felony.

CRIMINAL LAW I CRIME A crime is an act or omission which is punishable under the law.
Crime is defined as an act committed or omitted in violation of
1JD4 public law forbidding or commanding it. It is a positive or
FISCAL NIKKI ESPERANZA negative act in violation of penal law; an offense against the
State. (Black’s Law Dictionary)
Disclaimer: This reviewer may or may not be accurate.
OFFENSE If it is a violation of a Special Law, it is called an offense.

1JD4
I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW
INFRACTION OF AN If it is punished by an Ordinance, it is referred to as an Infraction
ORDINANCE of an Ordinance.
A. NATURE AND DEFINITION

THEORIES IN CRIMINAL LAW

CRIMINAL LAW

Criminal law is that branch or division of law which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and The classical theory posits that a human
provides for their punishment. person is essentially a moral creature with
absolute free will to choose between good and
It is a branch of public law because it treats of acts or omissions of the citizens which are deemed evil.
primarily as wrongs against the State more than against the offended party.
CLASSICAL OR JURISTIC THEORY The purpose of the penalty – retribution. In
Criminal law is that law which for the purpose of preventing harm to society: (a) declares what view of the voluntariness of the act or omission
conduct is criminal, and (b) prescribes the punishment to be imposed for such conduct. Further, it of the offender, he should be meted the proper
includes the definition of specific offenses and general principles of liability. (Black’s Law Dictionary) penalty. The offended deserves justice which
requires that the offender be meted with
commensurate punishment.
PENAL LAWS
The positive theory posits the view that man is
Penal laws are those acts of the legislature which prohibit certain acts and establish penalties for subdued occasionally by a strange and morbid
their violations; or those that define crimes, treat of their nature and provide for their punishment. phenomenon which conditions him to do wrong
(Lacson v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 128096, January 1999) in spite of or contrary to his volition.
POSITIVIST OR REALISTIC THEORY
Rule of Lenity. The rule applies when the court is faced with two possible interpretations The purpose of the penalty is – reformation.
of a penal statute, one that is prejudicial to the accused and another that is favorable to Since the offender is not inherently evil but
him. The rule calls for adoption of an interpretation which is more lenient to the accused. only made evil by his environment, then the
penalty should be corrective to reform him or
In all criminal prosecutions, the existence of criminal liability for which the accused is restore him to his good nature. (Thus, jails are
made answerable must be clear and certain. also called reformations.
The Court has consistently held that “penal statutes are construed strictly against the ECLECTIC OR MIXED PHILOSOPHY This theory combines the good features of
State and liberally in favor of the accused.” Where there is doubt on the interpretation of classical and positivist theories.
criminal laws, all must be resolved in favor of the accused.

The law is penal if the following are present:

POWER TO DEFINE AND PUNISH CRIMINAL ACTS
● The law must define the criminal act;
● It must prescribe a penalty; and
● It must be an act of the legislature. Each state has the authority, under its police power, to define and punish crimes and to lay down the
rules of criminal procedure.

PUBLIC LAW Subject to constitutional limitations, the legislature is empowered to define what acts or omissions
shall constitute a crime and to prescribe punishments therefor.
It means “any law made by the state.” Criminal law is a public law. Police power is the power of the state to promote public welfare by restraining and regulating the use
of liberty and property. It is the most pervasive, the least limitable, and the most demanding of the
three fundamental powers of the State. The justification is found in the Latin maxim salus populi est
FELONY If the act is punished by the Revised Penal Code, it is called a

