ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
Notes:
1. The mother of the person in the custody of the
public officer is not included.
2. To solicit means to propose earnestly and
persistently something unchaste and immoral
to a woman.
3. The crime is consummated by mere
proposal.
4. Proof of solicitation is not necessary when
there is sexual intercourse.
————end of topic ————
G. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
Chapter 1: Destruction of Life
Section 1 - Parricide, Murder, Homicide
Art. 246. Parricide
Any person who shall kill his father, mother, or
child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any
of his ascendants, or descendants, or his
spouse
Elements: (RAK)
1. That a person is killed;
2. That the deceased is killed by the accused;
3. That the deceased is the (relationship)
a. father, mother, or child, whether
legitimate or illegitimate, or
b. legitimate other ascendant or other
descendant, or
c. legitimate spouse of the accused
Relationship of the offender with the victim is
the essential element.
1. Required to determine legitimacy of
relationship with victims;
2. The following are excluded (i.e., the accused
will not be guilty of parricide if they are killed
by him/her) (A3-RIC)
a. Adoptive relationship (adopting parent-
adopted child); (Reyes, Book Two, p.507)
CRIMINAL LAW
b. Child Less than 3 days old (infanticide);
c. Relationship by Affinity (in-laws);
d. Illegitimate other
Ascendant/descendant; and
e. Common-law spouse
Notes:
1. Relationship must be alleged in the
Information and proved. If not alleged, it can
only be considered as an ordinary
aggravating circumstance.
2. Punished by reclusion perpetua to death
3. Only relatives by blood and in direct line
(except spouse) are considered. Only
relatives by blood may be legitimate or
illegitimate. An adoptive father or adopted
son, or father-in-law or son-in- law, is not
included in this provision. (Reyes, Book Two,
p.507)
4. Marriages among Muslims or among
members of ethnic cultural communities
recognized (Art. 33, Family Code)
5. Punishment for Parricide through
imprudence/negligence:
a. Reckless imprudence – punished by
Arresto Mayor in its maximum period to
Prision Correccional in its medium
period; and
b. Simple imprudence or negligence –
punished by Arresto Mayor in its medium
maximum periods.
6. Parricide by mistake: if there is intent to kill
a stranger but, by mistake, a covered relative
is killed, offender will be liable, applying Art.
4(1) (in relation to Art. 49 of the RPC, for
penalization), because knowledge of
relationship is not required in parricide
7. Parricide by omission (in relation to Art. 276,
2nd par. – Abandoning a minor)
8. Stranger cooperating in parricide is only guilty
of homicide or murder, as the case may be
Parricide is not punishable by Reclusion
Perpetua to Death when:
1. It is committed through negligence (Art. 365);
or
2. It is committed under exceptional
circumstances (Art. 247).
Page 161 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
Art. 247. Death or Physical Injuries Inflicted
Under Exceptional Circumstances
Committed by
1. any legally married person who, having
surprised his spouse in the act of
committing sexual intercourse with another
person, shall kill or inflict serious physical
injuries on any of them or both of them in
the act or immediately thereafter; or
2. Parents who, having surprised their
daughters under 18 years of age and living
with them in the act of committing sexual
intercourse with other persons, shall kill or
inflict serious physical injuries on any of
them or both of them in the act or
immediately thereafter
Elements: (3)
1. A legally married person or parent surprises
his spouse or daughter (the latter must be
under 18 and living with them) in the act of
committing sexual intercourse with another
person;
2. He/she kills any or both of them or inflicts
upon any or both of them any serious physical
injury in the act or immediately thereafter; and
3. He/she has not promoted or facilitated the
prostitution of his wife or daughter, or that
he/she has not consented to the infidelity of
his/her spouse.
Definitions of terms
1. The requirement of being legally married
therefore excludes common-law
relationships.
2. Legitimacy of parent is not required, where a
daughter is minor, unmarried and living with
her parents.
3. Surprise means “to come up suddenly and
unexpectedly.”
4. In the act of committing sexual
intercourse with another person is satisfied
if circumstances show reasonably that the
carnal act is being committed or has just been
committed.
5. Immediately thereafter means the
discovery, escape, pursuit and the killing
must all form parts of one continuous act.
CRIMINAL LAW
Justification for Art. 247: Burst of Passion
The killing must be the proximate result of the
outrage overwhelming the accused; and not
influenced by external factors.
Notes:
1. The article does not define a crime, but when
death/serious physical injuries are inflicted, it
grants a “singular mitigating circumstance”
and, provides for the “penalty” of destierro (as
a form of protection for the accused) instead
of the severe penalty prescribed for parricide,
homicide, or physical injuries.
2. If the physical injuries caused are less
serious or slight, the circumstances present
an absolutory cause, thus no criminal liability
is ascribed.
3. Both wives and husbands are entitled to the
benefits of this article.
4. Sexual intercourse does not include
preparatory acts.
5. It is immaterial whether the offending
daughter is legitimate or illegitimate, provided
they are living with their offended parents.
Physical Injuries:
1. When only other types of physical injuries are
inflicted, the article grants absolution from
criminal liability (no penalty imposable).
2. Although as a rule, one committing an
offense is liable for all the consequences of
his act, the rule presupposes that the act
done amounts to a felony. If the act done is
not a felony, the accused cannot be held
liable for physical injuries inflicted upon third
persons (i.e., those other than the
wife/daughter and the paramour). (People v.
Abarca, 153 SCRA 735)
Art. 248. Murder
Any person who, not falling within the
provisions of Article 246, shall kill another with
the attendance of certain qualifying
circumstances
Page 162 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
Elements:
1. That a person is killed;
2. That the deceased is killed by the accused;
3. That the killing was attended by any of the
following qualifying circumstances:
a. 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,
b. in consideration of price, reward or
promise,
c. by means of inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, shipwreck, stranding of
vessel, derailment or assault upon a
street car or locomotive, fall of airship, by
means of motor vehicles, or with the use
of any other means involving great waste
or ruin,
d. on occasion of any of the calamities
enumerated in the preceding paragraph,
or of an earthquake, eruption of a
volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic or
any other public calamity,
e. with evident premeditation, or
f. with cruelty, by deliberately and
inhumanely augmenting the suffering of
the victim, or outraging or scoffing at his
person or corpse; and
4. The killing is not parricide or infanticide.
Murder is the unlawful killing of any person, which
is not parricide or infanticide, provided that any of
the above-enumerated circumstances are
present.
