1.

On January 8, 2022, Inggo committed a crime against Juan for which the
law
provides a fine of P200.00 as a penalty. On February 18, 2022, complainant
Juan filed the case with the Prosecutor’s Office charging Inggo for the crime
committed, Will the case filed by Juan prosper? Explain
Answer:
Yes, the case of Juan will prosper.
In the given scenario, Inggo committed a crime on January 8, 2022 and the
information was filed on February 18, 2022 which means that the crime
committed was not yet prescribed.
The crimes punishable by arresto menor or a fine not exceeding P200.00
(now P40,000.00) being a light offense prescribes in two months under Art
90 of Revised penal Code.
Therefore, the case or information filed by Juan will prosper.
2. Ramon was slapped on the face by Sonny, as a result of an altercation
between them. Two months later, while Truman holding a gun, was talking
face to face with Sonny, Ramon came from behind and hacked Sonny on
the head. As Ramon was about to strike Sonny, a second blow, Truman
said, “You kill him, “. Then Ramon hacked Sonny again on his arm. Sonny
died as a result of his head injuries. Is Truman a Principal by Induction?
Explain.

Answer:

No, Truman is not a Principal by induction.

In determining whether the utterances of an accused are sufficient to make
him guilty as principal by induction, the following requisites must be
present: (a) That the inducement be made directly with the intention of
procuring the commission of the crime; and (b) That such inducement be
the determining cause of the commission of the crime by the material
executor.
 In this case, the appellant was, of course, armed with a gun while talking
with the deceased, but the firearm was not pointed at the latter. Then he is
alleged to have uttered the words “You kill him” only after Ramon had
already fatally hacked Sonny on the head. The inducement to commit the
crime was, therefore, no longer necessary to induce the assailant to
commit the crime.
3. In a quarrel, Jun was choking John. Then Juan ran up and delivered a blow
with a bamboo stick on the head of John. After the blow was struck by Juan
which Jun saw, the latter continued to choke John until life was extinct. The
choking by Jun was not the cause of death. It was the blow delivered by
Juan which caused the death of John. What is the degree of responsibility
of Jun. Explain

Answer:

Jun is an accomplice.

The reason is that after the deceased had received the fatal injury, Jun
continued to hold and choke the deceased until life was extinct. It shows
that Jun approved of the blow struck by Juan, thereby showing his
participation in the criminal design of Juan, and this is sufficient to make
Jun responsible as an accomplice.

4. Inggo was convicted of Parricide and sentence to Reclusion Perpetua, as

the maximum term of the indeterminate penalty and to pay a fine of
P10,000.00. If he has no property to meet the fine, how long will his
subsidiary imprisonment be?

Answer:

There is no subsidiary penalty.

 The answer is found in Art 39, paragraph 3 of Revised Penal Code; When
the principal penalty imposed is higher than prision correccional, no
subsidiary penalty imprisonment shall be imposed upon the culprit.

5. Pedro was convicted of Attempted Homicide and sentenced to 4 years, 9

months and 10 days of prision correccional as the maximum term of the
indeterminate penalty and to pay a fine of P400,000.00. If he has no
property with which to meet the fine, how long will be the subsidiary
imprisonment which he should be made to suffer? Explain.

Answer: If Pedro has no property with which to meet the fine, he will have
to suffer subsidiary imprisonment at the rate of one day for each P500.00
which he cannot pay, but not to exceed 365 days, computed as follows:

365 days in one year

X4 years
1460 – days in 4 years
270 - days in 9 months
10 – days
1,740 – days in 4 years, 9 months and 10 days
580 – days, which represent 1/3 of the penalty imposed

P538.00/P400,000 – amount of fine

743 – days

One of the rules of subsidiary imprisonment under Art 39 of Revised Penal

code states that If the penalty imposed is prision correccional or arresto
and fine – subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed 1/3 of the term of the
sentence, and shall not continue for more than one year. Fraction or part of
a day, not counted.

6. Jed fired his Armalite rifle at several persons. The first burst of shots hit and
killed three persons. He let loose a second burst of shots wounding and
killing two others. For what crime/s is Jed liable. Explain
 Answer:

Jed committed 5 separate Offenses of Homicide.

In this case, Jed fires his riffle twice in succession. When three persons are
killed one after the other, by different acts, although these two killings
were the result of a single criminal impulse, the different acts must be
considered as distinct crimes.