1
suprema lex – the welfare of the people is the supreme law and sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas
– so use your property as not to injure the property of others.
B. SOURCES OF CRIMINAL LAW
PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION
Article II, Section 5
1JD4
SECTION 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and property, and
the promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the
blessings of democracy.
Article VI, Section 1
SECTION 1. The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines which shall
consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people
by the provision on initiative and referendum.
REVISED PENAL CODE
The Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815) which took effect on January 1, 1932, and its
amendments.
It is the main source of criminal laws in the Philippines.
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
Special penal laws are those that punish acts not defined and penalized by the Revised Penal
Code. They are statutes enacted by the Legislative branch, penal in character, which are not
amendments to the Revised Penal Code.
Passed by the legislative branch of Philippine government known variously as Philippine
Commission, National Assembly, Philippine Congress, Batasang Pambansa and the presidential
issuances or decrees under Amendment No. 6 of the 1973 Constitution.
PENAL PROVISIONS OF NON-PENAL LAWS
These are laws that, although contain penal provisions, are not penal laws.
Example:
● The Corporation Code is not a penal statute but it contains penal provisions. It was
intended as a regulatory measure, not primarily as a penal statute. The Insurance Code
and the National Building Code also contain penal provisions. In order to ensure
compliance, they have penal provisions penalizing certain specific acts. These penal
provisions, however, partake in the nature of special penal laws.
LOCAL ORDINANCES
Under the Local Government Code (Republic Act No. 7160), local government units are endowed
with powers to enact ordinances defining criminal acts and prescribing penalties thereof.
The police power granted to local government units must always be exercised with utmost
observance of the rights of the people to due process and equal protection of the law.
If an act is already prohibited and penalized by a general law, it does not preclude the enactment
of a municipal ordinance covering the same matter.
For an ordinance to be valid, it must conform to the following substantive requirements:
● Must not contravene the Constitution or any statute;
● Must not be unfair or oppressive;
● Must not be partial or discriminatory;
● Must not prohibit but may regulate trade;
● Must general and consistent with public policy; and
● Must be reasonable.
DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT
While decisions of the Court are not laws pursuant to the doctrine of separation of powers, they
evidence the laws’ meaning, breadth, and scope and, therefore, have the same binding force as
the laws themselves.
C. CHARACTERISTICS OF CRIMINAL LAW
The characteristics of criminal law are generality, territoriality, and prospectivity. Generality refers to
the persons covered by penal laws; territoriality refers to the place where the law is applicable; and
prospectivity refers to the time when the law should be applied.
GENERALITY (Article 2, RPC)
Criminal law is binding on all persons who live or sojourn in the Philippine territory. This is based
on Article 14 of the New Civil Code which provides:
“Article 14. Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon
all those who live or sojourn in Philippine territory.”
Even aliens are covered by the principle because they are also protected by the laws of the
Philippines during all the time that they sojourn within its territory, and the word “person” in the
Constitution does not refer only to its citizens.
There are cases where our Criminal Law does not apply even if the crime is committed by a
person residing or sojourning in the Philippines. The opening sentence of Article 2 of the
Revised Penal Code says that the provisions of this Code shall be enforced within the Philippine
Archipelago, “except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential application.”
On the other hand, Article 14 of the New Civil Code provides that penal laws and those of
public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in Philippine territory,
“subject to the principles of public international law and to treaty stipulations.”
EXCEPTIONS to this principle are as follows: Treaty or treaty stipulations; Laws of
preferential application; International law
A. TREATY OR TREATY STIPULATIONS
By the doctrine of incorporation, the country is bound by generally accepted principles of
international law, which are considered to be automatically part of our own laws.
A treaty engagement is not a mere moral obligation but creates a legally binding obligation on the
parties. A state which has contracted valid international obligations is bound to make in its
legislation such modifications as may be necessary to ensure the fulfillment of the obligations
undertaken.
2
Example:
● Visiting Forces Agreement - The VFA is an agreement which defines the treatment of
United States troops and personnel visiting the Philippines to promote “common
security interests” between the US and the Philippines in the region.
● Agreement between Asian Development Bank and the Philippines - The agreement
provides that experts and consultants performing missions for the Bank enjoy immunity
from legal processes with respect to acts performed by them in their official capacity
except when the Bank waives its immunity.
1JD4
B. LAWS OF PREFERENTIAL APPLICATION
Laws of preferential application are laws which give criminal immunity to some class of persons
by reason of the nature of their office, position, or religious belief.
These persons are immune from the operation of penal laws. These laws recognized the
immunities, rights and privileges of duly accredited foreign diplomatic representatives of one state
to another state.
