CRIMINAL LAW I

By: Macakiling, Sittie Farhani D.

Presenter, Group 2

G. Stages of Execution (Consummated)

H. Conspiracy and Proposal
I. Plurality of Crimes
CONSUMMATED FELONY
- A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its
execution and accomplishment are present.

WHEN NOT ALL THE ELEMENTS OF A FELONY ARE PROVED

1. The felony is not shown to have been consummated;
2. The felony is not shown to have been committed; or
3. Another felony is shown to have been committed
DETERMINING WHETHER THE CRIME IS ATTEMPTED, FRUSTRATED, OR
CONSUMMATED

1. NATURE OF THE OFFENSE

e.g. Even if only a portion of the wall or any part of an improvement is
burned, the crime of arson is consummated.

2. ELEMENTS CONSTITUTING THE OFFENSE

e.g. Actual taking with intent to gain of personal property, belonging to
another, without the latter’s consent, is sufficient to constitute
consummated theft.
DETERMINING WHETHER THE CRIME IS ATTEMPTED, FRUSTRATED, OR
CONSUMMATED

3. MANNER OF COMMITTING THE OFFENSE

a. Formal crimes – consummated in one instant, no attempt
b. By mere attempt or proposal or by overt act
c. By omission
d. Crimes committed by mere agreement
e. Material crimes – are not consummated in one instant or by a single act
 CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL
UNDER ARTICLE 8 OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE
Article 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. –
Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the
cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor.
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement
concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.
There is proposal when the person who has decided to commit a felony
proposes its execution to some other person or persons.

As a general rule, conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are not

punishable, except when the law specifically provides a penalty
therefor.
KINDS OF CONSPIRACY
1. Conspiracy as a crime
- no overt act is necessary to bring about the criminal
liability. The mere conspiracy is the crime itself.
- Treason (Art. 115), rebellion (Art.136), and sedition (Art. 141)
are the only crimes where the conspiracy and proposal to commit to
them are punishable.
2. Conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal liability
- there must be an overt act done before the co-conspirators become
criminally liable.
REQUISITES OF CONSPIRACY
1. That two or more persons come to an agreement;
2. That the agreement concerned the commission of a felony; and
3. That the execution of the felony be decided upon.

“The act of one is the act of all.”

REQUISITES OF PROPOSAL
1. That a person has decided to commit a felony; and
2. That he proposes its execution to some other person or persons.

There is no criminal proposal when,

a. The person who proposes is not determined to commit the felony.
b. There is no decided, concrete, and formal proposal.
c. It is not the execution of a felony that is proposed
PLURALITY OF CRIMES
- consists in the successive execution by the same individual of
different criminal acts upon any of which no conviction has yet been
declared

A person committing multiple crimes is punished with one penalty in the

following cases:
1. When the offender commits any of the complex crimes defined in Art.
48 of the RPC.
2. When the law specifically fixes a single penalty for two or more
offenses committed;
3. When the offender commits continued crimes.
PLURALITY OF CRIMES
a. Complex Crimes
- although two or more crimes are actually committed, the offender has
only one criminal intent

KINDS OF COMPLEX CRIMES (Art. 48, under RPC)

1. Compound crime – when a single act constitutes two or more grave or
less grave felonies.
2. Complex crime proper – when an offense is a necessary means for
committing the other
PLURALITY OF CRIMES
KINDS OF COMPLEX CRIMES (Art. 48, under RPC)
1. Compound crime – when a single act constitutes two or more grave or
less grave felonies.

REQUISITES:
1. That only a single act is performed by the offender.
2. That the single act produces (1) two or more grave felonies, or (2)
one or more grave and one or more less grave felonies, or (3) two or
more less grave felonies.
PLURALITY OF CRIMES
KINDS OF COMPLEX CRIMES (Art. 48, under RPC)
2. Complex crime proper – when an offense is a necessary means for
committing the other

REQUISITES:
1. That at least two offenses are committed.
2. That one or some of the offenses must be necessary to commit the
other.
3. That both or all the offenses must be punished under the same
statute.
PLURALITY OF CRIMES
b. Special Complex Crimes
- are crimes which in the eyes of the law are regarded only as a single
indivisible offense, yet in substance, consists of two or more crimes
having specific penalty.
- Where the law provides a single penalty for two or more component
offenses, the resulting crime is called a special complex crime.
- Article 48 does not apply because the R.P.C. provides for one single
penalty for each of those crimes.
PLURALITY OF CRIMES
Examples of Special Complex Crimes:
1. Robbery with homicide (Art. 294, par. 1)
2. Robbery with rape (Art. 294, par. 2)
3. Kidnapping with serious physical injuries (Art. 267, par. 3)
4. Kidnapping with murder or homicide (Art. 267, last par.)
5. Rape with homicide (Art. 335)
PLURALITY OF CRIMES
c. Continued Crimes
- It is a single crime, consisting of a series of acts but all arising
from one criminal resolution.
- It is a continuous, unlawful act or series of acts set on foot by a
single impulse and operated by an unintermittent force, however long a
time it may occupy. (22 C.J.S.,52)
- It is not a complex crime, because the offender does not perform a
single act, but a series of acts, and one offense is not a necessary
means for committing the other.
PLURALITY OF CRIMES
Examples of Continued Crimes:
1. In the case of People v. De Leon, the theft of the two game roosters
belonging to two different persons was punished with one penalty
only, the Supreme Court holding that there being only one criminal
purpose in the taking of the two roosters, only one crime was
committed.
2. In the case of People v. Ermit, it was held that since the killings
were the result of a single impulse and that neither the accused nor
his companion had in mind killing any particular individual, the acts
complained of should be considered as resulting from a single
criminal impulse and constituting a single offense.