7. Pepe aimed and fired his 9mm pistol at Mario and Nene, who were
standing on the same line of the direction of the bullet, and the same bullet
hit them both and caused their death. What crime or crimes has Pepe
committed? Explain

Answer:
Pepe committed complex crime of double homicide.
The requisites of Complex Crime (Art 48, RPC); (a)That only a single act is
performed by the offender; and (b) 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.
Therefore, the single act by Pepe in firing a shot, the same bullet causing
the death of Mario and Nene.
8. Jomar received 18 money order with a letter, all in one envelope,
addressed to Pepe. Jomar presented them to the post office for cashing on
one occasion, after having falsified the signature of Pepe on each and every
one of the 18 money orders. What crime or crimes were committed by
Jomar? Explain.

Answer:

Jomar committed one complex crime of estafa through multiple

falsification.
 In complex crime (Art 48), although two or more crimes are actually
committed, they constitute only one crime in the eyes of the law as well as
in the conscience of the offender. The offender has only one criminal
intent. Even in the case where an offense is a necessary means for
committing the other, the evil intent of the offender is only one.
Hence, To commit estafa, Jomar had to commit 18 falsifications. These
falsifications were necessary to commit estafa; this is known as complex
crime proper.

9. Juan, as principal, Juana, as accomplice, and John, as accessory, are

convicted of frustrated homicide. The penalty for homicide is reclusion
temporal. Without applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, what is the
penalty to be imposed on Juan, Juana and John?

Answer:

Without applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the penalty of Juan as

principal is Prision mayor, Juana as accomplice is Prision correccional and
John as accessory is Arresto mayor.

Art 50. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of a frustrated crime – The

penalty next lower in degree than the prescribed by law for the
consummated felony shall be imposed upon the principals in frustrated
felony.

Art 54. – Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in a frustrated crime. –

The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the
frustrated felony shall be imposed upon the accomplices in the commission
of a frustrated felony.

Art 55. – Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of a frustrated crime. –

The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the
frustrated felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the commission
of a frustrated felony.
10. Sendong was convicted of theft in 1980; after his release he committed
and convicted of estafa in 1982; was released on December 5, 1983; and on
December 4, 1993, he committed robbery, and was convicted thereof in
January 1994. Is Sendong Habitual Delinquent? Explain

Answer:

Sendong is not habitual delinquent.

The requisites of Habitual delinquency are as follows: (a) That the offender
had been convicted of any crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries,
robbery, theft, estafa, or falsification; (b) That after that conviction or after
serving his sentence, he again committed, and within 10 years from his
release or first conviction, he was again convicted of any of the said crimes
for the second time; and (c) That after his conviction of, or after serving
sentence for, the second offense, he again committed, and, within 10 years
from his last release or last conviction, he was again convicted of any of
said offenses, the third time or oftener.

Sendong was convicted of theft in 1980; after his release he committed and
convicted of estafa in 1982; was released on December 5, 1983; and on
December 4, 1993, he committed robbery, and was convicted thereof in
January 1994. The law says

Note that as regards the crime of theft in 1980, the starting point maybe
the date of conviction for estafa (1982) or the date of release (December 5,
1983) as the starting point to determine the ten-year period to (January
1994), the date when the offender was found guilty of robbery. The
difference will be more than 10 years, then he cannot be a habitual
delinquent.
11. Ramon was sentenced to suffer – 14 years, 8 months and I day for
homicide, 17 years, 4 months and 1 day in another case, 14 years and 8
months in the third case, and in a case of frustrated homicide, he was
sentenced to 12 years. How many years should Ramon be imprisoned?

Answer:

Ramon will suffer 40 years imprisonment.

According to the three-fold rule, the maximum duration of the convict’s

sentence shall not more than three times the length of time corresponding
to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon him.

He has a total of 58 years, 8 months and 2 days for the four crimes he
committed. The most severe of those penalties is 17 years, 4 months and 1
day. Three times the penalty is 52 years and three days. But since the law
has limited the duration of the maximum term of imprisonment to not
more than 40 years, the accused will have to suffer 40 years only.