It is a well-established principle of international law that diplomatic representatives such as
ambassadors, or public ministers and their official retinue, possess immunity from the
criminal jurisdiction of the country of their sojourn and cannot be sued, arrested or punished by
the law of that country.
Republic Act No. 75 provides that ambassadors or public ministers or their domestic servants
are exempted from local laws. They cannot be arrested or imprisoned as all writs or processes
against them are considered void by operation of law. However, following the doctrine of
reciprocity, the provisions of the law do not apply when the foreign country affected does not
provide similar protection to members of our diplomatic representatives.
Presidential Decree No. 1083 or the Muslim Code of the Philippines provides that penal laws
relative to bigamy do not apply to persons married pursuant to Muslim laws where the
requirements provided therein are complied with.
*Par in parem, non habet imperium. All States are sovereign equals and cannot assert
jurisdiction over one another.
*While the doctrine of state immunity appears to prohibit only suits against the State without its
consent, it is also applicable to complaints filed against officials of the State for acts allegedly
performed by them in the discharge of their duties.
*The doctrine of immunity from suit will not apply and may not be invoked where the public
official is being sued in his private and personal capacity as an ordinary citizen. This situation
usually arises where the public official acts without authority or in excess of the powers vested in
him. It is a well-settled principle of law that a public official may be liable in his personal private
capacity for whatever damage he may have caused by his act done with malice and in bad faith
or beyond the scope of his authority and jurisdiction.
*Slandering a person could not possibly be covered by the immunity agreement because our
laws do not allow the commission of a crime, such as defamation, in the name of “official duty.” It
is a well-settled principle of law that a public official may be liable in his personal private capacity
for whatever damage he may have caused by his act done with malice and in bad faith or beyond
the scope of his authority and jurisdiction.
C. INTERNATIONAL LAW
In the case of diplomatic immunity, the privilege is not an immunity from the observance of the law
of the territorial sovereign or from ensuing legal liability; it is, rather, an immunity from exercise of
territorial jurisdiction.
Those who are exempt, by virtue of principles of international law, are sovereigns and other
chiefs of state, ambassadors, ministers plenipotentiary, ministers resident, and chargers
d’affaires. Their official retinue are included in the coverage.
The main yardstick in ascertaining whether a person is a diplomat entitled to immunity is the
determination of whether or not he performs duties of diplomatic nature.
Is a consul entitled to the privileges and immunities of an ambassador or minister?
No. They do not possess the statutes of and cannot claim the privileges and immunities accorded
to ambassadors and ministers. Consuls, vice-consuls and other commercial representatives are
not exempt from criminal prosecution for violations of the laws of the country where he resides.
Restrictive Theory of State Immunity
This traditional rule of state immunity which exempts a State from being sued in the courts of
another State without the former’s consent or waiver has evolved into a restrictive doctrine which
distinguishes sovereign and governmental acts (Jure imperii) from private, commercial and
proprietary acts (Jure gestionis).
Under the restrictive rule of State immunity, State immunity extends only to acts Jure imperii.
This concept holds that the immunity of the sovereign is recognized only with regard to public acts
or acts jure imperii, but not with regard to private acts or acts jure gestionis.
State immunity extends to its officials acting in official capacity
The doctrine of immunity from suit will not apply and may not be invoked where the public official
is being sued in his private and personal capacity as an ordinary citizen.
It is a well-settled principle of law that a public official may be liable in his personal private
capacity for whatever damage he may have caused by his act done with malice and bad faith, or
beyond the scope of his authority or jurisdiction.
Nationality principle is not applicable in penal law
Under Article 15 of the New Civil Code, the national law of Filipino citizens governs his family
rights and duties, or the status, condition and legal capacity wherever they are. Their national law
follows them wherever they go.
This is not the same rule in penal laws. Penal laws apply to all persons, whether citizens or not,
who reside or sojourn in the Philippine territory.
TERRITORIALITY (Article 2, RPC)
The basis of the territoriality principle is Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code which provides that
its provisions shall be enforced within the Philippine archipelago including its
atmosphere, its internal waters, and maritime zone.
As a general rule, the Philippines, being a sovereign nation, has jurisdiction over all offenses
committed within its territory. However, it may, by a treaty or agreement, consent to any other
foreign nation, to exercise jurisdiction over certain offenses committed within certain portions of
said territory.
The territorial waters – 12 miles from the baselines.
Contiguous zone – 24 nautical miles from the baselines.
Exclusive economic zone – 200 nautical miles from the baselines.
Continental shelves that UNCLOS III delimits.
3
In criminal cases, venue is jurisdictional
The place where the crime was committed determines not only the venue of the action
but is an essential element of jurisdiction.
It is a fundamental rule that for jurisdiction to be acquired by courts in criminal cases,
the offense should have been committed or any one of its essential ingredients should
have taken place within the territorial jurisdiction of the court.
Territorial jurisdiction in criminal cases is the territory where the court has jurisdiction