Notes:
1. Intent to kill – essential in all qualifying
circumstances, except treachery
2. Victim must be killed in order to consummate
the crime; if victim is not killed, only either
attempted or frustrated murder is committed
3. Treachery – present when the act
constituting the felony is sudden and
unexpected, to the point of incapacitating the
victim from being able to repel or escape it
a. The means, methods, or form of attack
must be consciously adopted by the
offender.
CRIMINAL LAW
b. Present when an adult person attacks a
child of tender years
c. The essence of treachery is that the
attack comes without a warning and in a
swift, deliberate, and unexpected
manner, affording the hapless, unarmed,
and unsuspecting victim no chance to
resist or escape.
Treachery must have been deliberately or
consciously adopted as the means of
execution to ensure the success of the felony.
[LEONEN] There was no treachery because X
had tapped the victim on his shoulder before he
stabbed him. The mere suddenness of an attack
shouldn’t be the sole basis in finding treachery.
There must be evidence to show that the accused
deliberately or consciously adopted the means of
execution to ensure its success. Also, before the
attack, the victim had been insulting him and
mocking him in a loud voice. This utterance, along
with the testimonies of victim’s previous insults,
would have been sufficient provocation for X to
stab him. Since treachery hasn’t been
established, the crime is only homicide. (People
v. Oloverio, G.R. No. 211159, March 18, 2015)
[LEONEN] For there to be treachery, the
following must be proven: (1) that at the time of
the attack, the victim was not in a position to
defend himself, and (2) that the offender
consciously adopted the particular means,
method or form of attack employed by him. When
Z grabbed X's arm by surprise and
simultaneously stabbed him with a knife despite
being unarmed. This left X helpless as it left him
with no opportunity to defend himself or even to
retaliate. (People v. Antonio y Pableo, G.R. No.
229349, January 29, 2020)
[LEONEN] After responding to a report and
resorting to a car chase, the officers were able to
block its path. Upon order of the officers, all the
riders stepped out of the vehicle except for the
driver. Police X, who was fully armed, opened the
door opposite the driver’s side to check on him,
but as soon as he did, the driver shot Police X
thrice in the chest. Police X was a fully armed and
trained police officer; his training and police work
Page 163 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
would have prepared him for the possible
hostilities that a person’s impending arrest may
commit. The previous car chase and accused’s
refusal to heed police orders should have warned
him of possible violent behavior to evade arrest.
When a police officer had been forewarned of
brewing violence, he or she could not have been
completely taken by surprise by the attack. In
such instance, therefore, treachery could not
have attended the killing. (People v. Pitulan y
Briones, G.R. No. 226486, January 22, 2020)
They hid in a dark portion of the road and
assaulted Jesus with their bolos while he was
urinating with his back to them. They even held
him by his shoulders to render him defenseless
and unable to resist the attack on him by his
assailants. Jesus was unaware of the imminent
peril to his life and was rendered incapable of
defending himself. (People v. Benny Cabtalan,
G.R. No. 175980, February 15, 2012)
Notes (continued):
4. Not enough that superior strength is
present; it must be taken advantage of
5. Taking advantage of superior strength also
applies when the act is committed on
occasion of a public calamity.
6. Armed men must take part in the
commission of the crime directly or indirectly.;
accused must avail himself of their aid or rely
upon them.
7. Person who received the price, reward, or
promise is a principal by direct participation;
person who gave such price, reward, or
promise is a principal by induction. BOTH are
guilty of murder.
8. Treachery and premeditation are inherent in
murder by poison, and thus, cannot be
considered as aggravating.
When abuse of superior strength does not
apply
The presence of abuse of superior strength
should not result in qualifying the offense to
murder when it obtains in the special complex
crime of robbery with homicide. In such case, it
should be regarded as a generic circumstance.
(Judge Pimentel Notes, page 220)
CRIMINAL LAW
Complex crime of direct assault with murder
or homicide
When the assault results in the killing of an agent
or of a person in authority, there arises the
complex crime of direct assault with murder or
homicide. (People v Ex-Mayor Carlos Estonilo
Sr., et al., GR No 201565, October 13, 2014)
Rules for application of qualifying
circumstances
1. Murder will exist with only one of the
circumstances; others must be considered as
generic aggravating.
2. When other circumstances are absorbed or
included in one qualifying circumstance, they
cannot be considered as generic aggravating
circumstances.
3. Any of the circumstances must be alleged in
order to qualify the crime to murder. If not
alleged, it will not even be considered as a
generic aggravating circumstance. (Secs. 8
and 9, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court)
Outraging or scoffing at the victim or his
corpse: additional qualifying circumstance
not mentioned in Art. 14
1. Outraging: to commit an extremely vicious or
deeply insulting act
2. Scoffing: to jeer; implies a showing of
irreverence
Jurisprudence:
[LEONEN] While the court does not condone the
archaic and oftentimes barbaric traditions of the
fraternities involved, it is conceded that there are
certain practices that are unique to fraternal
organizations. It is quite possible that the victims
knew the identities of their attackers but chose not
to disclose it without first conferring with their
other fraternity brothers. Seniority is also often
the norm in fraternities. It was upon the advice of
the victims’ senior "brods" and their legal counsel
that they executed their sworn statements before
the National Bureau of Investigation four (4) days
after the incident. Treachery was present in the
commission of the crime. The victims were eating
lunch on campus, where there is no reasonable
expectation for any sudden attack. They were
also unarmed, while the assailants, who
Page 164 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
outnumbered the victims, were armed with
baseball bats and lead pipes. The swiftness and
suddenness of the attack gave no opportunity for
the victims to retaliate or even to defend
themselves. Finally, since there is proven
conspiracy, the CA erred in distinguishing the
liabilities of the assailants per the degrees of
seriousness of the injuries suffered by their
respectively-assailed victims because the “act of
one is the act of all” in crimes with conspiracy.
(People v Feliciano, G.R. No. 196735, May 5,
2014)
[LEONEN] The fact that the wounds sustained by
the victim were merely superficial and not fatal did
not negate the liability of the accused for
attempted murder. In this case, Mr. Z managed to
parry an attempted blow, causing a fracture in his
right hand instead of a more serious and possibly
fatal injury on his head. In any case, the fact that
Mr. Z was successful in blocking the blow with his
hand does not, in and of itself, mean that
respondents could not have possibly killed him. It
does not negate any homicidal intent. It remains
that Mr. X attempted to hit Mr. Z on the head with
a hollow block while Mr. C and Mr. L made efforts
to restrain Mr. Z. (Marasigan y De Guzman v.
