another, the offender shall be punished by a fine ranging
from an amount equal to the value of said damages to three times such value, but
which shall in no case be less than twenty-five pesos.

"A fine not exceeding two-hundred pesos and censure shall be imposed upon any
person who, by simple imprudence or negligence, shall cause some wrong which, if
done maliciously, would have constituted a light felony.

"In the imposition of these penalties, the courts shall exercise their sound
discretion, without regard to the rules prescribed in article sixty-four.

"The provisions contained in this article shall not be applicable:

"1. When the penalty provided for the offense is equal to or lower than those
provided in the first two paragraphs of this article, in which case the courts shall
impose the penalty next lower in degree than that which should be imposed in the
period which they may deem proper to apply.

"2. When, by imprudence or negligence and with violations of the Automobile Law,
the death of a person shall be caused, in which case the defendant shall be punished
by prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.

"Reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily, but without malice, doing or failing to

do an act from which material damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of
precaution on the part of the person performing or failing to perform such act,
taking into consideration his employment or occupation, degree of intelligence,
physical condition and other circumstances regarding persons, time and place.

"Simple imprudence consists in the lack of precaution displayed in those cases in

which the damage impending to be caused is not immediate nor the danger clearly
manifest.

"The penalty next higher in degree to those provided for in this article shall be
imposed upon the offender who fails to lend on the spot to the injured parties such
help as may be in his hands to give."

C.Transferred intent(ART. 4,par.1 RPC)-Transferred intent is used when a

5
defendant intends to harm one victim, but then unintentionally harms a second
victim instead.For example, if a murderer intends to kill John, but accidentally kills
George instead, the intent is transferred from John to George, and the killer is held
to have had criminal intent.

i. Aberratio ictus-In “aberratio ictus” or mistake in the blow, a person directed the
blow at an intended victim, but because of poor aim, that blow landed on somebody
else. The intended victim as well as the actual victim are both at the scene of the
crime.It is a manner or incurring criminal liability according to Paragraph 1,Article
4 RPC.It is a mistake in the identity of the victim.

- People v. Guillen, G.R. No. L-1477, 18January 1950

ii. Error in personae-“Error in personae” or mistake in identity is injuring one

person who is mistaken for another. The intended victim is not at the scene of the
crime. It is the actual victim upon whom the blow was directed, but he is not really
the intended victim.

- People v. Sabalones, G.R. No. 123485, 31 August 1998

iii. Praeter intentionem-“Praeter intentionem” is defined as having an injurious

result that is greater than that intended. The Revised Penal Code describes it as no
intention to commit so grave a wrong.Paragraph 3,Art 13 RPC Anyone who acts in
defense of the person or rights of a stranger, provided that the first and second
requisites mentioned in the first circumstance of this Article are present and that
the person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive

- People v. Albuquerque, G.R. No.38773, 19 December 1933 d. Concurrence

e. Resulting harm-defined as a violation of some legally protected interest —plays a

key role in determining criminality, Anglo-American criminal jurisprudence has
paid little attention to the theoretical exploration and practical employment of the
principle of harm.There are, of course, numerous cases in which judges speak of
"harm," "evil consequences," or "injurious effects" resulting from criminal con-
duct' or where the harm is considered by the violated statute in determining the
criminal sanction.harm is the very essence of the crime or, as Hall calls it, the
"fulcrum between criminal conduct and the punitive sanction. Besides its
constitutional relevance, the principle of harm can also illuminate shadowed
elements of the crime.

f. Causation-In criminal law, it is defined as the actus reus (an action) from which

6
the specific injury or other effect arose and is combined with mens rea (a state of
mind) to comprise the elements of guilt. Causation only applies where a result has
been achieved and therefore is immaterial with regard to inchoate offenses.For
example,Although Betty has committed a crime in attempting to kill her husband,
she did not actually cause his death. Oscar died when he himself became angry and
had a heart attack. In this example of causation, the prosecutor would not be able
to prove factual causation between the poison and the heart attack.

III. Impossible Crimes (Art. 4, Par. 2, RPC)-By any person performing an act which
would be an offense against persons or property, were it not for the inherent
impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the employment of inadequate
or ineffectual means.

Impossible crime is a crime of last resort.If the acts constitute another distinct
felony,an impossible crime is not committed because objectively a crime is
committed.In other words,if the crime is not produced although there is adequate
or effectual means employed,it cannot be impossible crime but a frustrated
felony.Thus,if the offender administered adequate quantity of poison in order to
kill the victim but the latter survived because he was immediately brought to a
hospital,the offender is guilty of frustrated murder and not of impossible crime.

- Intod v. CA, G.R. No. 103119, 21 October 1992

- Jacinto v. People, G.R. No. 162540, 13 July 2009.

MODULE 3:STAGES OF EXECUTION

A.Attempted Stage (Art. 6, RPC)-There is an attempt when the offender commences

the commission of a felony directly or over acts, and does not perform all the acts of
execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident
other than this own spontaneous desistance.

B.Frustrated Stage (Art. 6, RPC)-frustrated when the offender performs all the acts
of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which,

7
nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the
perpetrator.

C.Consummated crimes (Art. 6, RPC)-A felony is consummated when all the

elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present.