1JD4
to take cognizance or to try the offense allegedly committed therein by the accused.
Venue is an essential element of jurisdiction in criminal cases
It determines not only the place where the criminal action is to be instituted, but also the
court that has jurisdiction to try and hear the case.
This principle of territoriality enunciates TWO CONCEPTS:
1) That our penal laws are enforceable within the Philippine territory;
2) That our penal laws cannot be enforced outside the Philippine territory.
First concept: That our penal laws are enforceable within the Philippine territory
These laws undertake to punish acts committed in the Philippine territory. In other words, all
crimes committed within the territory of the Philippines are triable by our local courts.
There are instances where our local courts cannot try the crimes committed even within the
territory of the Philippines.
EXCEPTIONS to this principle are as follows: Foreign merchant vessel; Foreign military
vessel; Immunity extends to government ships operated for non-commercial purposes;
Foreign aircraft; Aircraft registered in the Philippines
A. FOREIGN MERCHANT VESSEL
Local officials exercise but little control over their actions, and offenses committed by their crew
are justiciable by their own officers acting under the laws to which they primarily owe allegiance.
In case of crime committed on a foreign merchant vessel, there are two fundamental rules on
this particular matter in connection with international law.
French Rule English Rule
General Rule: Matters happening on board a General Rule: Matters happening on board a
merchant vessel while in the territorial waters merchant vessel are justiciable only by the
of another country are justiciable only by the courts of the country where the merchant
country to which the vessel belongs. vessel is (territorial)
Exceptions: Unless their commission affects Exceptions: Unless they merely affect things
the peace and security of the territory of the within the vessel or they refer to the internal
safety of the state is endangered management thereof
The English Rule is observed in our jurisdiction. No court of the Philippine islands had
jurisdiction over an offense or crime committed on the high seas or within the territorial waters of
any country, but when she came within three miles of a line drawn from the headlands, which
embrace the entrance of Manila Bay, she was within the territorial waters, and a new set of
principles became applicable.
Crimes not involving a breach of public order committed on board a foreign merchant
vessel in transit not triable by our courts
As a general rule, mere possession of opium aboard a foreign merchant vessel IN TRANSIT is
not triable in Philippine courts, because that fact alone does not constitute a breach of public
order and on account of such a vessel being considered as an extension of its own
territory/nationality.
The reason for this ruling is that mere possession of opium on such a ship, without being used in
our territory, does not bring about in this country those disastrous effects that our law
contemplates avoiding.
However, to be triable, the crime must be committed on board a foreign merchant vessel while in
Philippine waters and that the crime affects a breach of public order. Landing or using opium is an
open violation of Philippine laws.
When the foreign merchant vessel is NOT IN TRANSIT because the Philippines is its terminal
port, the person in possession of opium on board that vessel is liable, because he may be held
guilty of illegal importation of opium.
Courts acquire jurisdiction when the tins of opium are landed from the vessel on Philippine soil.
Landing or using opium is an open violation of the laws of the Philippines.
Example:
● Smoking opium aboard a foreign merchant vessel while anchored two and a half miles
in Manila Bay constitutes a breach of public order, because the primary object of the
law in punishing the use of opium is to protect the inhabitants of this country against the
disastrous effects entailed by the use of such drugs.
● Philippine courts have jurisdiction over crimes constituting a breach of public aboard
merchant vessels anchored in Philippine jurisdictional waters.
Internal management of the vessel not cognizable
Disorders which disturb only the peace of the ship or those on board are to be dealt with
exclusively by the sovereignty of the home of the ship.
However, those who disturb the public peace may be suppressed, and, if need be, the offenders
punished by the proper authorities of the local jurisdiction.
Crimes committed aboard a foreign ship on high seas are NOT triable in the Philippines
No court of the Philippines had jurisdiction over an offense or crime committed on the high seas
or within the territorial waters of any territory.
But when the vessel, in transit to the Philippines, entered its territorial waters, a new set of
principles became applicable.
When the vessel is “in transit,” the exact place where the crime was committed is
immaterial.
Paragraph C of Section 15, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure provides that
“Where an offense is committed on board a vessel in the course of its voyage, the criminal action
may be instituted and tried in the proper court of the first port of entry or of any municipality or
territory through which the vessel passed during such voyage subject to the generally accepted
principles of international law.
Crimes committed on board a Philippine-registered vessel committed on the high seas.
Local courts can take cognizance of the cases committed on board vessels registered in the
Philippines.
4
 But this exception has no application:
B. FOREIGN MILITARY VESSEL
(1) Where the new law is expressly made inapplicable to pending actions or existing
Philippine laws do not apply to those crimes committed inside the foreign military or public causes of action.
vessels. Warships are considered extensions of their flag states, hence, immune from local (2) Where the offender is a habitual criminal under Rule 5, Article 62, Revised Penal Code.
jurisdiction. (Article 22, RPC).