Fuentes, G.R. No. 201310, January 11, 2016)
[LEONEN] Victim’s medical certificate belies his
claim that he was assaulted. If he were actually
“relentlessly” assaulted, there would be a greater
chance that he must have been “black and blue
all over”. The Court cannot be persuaded by the
claim of perpetration of physical violence in the
absence of any marked physical injuries on the
various parts of the victim’s face and body.
Additionally, he admitted that the injury was
caused by hitting his head on the pavement rather
than by petitioners’ attack. (Daayata v. People,
G.R. No. 205745, March 8, 2017.)
Art. 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 Article 248
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements: (PAIN) (4)
1. That a Person was killed;
2. That the Accused killed him without any
justifying circumstances;
3. That the accused had the Intention to kill,
which is presumed; and
4. That the killing was Not attended by any of
the qualifying circumstances of murder, or
by those of parricide or infanticide
Notes:
1. Homicide is the unlawful killing of any
person, which is neither parricide, murder, or
infanticide
2. Consummated when victim is killed;
otherwise, attempted or frustrated
3. Presumption of intent to kill
a. With respect to crimes of personal
violence, the penal law looks particularly
to the material results following the
unlawful act and holds the aggressor
responsible for all the consequences
thereof
b. Evidence of intent to kill is important only
in attempted or frustrated homicide
- Intent to kill is conclusively presumed
when the victim dies
- Otherwise, intent to kill must be
proved beyond reasonable doubt
• Generally shown by the kind of
weapon used, the parts of the
victim’s body at which it was
aimed, and by the wounds
inflicted
• But purpose of the accused may
also be considered
• The element of intent to kill is
incompatible with imprudence or
negligence
• No attempted or frustrated
homicide through imprudence or
negligence; crime would be
physical injuries through
reckless imprudence
• Accidental Homicide is not the
same as Homicide through
imprudence or negligence; no
criminal liability for accidental
homicide
Page 165 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
Accidental Homicide is the death of a person
brought about by a lawful act performed with
proper care and skill, and without homicidal
intent.
a. If in a game, rules are violated and death
resulted, the significance of the presence
or absence of intent to kill is as follows:
b. If there was intent to kill, it is intentional
homicide
c. If there was no intent to kill, it is homicide
through negligence.
4. When two different persons inflicted the
wounds which caused the death, both are
guilty of homicide.
a. The burden to prove otherwise is on each
of the defendants.
b. Proof of conspiracy is not necessary.
c. Also applies when it is not shown which
wounds were inflicted by each person
5. Use of unlicensed firearm in homicide (and in
other crimes v persons) is considered an
aggravating circumstance and not a separate
crime.
Unallowable exculpatory defenses:
1. Refusal of victim to be operated
2. The fact that suicide by the victim concurs
Corpus Delicti
In all crimes against persons in which the death
of the victim is an element of the offense, there
must be satisfactory evidence of:
1. The fact of death, and
2. The identity of the victim.
Corpus delicti does not refer to the body of the
victim but to the “body of the crime” – the actual
commission of the crime charged.
Art. 250. Penalty for Frustrated Parricide,
Murder, or Homicide
1. Courts may impose a penalty two
degrees lower for frustrated parricide,
murder or homicide, under Article 50.
2. Courts may impose a penalty three
degrees lower for attempted parricide,
murder or homicide, under Article 51.
3. This rule is permissive—not mandatory
CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 251. Death Caused in a Tumultuous
Affray
When, while several persons, not composing
groups organized for the common purpose of
assaulting and attacking each other reciprocally,
quarrel and assault each other in a confused and
tumultuous manner, and in the course of the
affray someone is killed, and: (a) it cannot be
ascertained who actually killed the deceased, but
the person or persons who inflicted serious
physical injuries can be identified, or (b) it also
cannot be determined who inflicted serious
physical injuries on the victim, but those who
used violence on the person of the victim can be
identified
Elements:
1. That there be several persons;
2. That they did not compose groups organized
for the common purpose of assaulting and
attacking each other reciprocally;
3. That these several persons quarreled and
assaulted one another in a confused and
tumultuous manner;
4. That someone was killed in the course of the
affray;
5. That it cannot be ascertained who actually
killed the deceased; and
6. That the person or persons who inflicted
serious physical injuries or who used violence
can be identified
Definition of “Tumultuous”
Tumultuous (as used in Art. 153) means that the
disturbance is caused by at least four persons
who are armed or are provided with means of
violence. There must be no unity of purpose and
intention among the persons who used violence.
Persons liable:
1. Person or persons who inflicted serious
physical injuries, if identifiable; or
2. If it is not known who inflicted serious physical
injuries on the deceased, all persons who
used violence upon the person of the victim
Notes:
Page 166 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
1. When there are two identified groups which
assaulted each other, there is no tumultuous
affray.
2. The person killed need not be a participant in
the affray.
3. Does not apply when the person who inflicted
the fatal wound is known; in that case, the
crime will be homicide under Art. 249
Art. 252. Physical Injuries Inflicted in a
Tumultuous Affray
When in a tumultuous affray as referred to in
Article 251, only serious or less serious
physical injuries are inflicted upon the
participants and the persons responsible
therefor cannot be identified, but those who
used violence on the person of the victim can
be identified.
Elements:
1. That there is a tumultuous affray as referred
to in the Article 251;
2. That a participant or some participants
thereof suffer serious physical injuries or
physical injuries of a less serious nature only;
3. That the persons responsible therefor cannot
be identified; and
4. That all those who appear to have used
violence upon the person of the offended
party are known
Notes:
1. Persons liable: only those who used violence
on the person of the offended party
2. Penalty will be one degree lower than that
provided for the physical injury inflicted.
3. Injured party must be a participant of the
tumultuous affray (as opposed to the
preceding article).
4. If the one who caused physical injuries on the
victim is known, he will be liable for the
physical injuries actually committed.
5. Slight physical injuries are not included.
CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 253. Giving Assistance to Suicide
Any person who shall assist another to
commit suicide, whether the suicide was
consummated or not
Punishable Acts:
1. Assisting another to commit suicide (that
is, only furnishing the person committing
suicide with the means to kill him/herself),
whether the suicide is consummated or not;
and
2. Lending assistance to another to commit
suicide to the extent of doing the killing
himself
Notes:
1. If the suicide is not consummated:
a. For the first punishable act: punishable
by arresto mayor in its medium and
maximum periods; and
b. For the second punishable act: one or
two degrees lower than that provided for
consummated suicide
2. An attempt to commit suicide is an act, but it
is not punishable by law. The person so
attempting is not criminally liable.