D.Stages of execution in relation to specific felonies

i. Theft (Art. 308, RPC)-Article 308. Who are liable for theft. - Theft is committed by
any person who, with intent to gain but without violence against or intimidation of
persons nor force upon things, shall take personal property of another without the
latter's consent.Theft is likewise committed by:

1. Any person who, having found lost property, shall fail to deliver the same to the
local authorities or to its owner;

2. Any person who, after having maliciously damaged the property of another, shall
remove or make use of the fruits or object of the damage caused by him; and

3. Any person who shall enter an inclosed estate or a field where trespass is
forbidden or which belongs to another and without the consent of its owner, shall
hunt or fish upon the same or shall gather cereals, or other forest or farm products.

- Valenzuela v. People, G.R. No. 160188, 21June 2007

ii. Robbery (Art. 293, RPC)-Article 293. Who are guilty of robbery. - Any person who,
with intent to gain, shall take any personal property belonging to another, by means
of violence or intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything shall be
guilty of robbery.

- People v. Dio, G.R. No. L-36461, 29 June 1984

iii. Illegal Trespass (Art. 280, RPC)-Article 280. Qualified trespass to dwelling. - Any
private person who shall enter the dwelling of another against the latter's will shall
be punished by arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos.If the offense be
committed by means of violence or intimidation, the penalty shall be prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine not exceeding 1,000
pesos.The provisions of this article shall not be applicable to any person who shall
enter another's dwelling for the purpose of preventing some serious harm to
himself, the occupants of the dwelling or a third person, nor shall it be applicable to
any person who shall enter a dwelling for the purpose of rendering some service to

8
humanity or justice, nor to anyone who shall enter cafes, taverns, inn and other
public houses, while the same are open.

- People v. Lamahang, G.R. No. L-43530, 3 August 1935

iv. Physical Injuries, Homicide, andMurder (Art. 248, 249, and 263,RPC) - Article 248.
Murder. - Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246 shall kill
another, shall be guilty of murder and shall be punished by reclusion temporal in
its maximum period to death, if committed with any of the following attendant
circumstances:

1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed
men, or employing means to weaken the defense or of means or persons to insure
or afford impunity.

2. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise.

3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,

derailment or assault upon a street car or locomotive, fall of an airship, by means
of motor vehicles, or with the use of any other means involving great waste and
ruin.

4. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or

of an earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic or other
public calamity.

5. With evident premeditation.

6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the

victim, or outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse.

Article 249. Homicide. - Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article
246, shall kill another without the attendance of any of the circumstances
enumerated in the next preceding article, shall be deemed guilty of homicide and
be punished by reclusion temporal.

Article 263. Serious physical injuries. - Any person who shall wound, beat, or assault
another, shall be guilty of the crime of serious physical injuries and shall suffer:

1. The penalty of prision mayor, if in consequence of the physical injuries inflicted,

the injured person shall become insane, imbecile, impotent, or blind;

9
2. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if in
consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the person injured shall have lost the
use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a
foot, an arm, or a leg or shall have lost the use of any such member, or shall have
become incapacitated for the work in which he was therefor habitually engaged;

3. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, if in

consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the person injured shall have become
deformed, or shall have lost any other part of his body, or shall have lost the use
thereof, or shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance of the work in
which he as habitually engaged for a period of more than ninety days;

4. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its
minimum period, if the physical injuries inflicted shall have caused the illness or
incapacity for labor of the injured person for more than thirty days.If the offense
shall have been committed against any of the persons enumerated in Article 246, or
with attendance of any of the circumstances mentioned in Article 248, the case
covered by subdivision number 1 of this Article shall be punished by reclusion
temporal in its medium and maximum periods; the case covered by subdivision
number 2 by prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its
minimum period; the case covered by subdivision number 3 by prision correccional
in its medium and maximum periods; and the case covered by subdivision number
4 by prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods.The provisions of the
preceding paragraph shall not be applicable to a parent who shall inflict physical
injuries upon his child by excessive chastisement.

People v. Borinaga, G.R. No. 33463, 18 December 1930

v. Rape (Art. 266-A, RPC)-

Section 1. Short Title. - This Act shall be known as "The Anti-Rape Law of 1997."

Section 2. Rape as a Crime Against Persons. - The crime of rape shall hereafter be
classified as a Crime Against Persons under Title Eight of Act No. 3815, as amended,
otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code. Accordingly, there shall be
incorporated into Title Eight of the same Code a new chapter to be known as
Chapter Three on Rape, to read as follows:

"Chapter Three

10
"Rape

"Article 266-A. Rape: When And How Committed. - Rape is committed:

"1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the
following circumstances:

"a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;

"b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;

"c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and

"d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even
though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.

"2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1
hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another
person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal
orifice of another person.

- People v. Orita, G.R. No. 88724, 3 April 1990

vi. Arson (Art. 320, RPC)-Article 320. Destructive arson. - The penalty of reclusion
temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon any
person who shall burn:1. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or military powder or
fireworks factory, ordinance, storehouse, archives or general museum of the
Government.2. Any passenger train or motor vehicle in motion or vessel out of
port.3. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or factory of inflammable or explosive
materials.

- US v. Valdez, G.R. No. L-14128, 10 December 1918.

11