However, this immunity will not apply if the crew violates the laws while they are on off duty. Different effects of repeal of penal law.

Immunity extends to government ships operated for non-commercial purposes. (1) If the repeal makes the penalty lighter in the new law, the new law shall be applied,

1JD4
except when the offender is a habitual delinquent or when the new law is made not
C. FOREIGN AIRCRAFT applicable to pending action or existing causes of action.
(2) If the new law imposes a heavier penalty, the law in force at the time of the commission
Under the Convention on Offenses and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft, crimes of the offense shall be applied.
committed aboard the foreign aircraft traveling in the Philippine airspace are not triable in the (3) If the new law totally repeals the existing law so that the act which was penalized under
Philippines. the old law is no longer punishable, the crime is obliterated.

The State of registration of the aircraft is competent to exercise jurisdiction over offenses and acts
committed on board. D. CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ON CRIMINAL LAWlex

Second concept: Penal laws cannot be enforced outside the Philippine territory
Section 1, Article III of the 1987 Constitution
states that “No person shall be deprived of life,
The rule enunciates that our penal laws cannot be enforced beyond our territorial jurisdiction. This liberty and property without due process of law
simply means that our local courts cannot try those crimes if committed outside our territory. nor shall any person be denied the equal
protection of the laws.”
EXCEPTIONS: Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code amplifies the “protective principle” which DUE PROCESS OF LAW
states that the Philippines has jurisdiction over the crimes committed abroad by nationals or The guarantee of the due process of law is a
foreigners which are prejudicial to its security and interest. constitutional safeguard against any
arbitrariness on the part of the Government
In the following instances, penal laws shall be enforced even outside the Philippine territory whether committed by the Legislature, the
against those who: Executive, or the Judiciary. It is a protection
essential to every inhabitant of the country.
a. Should commit an offense while on Philippine ship or airship;
b. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippines or obligations or
securities issued by the Government; Section 1, Article III of the 1987 Constitution
c. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into the Philippines of the said states that “No person shall be deprived of life,
obligations; liberty and property without due process of law
d. While being a public officer or employee, should commit an offense in the exercise of nor shall any person be denied the equal
their functions; or protection of the laws.”
e. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the laws of nations.
The guarantee of equal protection simply
means that all persons shall be treated alike,
PROSPECTIVITY (Article 21 and 22, RPC) EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW under like circumstances and conditions both
as the privilege conferred and liabilities
The law looks forward, never backward. (Lex prospicit, non respicit) enforced.
Prospective, in that a penal law cannot make an act punishable in a manner in which it was not Valid classification when allowed. The equal
punishable when committed. As provided in Article 366 of the Revised Penal Code, crimes are protection of the law clause of the Constitution
punished under the laws in force at the time of their commission. allows classification. Classification in law, as in
other departments of knowledge or practice, is
A new law has a prospective, not retroactive, effect. However, penal laws that are favorable to the the grouping of things in speculation or
accused, who is not a habitual delinquent, shall be given a retroactive effect. practice because they agree with one another
in certain particulars. A law is not invalid
EXCEPTIONS: Under Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code, a penal law that is favorable or because of simple inequality.
advantageous to the accused shall be given retroactive effect if he is NOT a habitual delinquent
or criminal. Section 4, Article III of the 1987 Constitution
states “No law shall be passed abridging the
Whenever a new statute dealing with crime establishes conditions more lenient or favorable to the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the
accused, it can be given a retroactive effect. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION press, or the right of the people peaceably to