3. A pregnant woman who tries to commit
suicide by means of poisoning herself, but
instead of dying, the fetus in her womb was
expelled, is not liable for abortion.
a. In order to incur criminal liability for the
result not intended, one must be
committing a felony.
b. Unintentional abortion is punishable only
when it is caused by violence, not by
poisoning oneself (Art. 257).
4. Assistance to suicide is different from mercy-
killing. Euthanasia or mercy-killing is the
practice of painlessly putting to death a
person suffering from some incurable
disease. In this case, the person does not
want to die. A doctor who resorts to
euthanasia may be held liable for murder.
Page 167 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
Art. 254. Discharge of Firearms
Any person who shall shoot at another with
any firearm if the shooting does not amount to
attempted, frustrated, or consummated
murder, homicide, parricide, or any other
crime that imposes a higher penalty
Elements: (ON) (2)
1. That the Offender discharges a firearm
against or at another person; and
2. That the offender has No intention to kill that
person.
Notes:
1. The offender must shoot at another with any
firearm without intention of killing him.
a. The purpose of the offender may be only
to intimidate or frighten the offended
party.
b. If the firearm is not discharged at a
person, the act is not punished under this
article.
c. A discharge towards the house of the
offended party, not knowing in what part
of the house the people inside were, is
only alarm under Art. 155.
d. It is sufficient that the gun was initially
aimed at or against the offended party,
even if it was not pointed at the offended
party when it was fired.
e. If there was intent to kill, it may be
frustrated or attempted parricide, murder,
or homicide.
2. Essential to prove that the discharge of
firearm was directed precisely against the
offended party
3. If the illegal discharge inflicts serious or less
serious physical injuries to the offended party,
there will be a complex crime of illegal
discharge of firearm with serious or less
serious physical injuries.
Section 2. - Infanticide and Abortion
Art. 255. Infanticide
Infanticide is the killing of any child less than
three days of age, whether the killer is a
CRIMINAL LAW
parent or grandparent, any other relative of
the child, or a stranger
Elements: (KLA) (3)
1. That a child was Killed;
2. That the deceased child was Less than three
days (72 hours) of age; and
3. That the Accused killed the child
Notes:
1. The child must be born alive and can sustain
an independent life when it is killed.
a. Burden of proof upon the prosecution
2. Penalty is that of either parricide or murder,
depending on the relationship of the accused
with the victim
3. Mitigating circumstance of concealing
dishonor
a. Applicable only to the mother and
maternal grandparents; and
b. Delinquent mother must be of good
reputation
Art. 256. Intentional Abortion
Willful killing of the fetus in the uterus, or the
violent expulsion of the fetus from the maternal
womb which results in the death of the fetus
Elements:
1. That there is a pregnant woman;
2. That any of the following is accomplished
a. violence is exerted upon the person of
the pregnant woman, or
b. drugs or beverages are administered to
the woman or other acts done, without
using violence and without the consent of
the, or
c. drugs or beverages are administered to
the woman or other acts done, with her
consent;
3. That as a result of the use of violence, drugs
or beverages by, or any other act of, the
accused, the fetus dies, either in the womb or
after having been expelled therefrom; and
4. That the abortion is intended.
Page 168 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
Notes:
1. Fetus must die, in consummated abortion;
otherwise (meaning fetus lives):
a. If there is an intention to abort, frustrated
intentional abortion;
b. If there is no such intention to abort,
physical injuries
2. The crime is infanticide (as opposed to
abortion) if the fetus:
a. Could sustain an independent life, after
separation from the womb; and
b. Dies
3. The person who intentionally caused the
abortion is liable. As for the woman:
a. If she permitted the acts to be done to her,
she will be liable under Art. 258;
b. otherwise, she is not liable
Art. 257. Unintentional Abortion
Any person who shall cause an abortion by
violence, but unintentionally
Elements: (4)
1. That there is a pregnant woman;
2. That violence is used upon such pregnant
woman without intending an abortion;
3. That the violence is intentionally exerted; and
4. That as a result of the violence the fetus dies,
either in the womb or after having been
expelled therefrom
Notes:
1. Can only be committed by violence
a. Violence or actual physical force (as
opposed to threats or mere administering
of substance with no intention to commit
abortion) must be used
2. Intention may be inferred from the condition
of the pregnant woman (i.e. whether
pregnancy is noticeable)
3. May be committed through imprudence
4. May be complexed with homicide and
parricide
5. If there is no intent to cause abortion and no
violence committed, no abortion of any kind
CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 258. Abortion Practiced by the Woman
Herself or by Her Parents
Elements:
1. That there is a pregnant woman who has
suffered an abortion;
2. That the abortion is intended; and
3. that the abortion is caused by –
a. the pregnant woman herself;
b. any other person, with her consent; or
c. particularly by any of her parents, with
her consent, for the purpose of
concealing her dishonor
Notes:
1. Mitigating circumstance (as distinguished
from infanticide): done for the purpose of
concealing dishonor; only applicable to the
pregnant woman and not to the parents of the
pregnant woman
2. If the purpose of the woman’s parents was
not to conceal dishonor, they will be liable for
intentional abortion under Art. 256.
Art. 259. Abortion Practiced by a Physician
or Midwife and Dispensing of Abortives
Elements: (4)
1. That there is a pregnant woman who has
suffered an abortion;
2. That the abortion is intended;
3. That the offender, who must be a physician or
midwife, causes, or assists in causing, the
abortion; and
4. That said physician or midwife takes
advantage of his or her scientific knowledge
or skill
Elements as to Pharmacists: (3)
1. That the offender is a pharmacist;
2. That there is no proper prescription from a
physician; and
3. That the offender dispenses any abortive
Notes:
1. The taking advantage of scientific knowledge
or skill for the destruction of human life
justifies the imposition of the maximum
penalty.