12.Marlon was convicted of a complex crime of frustrated homicide with

assault upon an agent of person in authority. The penalty for homicide is
reclusion temporal. The penalty for assault is prision correccional in its
medium and maximum periods. What is Indeterminate penalty of Marlon?
Explain
Answer:
The maximum term of Indeterminate penalty of Marlon is Prision mayor in
its maximum period and the minimum term is Prision Correccional in its
maximum.
The penalty of Homicide is Reclusion Temporal. Being frustrated, the
penalty should be one degree lower (Art 50) or Prision Mayor. The penalty
for assault is Prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.
Therefore, the penalty for the graver offense, the same to be applied in its
maximum period. (Art 48)
13. How criminal liability totally extinguished?
Answer:
Under Art 89 of Revised Penal Code, Criminal liability is totally extinguished
by (a) Death of the convict, as to the personal penalties; and as to
pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished only when the death
of the offender occurs before final judgement; (b) By service of the
sentence; (c) By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty and all
its effects; (d) by absolute pardon; (e) by prescription of the crime (f) by
prescription of the penalty; (g) by the marriage of the offended woman, as
provided in Art 344 of this code.
14. Xander was convicted of murder and sentenced to 17 years, 4 months and
1 day of reclusion temporal. After serving 15 years, 7 months and 11 days,
on March 6, 1989, he was granted a conditional pardon. The condition of
his pardon was that he should not commit any crime in the future. On April
1999, he was found guilty of driving without license. He was committed to
prison for violation of said conditional pardon. Will the defense of
“prescription of penalty” prosper in this case?

Answer:

No, the defense of Xander of prescription of penalty will not prosper.

Under Art 93 of RPC, the elements of Prescription of Penalties are as
follows: (a) That the penalty is imposed by final sentence; (b) That the
convict evaded the service of the sentence by escaping during the term of
his sentence; (c) That the convict who escaped from prison has not given
himself up, or been captured, or gone to a foreign country with which we
have no extradition treaty, or committed another crime; (d) That the
penalty has prescribed, because of the lapse of time from the date of
evasion of the service of the sentence by the convict.
Hence, the defense of prescription will not prosper because there was no
evasion of the service of the sentence. There was no evasion of service of
the sentence in this case, because such evasion presupposes escaping
during the service of the sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty.
15. Yolo, 16 years old was found guilty of murder upon a plea of guilty. When
he became incorrigible in the training and rehabilitation Center for Boys in
La Union, the court imposed on him an indeterminate penalty of from 5
years, as the minimum to 10 years and 1 day, as the maximum. Is the
penalty imposed on Yolo correct? Explain

Answer:

No, the maximum indeterminate penalty of Yolo is Reclusion Temporal in

its minimum period and Prision mayor anywhere of its period as the
minimum term.

In the given case, Kardo is entitled with (a) one Privileged Mitigating
Circumstances being a minor; (b) one ordinary mitigating circumstances of
Plea of guilty.

The penalty of murder is reclusion perpetua to death. The privileged

mitigating circumstance (minority) is one degree lower. From reclusion
perpetua downgraded to Reclusion Temporal in its medium period. Since
Yolo pleaded guilty, he is entitled with one ordinary mitigating
circumstance; then the maximum term of indeterminate penalty should be
reclusion temporal in its minimum period (12 years and 1 day) after
considering the ordinary mitigating circumstance and the minimum term is
prision mayor within any range.

16. Banong, 16 years of age killed Kunat who was the unlawful aggressor.
Banong did not give sufficient provocation to Kunat but the means
employed by Banong to defend himself was not reasonable. After killing
Kunat, Banong surrendered to the authorities. Banong was convicted of
Homicide. What should be his indeterminate penalty?
Answer:
The maximum term of indeterminate penalty of Banong is Prision Correccional
in its minimum period and the minimum term is any range in Arresto Mayor.
Banong is entitled with (a) two privileged mitigating circumstances of minority
and incomplete self-defense; and (b) ordinary mitigating circumstances of
voluntary surrendered.
The R.P.C. provides in Article 64 that when the penalties prescribed by law
contain three periods, whether it be a single divisible penalty or composed of
three different penalties, when neither aggravating nor mitigating
circumstances attend, the penalty prescribed by law shall be imposed in its
medium period.
Therefore, the penalty of Homicide is Reclusion Temporal in its medium
period. By applying the two privileged mitigating circumstances, from reclusion
temporal downgraded to two degrees lower is Prision correccional. After
considering the ordinary mitigating circumstances the penalty should be
Prision correccional in its minimum period as a maximum term of
indeterminate penalty and the minimum term is any range or period of
Arresto mayor.