Page 169 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
2. The significance of knowledge that the
abortive would be used to cause abortion:
a. Without such knowledge, punishable
under this article; or
b. With knowledge, punishable as an
accomplice in the crime of abortion
3. Not necessary for the abortive to be actually
used; the act constituting the offense is
dispensing the abortive without proper
prescription
Section 3 – Duel
Art. 260. Responsibility of Participants in a
Duel
Punishable Acts:
1. Killing one’s adversary in a duel;
2. Inflicting upon such adversary physical
injuries; and
3. Making a combat although no physical
injuries have been inflicted by either
combatant on the other
Persons liable:
1. Principals – person who killed, or inflicted
physical injuries upon, his adversary, or both
combatants, in any other cases
2. Accomplices – seconds (person who make
the selection of the arms and fix the other
conditions of the fight)
Notes:
1. A duel is a formal or regular combat
previously concerted between two parties in
the presence of two or more seconds of
lawful age on each side, who make the
selection of arms and fix all the other
conditions of the fight.
2. Intent to kill is disregarded where only
physical injuries result. Penalty will be that for
physical injuries only, as opposed to those
imposed for frustrated/attempted homicide.
(2nd paragraph of the provision)
CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 261. Challenging to a Duel
Punishable Acts:
1. Challenging another to a duel;
2. Inciting another to give or accept a challenge
to a duel; and
3. Scoffing at or decrying another publicly for
having refused to accept a challenge to fight
a duel
Persons liable:
1. Challengers, and
2. Instigators
There must be intention to have a formal duel (as
opposed to light threats under Art. 285, par. 2)
Chapter 2: Physical Injuries
Crimes Punishable:
1. Mutilation;
2. Serious physical injuries;
3. Administering injurious substance or
beverages;
4. Less serious physical injuries; and
5. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment.
Note: To be found guilty of violation of Articles 262
to 266, there must be a specific malicious intent
to do wrong against the physical integrity or
well-being of a person, so as to incapacitate
and deprive the victim of certain bodily
functions. (Villa v Manual Lorenzo Escalona II,
et. al, GR No 178057 & 178080, December 1,
2014) – animus iniuriandi
Art. 262. Mutilation
Any person who shall intentionally mutilate
another by depriving him, either totally or
partially, of some essential organ of
reproduction
Two (2) Kinds:
1. Castration: Intentionally mutilating another
by depriving him, totally or partially, of some
essential organ for reproduction
2. Mayhem or other intentional mutilation:
Intentionally making other mutilation, i.e.
Page 170 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
lopping, clipping off any part of the body of
the offended party, other than the essential
organ for reproduction, to deprive him of that
part of his body
There must be intent to mutilate – offender must
have the intention of depriving the offended party
of a part of his body. If there’s no such intention,
the crime will be considered as serious physical
injuries.
Physical Injuries distinguished from other
crimes
1. Attempted or Frustrated Homicide
a. Attempted homicide may be committed,
even if no physical injuries are inflicted;
and
b. Intent to kill is not present in the crime of
physical injuries.
2. Mutilation
a. Intention to lop or clip off some part of the
body is present in mutilation.
Art. 263. Serious Physical Injuries
How committed:
1. Wounding;
2. Beating; or
3. Assaulting
Elements: (3)
1. The offender has wounded, beaten,
assaulted another;
2. The physical injuries inflicted shall have
caused the illness or incapacity for labor of
the injured person for more than 30 days;
3. There must be no intent to kill on the part of
the offender in inflicting the injury (Pilares Sr.
vs. People, GR No 165685, March 12, 2007)
Serious Physical Injuries Are:
1. When the injured person becomes insane,
imbecile, impotent or blind as a consequence
of the physical injuries inflicted;
2. When the injured person –
a. loses the use of speech or the power to
hear or to smell,
b. loses an eye, a hand, foot, arm or leg, or
loses the use of any such member,
CRIMINAL LAW
c. becomes incapacitated for the work in
which he had been habitually engaged;
3. When the injured person –
a. becomes deformed,
b. loses any other member of his body,
c. loses the use thereof, or
d. becomes ill or incapacitated for the
performance of the work in which he had
been habitually engaged in for more than
90 days; and
4. When the injured person becomes ill or
incapacitated for labor for more than 30 days
(but not more than 90 days).
Paragraph 1
1. Impotency includes inability to copulate and
sterility; no intent to deprive the person of
such abilities, however (as opposed to
castration); and
2. Complete blindness (as opposed to
paragraph 2 – loss of an eye only)
Paragraph 2 (mentions principal members of the
body)
1. Loss of power to hear of both ears (as
opposed to paragraph 3 – loss of one ear
only);
2. Loss of use of hand or incapacity for usual
work must be permanent; This must be
proven by clear and conclusive evidence;
3. The offended party must have an avocation
or work at the time of the injury [also in
paragraph (3)];
a. Work includes studies or preparation for
a profession; and
b. Incapacity is for a certain kind of work
only, but not for all
Paragraph 3
1. Deformity means physical ugliness, or
permanent and defining abnormality. It must
be conspicuous and visible (i.e., depending
on what part of the body);
a. If scar is usually covered, then it’s not
considered conspicuous or visible;
b. Loss of teeth may be considered as
deformity;
c. Injury must be that which cannot be
repaired by the action of nature;
Page 171 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
EXCEPTIONS: old men/women and
children;(Reyes, Book Two, p. 586, citing
People v. Balubar)
2. Loss of fingers may fall under paragraph 2 if
it results in the loss of the use of the hand
itself; and
3. Covers any member which is not a principal
member of the body.
Paragraph 4
1. Any kind of labor is included;
2. Hospitalization for more than 30 days may
mean either illness or incapacity for labor for
more than 30 days;
3. There must be evidence of the length of
period of illness or incapacity when the
category of the offense is serious physical
injuries. The absence thereof makes the
offense only slight physical injuries; and
4. Lessening of efficiency in work is not
incapacity.
Qualified Serious Physical Injuries
1. In relation to persons enumerated in parricide
(Art. 246) and circumstances mentioned in
murder (Art. 248) – higher penalties will be
inflicted.
2. Does not include injuries caused by
excessive chastisement of a parent upon his
child
Notes:
1. It can be committed by reckless imprudence,
or by simple imprudence or negligence.
2. There must be no intent to kill; otherwise, the
crime would be frustrated/attempted murder,
parricide, or homicide.
3. Medical attendance is not important in
serious physical injuries.
4. In case of physical injuries under the Revised
Penal Code, there must be a specific animus
iniuriandi or malicious intention to do wrong
against the physical integrity or well-being of
a person so as to incapacitate and deprive
the victim of certain bodily functions. Without
proof beyond reasonable doubt of the
required animus iniuriandi, the overt act of
inflicting physical injuries per se merely
satisfies the elements of freedom and
CRIMINAL LAW
intelligence in an intentional felony. The
commission of the act does not, in itself,
make a man guilty unless his intentions are.
(Villareal v. People, G.R. No. 151258,
February 1, 2012)
Art. 264. Administering Injurious Substances
or Beverages
Any person who, without intent to kill, inflicts
upon another any serious physical injury, by
knowingly administering to him any injurious
substances or beverages or by taking
advantage of his weakness of mind or credulity
Elements:
1. That the offender inflicted upon another
person any Serious physical injury;
2. That it was done by Knowingly administering
to him any injurious substances or beverages
or by taking advantage of his weakness of
mind or credulity; and
3. He had No intent to kill
Notes:
1. Administering means introducing into the
body.
2. If there is intent to kill, it is frustrated murder
– the injurious substance to be considered as
poison.
3. Knowledge applies to the injurious nature of
the substance or beverage.
4. “By taking advantage of his weakness of
mind or credulity” may take place in the case
of witchcraft, philters, magnetism and the like.
Art. 265. Less Serious Physical Injuries
Any person who shall inflict upon another
physical injuries not described in the preceding
articles, but which shall incapacitate the
offended party for labor for ten days or more, or
shall require medical attendance for the same
period, shall be guilty of less serious physical
injuries
Elements: (I-NP) (2)
1. That the offended party is Incapacitated for
labor or needs medical attendance for 10
Page 172 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
days or more (but not more than 30 days);
and
2. That the physical injuries must Not be those
described in the Preceding articles
Qualified Less Serious Physical Injuries
1. Fine not exceeding ₱50,000, in addition to
Arresto Mayor (Amended by RA 10951),
when
a. There is a manifest intent to insult or
offend the injured person, or
b. There are circumstances adding
ignominy to the offense
[a. and b. are considered as -
1. Ordinary aggravating circumstances in
less serious physical injuries; and
2. Elements of slander by deed, when
only slight physical injuries result]
2. A higher penalty, when the victim is either -
a. The offender’s parents, ascendants,
guardians, curators or teachers; or
b. Persons of rank or persons in authority,
provided the crime is not direct assault
Notes:
1. Medical attendance or incapacity for labor is
required. There must be proof as to the
period of required medical attendance.
2. Even if there was no incapacity but the
medical treatment was for more than 10 days
- less serious physical injuries
3. If injuries heal within 30 days - less serious
physical injuries;
if injuries heal only after 30 days - serious
physical injuries (as illness for more than 30
days)
4. When there is no incapacity for labor or
medical attendance needed - slight physical
injuries
Art. 266. Slight Physical Injuries and
Maltreatment
Three (3) kinds:
1. Physical injuries which incapacitated the
offended party for labor from one to nine (9)
days or required medical attendance during
the same period;
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Physical injuries which did not prevent the
offended party from engaging in his habitual
work or which did not require medical
attendance (ex. black eye); and
3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without
causing any injury (ex. slapping the face
without causing dishonor)
Notes:
1. Presumption
a. In the absence of proof as to the period
of the offended party’s incapacity for
labor or of the required medical
attendance, the crime committed is
presumed as slight physical injuries.
b. When there is no evidence to establish
the gravity or duration of actual injury or
to show the causal relationship to death,
the offense is slight physical injuries.
2. Supervening Event
a. When the charge contained in the
information filed was for slight physical
injuries because it was believed that the
wound suffered would require medical
attendance for eight (8) days only, but
during preliminary investigation it was
found that the healing would require
more than thirty (30) days, this
supervening event can still be the subject
of amendment of the information or of a
new charge, without placing the accused
in double jeopardy .(People v. Manolong,
85 Phil. 829)
Chapter 3: Rape
Art. 266-A. Rape; 266-B. Penalties
Rape By Sexual Intercourse (Under Para. 1):
Elements of Rape By Sexual Intercourse (M-
C-A) (3)
1. The offender is a Man – in general;
2. The offender had Carnal knowledge of a
woman;
3. Such Act is accomplished (any one of the
following) -: FIT-D-M-U (4)
a. Through Force, Threat or Intimidation;
b. when the offended party is Deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious;
Page 173 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
c. by means of fraudulent Machination or
grave abuse of authority; or
d. when the offended party is Under 12
years of age (statutory rape) or is
demented, even though none of the
circumstances mentioned above be
present
Penalties imposed on Rape By Sexual
Intercourse (Pursuant to R.A. 9346: Act
Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the
Philippines, the penalty of reclusion perpetua
without eligibility for parole shall be imposed, in
lieu of death penalty)
1. reclusion perpetua;
2. reclusion perpetua to death when:
a. rape is committed with the use of a
deadly weapon or by two or more
persons; or
b. victim became insane by reason or on the
occasion of rape; or
c. the rape is attempted and a homicide is
committed by reason or on the occasion
thereof.
3. death when:
a. by reason or on occasion of the
(frustrated or consummated) rape,
homicide is committed;
b. victim is under 18 years old and offender
is:
i. parent,
ii. ascendant,
iii. step-parent,
iv. guardian – must be a person who
has a legal relationship with his ward.
(People v Virgilio Antonio y Rivera,
GR No. 208623, July 23, 2014),
v. relative by consanguinity or affinity
within the 3rd civil degree,
vi. common law spouse of victim’s
parent;
c. victim is under the custody of the police
or military authorities or any law
enforcement or penal institution;
d. rape is committed in full view of the
spouse, parent or any of the children or
other relatives within the 3rd civil degree
of consanguinity;
CRIMINAL LAW
e. victim is a religious engaged in legitimate
religious vocation or calling and is
personally known to be such by the
offender before or at the time of the
commission of the crime;
f. victim is a child below 7 years old;
g. offender knows he is afflicted with HIV or
AIDS or any other sexually transmissible
disease and the virus is transmitted to the
victim;
h. offender is a member of the AFP, or para-
military units thereof, or the PNP, or any
law enforcement agency or penal
institution, when the offender took
advantage of his position to facilitate the
commission of the crime;
i. by reason or on occasion of the rape, the
victim suffered permanent physical
mutilation or disability;
j. the offender knew of the pregnancy of the
offended party at the time of the
commission of the crime; and
k. the offender knew of the mental disability,
emotional disorder and/or physical
handicap of the offended party at the time
of the commission of the crime
Rape Through Sexual Assault (Under Para. 2)
Elements: (S-I-1) (3)
1. the offender (man or woman) commits an act
of Sexual assault;
2. the act is committed by Inserting:
a. his penis into another person's mouth or
anal orifice; or
b. any instrument or object into the genital
or anal orifice of another person;
3. the act is committed under any of the
circumstances mentioned under paragraph 1
(FIT-D-M-U)
Penalties imposed on Rape by Sexual Assault
1. Prision mayor – in general;
2. Prision mayor to reclusion temporal when:
a. there was use of deadly weapon, or
b. committed by two or more persons;
3. Reclusion temporal – when the victim has
become insane;
4. Reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua –
rape is attempted and homicide is committed;
Page 174 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
5. Reclusion perpetua – homicide is committed
by reason or on occasion of (the frustrated or
consummated) rape; and
6. Reclusion temporal – committed with any of
the ten aggravating circumstances
mentioned in this article (letters b. to k. of
when death is imposed in rape through
sexual intercourse)
The four circumstances:
1. Using force or intimidation; the degree
sufficient to overcome resistance:
a. According to People v. Las Piñas, Jr.
(G.R. No. 133444, February 20, 2002),
the test is whether reasonable fear is
produced in the mind of the victim; where
resistance would be futile, offering none
at all does not amount to consent.
b. Verbal refusal alone will not do; there
must be a physical struggle that’s
manifest and tenacious. (People v. Lago,
G.R. No. 121272, June 6, 2001)
c. The force need not be irresistible; force
or violence necessary is relative,
depending on the age, size, and strength
of the parties and their relation to each
other.
d. It is not necessary that the force or
intimidation employed be so great or of
such character as could not be resisted;
it is only necessary that the force or
intimidation be sufficient to consummate
the purpose which the accused had in
mind.
e. Intimidation – enough that it produces
fear in the victim; must be viewed in light
of the victim’s perception and judgment at
the time of rape.
f. Moral ascendancy or influence has been
held to be a substitute for intimidation, in
a long line of cases. [People v. Dichoson,
G.R. No. 118986-89, February 19, 2001;
People v. Bazona, G.R. No. 133343-44,
March 2, 2000; People v. Panique, 316
SCRA 757 (1999); People v. Perez, 307
SCRA 276 (1999)] In such a case, it is not
necessary that the victim put up a
determined resistance.
CRIMINAL LAW
g. [LEONEN] The abuse of moral influence
is the intimidation required in rape
committed by the common-law father of a
minor. (People v. ZZZ, G.R. No. 229862,
June 19, 2019)
h. [LEONEN] The victim need not complain
immediately or struggle to oppose the
action of the offender in a rape case,
since, first, fear is recognized as a
legitimate deterrent for struggling
against, and that (second), since he was
the common law father of the victim, he
had moral ascendancy and abused his
authority by doing such action. (People v.
Gacusan, G.R. 207776, April 26, 2017)
i. Intimidation is addressed to the mind of
the victim. It is subjective and its
presence cannot be tested by any hard-
and-fast rule, but must be viewed in the
light of the victim’s perception and
judgment at the time of the crime.
(People. v Mostrales, GR No 125937,
August 28, 1998).
2. Offended party is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious:
a. Deprivation need not be complete;
b. Intercourse with a deaf-mute woman will
only be considered rape if she’s also
proven to be an imbecile.
c. Not considered rape where consent is
induced by the administration of
drugs/liquor, which incites the victim’s
passions and doesn’t deprive her of will
power (Reyes, Book Two, p. 586, citing
State v. Lung)
3. By means of fraudulent machination or grave
abuse of authority; and
4. When the offended party is under 12 years of
age or is demented, even though none of the
other circumstances be present (Statutory
rape).
a. Consent and character (e.g. prostitute) of
the offended party is immaterial.
b. [LEONEN] It is also called statutory rape
as "it departs from the usual modes of
committing rape." It is enough that the
age of the victim is proven and that there
was sexual intercourse. (People v.
Page 175 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
Francica, G.R. No. 208625, September
6, 2017)
c. It is immaterial that the prosecution failed
to allege in the information the exact date
of the commission of the offenses. It is
sufficient that it was alleged that the
victim was under 12 years of age when
the crime was committed. (People v
Marciano Dollano, Jr., GR No 188851,
October 19, 2011)
d. The term “demented” refers to a person
who has dementia, which is a condition
of deteriorated mentality, characterized
by marked decline from the individual’s
former intellectual level and often by
emotional apathy, madness, or insanity.
e. [LEONEN] The offender engaged in
sexual intercourse even though he knew
fully well that the child was mentally ill
and was deprived of reason. (People v.
Corpuz, G.R. No. 208013, July 3, 2017)
f. [LEONEN] Conditions under Article 266-
A should be construed in the light of one's
capacity to give consent. An intellectually
disabled person is not necessarily
deprived of reason or demented. The
victim’s chronological age might be over
12 years old but her mental age was
proved to be lower than 12-years-old.
(People v. Tayaban, G.R. No. 207666,
November 22, 2017).
Two stages: (Rape does not admit of a frustrated
stage)
1. Consummated
a. Penetration is necessary;
b. It is not essential that there be a complete
penetration of the female organ; neither
is it essential that there be a rupture of
the hymen.
c. It is enough that the labia majora be
penetrated, even the slightest.
d. The penis need not be erect; it is still
considered rape if the accused
repeatedly tried to insert the penis in the
vagina, even if in vain.
2. Attempted
a. The offender has already performed
overt acts with the intention to have
CRIMINAL LAW
carnal knowledge of the offended party,
but which was not consummated due to
some cause or accident other than his
own spontaneous desistance.
b. There must be intent to have carnal
knowledge of the woman against her will.
c. There can be no frustrated rape because
any penetration of the female organ is
sufficient.
Notes:
1. Homicide committed “by reason of” (i.e., “in
the course of” or “because of”) rape is a
special complex crime.
a. Rape must come before intent to kill or
act of killing.
b. Does not apply when the intent to kill or
killing act preceded the rape act (i.e.,
when victim was on the point of death
when she was ravaged).
c. Includes death of victim through STD
given by the accused who raped her.
(Reyes, Book Two, p.592)
2. Homicide committed "on the occasion of the
rape" - killing that occurs immediately before
or after, or during the commission itself of the
rape, where the victim of the homicide may
be a person other than the rape victim herself
for as long as the killing is linked to the rape.
3. [LEONEN] The elements of the special
complex crime of rape with homicide are
the following:
a. the appellant had carnal knowledge of a
woman;
b. the carnal knowledge of a woman was
achieved by means of force, threat or
intimidation; and
c. by reason or on occasion of such carnal
knowledge by means of force, threat or
intimidation, the appellant killed a
woman. (People v. ZZZ, G.R. No.
228828, July 24, 2019)
4. Character of the woman is immaterial.
5. Testimony of victim alone is enough for
conviction.
a. [LEONEN] The victim was able to
recount her experience in a
straightforward, spontaneous, and
believable manner, regardless of her
Page 176 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
mental condition, as this doesn’t
determine whether her testimony is
credible or not. (People v. Quintos, G.R.
No. 199402, November 12, 2014).
6. Fingers – count as "objects" under rape
through sexual assault
7. Indemnity and Damages
a. Awarding of Php50,000 as indemnity is
mandatory upon finding of the fact of
rape; and
b. Moral damages may be automatically
awarded in rape cases without need of
proof.
8. Multiple Rape
a. Each offender is responsible not only for
the rape he personally committed, but
also for those committed by the others.
b. Each and every rape alleged must be
proven.
c. In the case of People v Aaron, the
accused inserted his penis into the
victim's vagina; he then withdrew it and
ordered the latter to lie down on the floor,
and for the second time, he inserted his
penis into the victim’s vagina; thereafter,
the accused commanded the victim to lie
near the headboard and for the third time,
he inserted his penis into the victim’s
vagina. The accused was convicted for
only one count of rape despite the three
successful penetrations because there is
no indication that the accused decided to
commit separate and distinct acts of
sexual assault. There was only a lustful
desire to change positions.
d. In the case of People v Manolito Lucena
y Velasquez, the accused succeeded in
inserting his penis into the victim's
vagina. The three penetrations occurred
one after the other at an interval of five
minutes wherein the accused would rest.
From this set of facts, the accused was
convicted of three counts of rape as it can
be inferred that the accused decided to
commit those separate and distinct acts
of sexual assault.
9. [LEONEN] Qualified rape has twin
requisites—(1) the victim's age of minority
(under 18 years) and (2) the relationship of
CRIMINAL LAW
the offender, both of which much be alleged
in the information, regardless if the
relationship was proven during trial. (People
v. Armodia, G.R. 210654, June 7, 2017)
10. Sweetheart defense is an affirmative defense
that must be supported by convincing proof.
Evidence such as a love letter, a memento, or
even a single photograph to substantiate the
claim that they had a romantic relationship
should be presented.
11. Each of the penetrations constitute separate
and distinct acts of rape. However, in Aaron
(2002), the Court convicted the accused for
only one count of rape despite the three
successful penetrations because there was
no indication that the accused decided to
commit separate and distinct acts of sexual
assault other than his lustful desire to change
positions inside the room where the crime
was committed.
12. The act of cunnilingus or insertion of the
tongue to the vagina of a woman is rape
through sexual assault. (People v Bonaagua,
GR No 188897, June 6, 2011)
13. A medical examination of the victim is not an
element of rape. (People v Rico Jamlan
Salem, GR No 118946, October 16, 1997)
14. [LEONEN] In rape cases, impotency as a
defense must be proven with certainty to
overcome the presumption in favor of
potency (People v. ZZZ, G.R. No. 229209,
February 12, 2020).
15. [LEONEN] The absence of external signs or
physical injuries on the complainant’s body
doesn’t necessarily negative commission of
the rape, hymenal laceration not being, to
repeat, an element of the crime of rape.
(People v. Buclao, G.R. No. 208173, June 11,
2014) The foremost consideration in the
prosecution of rape is the victim's testimony
and not the findings of the medico-legal
officer. (People v. Austria, G.R. No. 210568,
November 08, 2017)
16. [LEONEN] The Court previously held, in
People v. Soria, that a victim need not identify
what was inserted into his or her genital or
anal orifice for the court to find that rape
through sexual assault was committed.
Page 177 of 354
ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2020/21
(Ricalde v. People, G.R. No. 211002, January
21, 2015)
Guiding Principles in the crime of Rape
(People v Ayade, GR No 188561, January 15,
2010):
1. An accusation of rape can be made with
facility; while the accusation is difficult to
prove, it is even more difficult for the accused,
though innocent, to disprove.
2. Considering that, in the nature of things, only
two persons are usually involved in the crime
of rape, the testimony of the complainant
must be scrutinized with extreme caution.
3. The evidence for the prosecution must stand
or fall on its own merits, and cannot be
allowed to draw strength from the weakness
of the evidence for the defense.
Art. 266-C. Effect of Pardon. Effect of Marriage
Notes:
1. Marriage extinguishes not only the penal
action but likewise the penalty imposed, and
only as to the principal. Since rape has
ceased to be a crime against chastity and is
now a crime against persons, it now appears
that marriage extinguishes that penal action
and the penalty only as to the principal (i.e.,
husband) and not as to the accomplices and
accessories.
2. A man who penetrates his wife without her
consent or against her will commits sexual
violence against her. xxx Besides, a husband
who feels aggrieved by his indifferent or
uninterested wife’s absolute refusal to
engage in sexual intimacy may legally seek
the court’s intervention to declare her
psychologically incapacitated to fulfill an
essential martial obligation. But he cannot
and should not demand sexual intimacy from
her coercively or violently. (People v
Jumawan, GR No 187495, April 21, 2014)
CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 266-D. Presumptions
Evidence which may be accepted
1. Any physical overt act manifesting resistance
against the act of rape in any degree from the
offended party
2. Circumstances showing the offended party to
be so situated as to render him/her incapable
of giving consent.
Please see SPL reviewer on:
1. R.A. 9262 Anti – Violence Against Women
and Children Act
2. R.A. 9775 Anti – Child Pornography Act of
2009
3. R.A. 8049 Anti-Hazing Law
4. R.A. 7610 Special Protection of Children
Against Child Abuse, Exploitation And
Discrimination Act
5. R.A. 9344 Juvenile Justice And Welfare Act
of 2006
6. P.D. 603 Child And Youth Welfare Code
———— end of topic ————
H. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY
AND SECURITY
Chapter 1: Crimes against Liberty
Section 1. Illegal Detention
Article 267. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention
Any private individual who shall kidnap or
detain another, or in any other manner deprive
him of his liberty
Elements: (P-K-I-F) (4)
1. That the offender is a Private individual;
2. That he Kidnaps or detains another, or in any
other manner deprives the latter of liberty;
3. That the act of detention or kidnapping must
be Illegal; and
4. That in the commission of the offense, any of
the following circumstances are present (3-S-
S-M)
a. The kidnapping/detention lasts for more than
3 days, or
Page 178 of 354