5

1JD4
FREEDOM OF RELIGION
NO EXCESSIVE FINES, NOR CRUEL,
DEGRADING OR INHUMAN PUNISHMENT
NON-IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT OR
NON-PAYMENT OF POLL TAX
assemble and petition the government for
redress of grievances.”
Complete liberty to comment on the conduct of
public men is a scalpel in the case of free
speech. The sharp incision of its probe relieves
the abscesses of officialdom. Men in public life
may suffer a hostile and an unjust accusation;
the wound can be assuaged with the balm of a
clear conscience. A public officer must not be
too thin-skinned with reference to comment
upon his official acts.
Section 5, Article III of the 1987 Constitution:
“No law shall be made respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof. The free exercise and
enjoyment of religious profession and worship,
without discrimination or preference, shall
forever be allowed. No religious test shall be
required for the exercise of civil or political
rights.”
The Court recognizes that state interests must
be upheld in order that freedoms - including
religious freedom - may be enjoyed. In the
area of religious exercise as a preferred
freedom, however, man stands accountable to
an authority higher than the state, and so the
state interest sought to be upheld must be so
compelling that its violation will erode the very
fabric of the state that will also protect
freedom. In the absence of a showing that
such state interest exists, man must be
allowed to subscribe to the Infinite. (Estrada v.
Escritor)
Section 19, Article III of the 1987 Constitution
states that “Excessive fines shall not be
imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman
inflicted. Neither shall the death penalty be
imposed, unless, for compelling reasons
involving heinous crimes, the Congress
hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty
imposed shall be reduced to reclusion
perpetua.
The prohibition against imprisonment for a debt
is a basic right enshrined in no less than the
Philippine Constitution. Article III of the
Constitution reads: “No person shall be
imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll
tax.”
In other words, no one can be compelled to
pay a debt under pain of criminal sanctions
(estafa is a different matter). No one can be
imprisoned for non-payment of debt. The
remedy of the creditor is civil in nature.
Section 22, Article III of the 1987 Constitution
states that “No ex post facto law or bill of
attainder shall be enacted.”
A bill of attainder is a legislative act which
inflicts punishment on individuals or members
BILL OF ATTAINDER of a particular group without the benefit of
judicial trial.
Essential to a bill of attainder are a
specification of certain individuals or a group of
individuals, the imposition of a punishment,
penal or otherwise, and the lack of judicial trial.
Its essence is the substitution of legislative
acts for a judicial determination of guilt.
Section 22, Article III of the 1987 Constitution
states that “No ex post facto law or bill of
attainder shall be enacted.”
EX-POST FACTO LAWS An ex post facto law is one which makes an
act done criminal before the passing of the law
and which was innocent when committed, and
punishes such action.
Which aggravates a crime or makes it greater
than when it was committed; or which changes
the punishment and inflicts greater punishment
than the law annexed to the crime when it was
committed.
E. CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION
1. Liberally in favor of the accused
The liberal disposition in favor of the accused is manifested in the three-fold rule, the rules of
mitigation of crimes, the requirement that qualifying circumstance should be proved by the same
quantum of evidence necessary to establish guilt, the analogous circumstances in Article 13 on
mitigating circumstances without the corresponding analogous circumstances on aggravating
circumstances, among others.
2. Spanish text of the RPC prevails over the English text
Inasmuch as the Revised Penal Code was originally approved and enacted in Spanish, the Spanish
text governs.
3. Retroactive application when favorable to the accused
The general rule is that a judgment that has acquired finality becomes immutable and unalterable,
and may no longer be modified in any respect even if the modification is meant to correct erroneous
conclusions of fact or law and whether it will be made by the court that rendered it or by the highest
court of the land.
6
However, when circumstances transpire after the finality of the decision rendering its execution
unjust and inequitable, the Court may sit en banc and give due regard to such exceptional The offender, in performing the act or incurring
circumstance warranting the relaxation of the doctrine of immutability. the omission, has the intention to cause an As stated in Article 3, the wrongful act results
injury to another. from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight
In Hernan v. Sandiganbayan or lack of skill.

The recent passage of Republic Act No. 10951 accordingly reduced the penalty applicable CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES
to the crime charged against the petitioner. Therefore, the Court has here a novel situation
wherein the judgment convicting the accused, petitioner herein, has already become final ACCORDING TO THE MEANS BY WHICH THEY ARE COMMITTED
and executory and yet the penalty imposed thereon has been reduced by virtue of the

1JD4
passage of said law. Because of this, the petitioner’s penalty must be modified respecting
the settled rule on the retroactive effectivity of laws, the law being favorable to the INTENTIONAL FELONIES
accused.
CULPABLE FELONIES
4. Prescribed but underserved penalties (Article 5, RPC)
ACCORDING TO THEIR STAGES OF EXECUTION
5. Suppletory application of RPC to Special Penal Laws (Article 10, RPC)

Article 10 of the Revised Penal Code. Offenses not subject to the provisions of this Code. – Offenses CONSUMMATED
which are or in the future may be punishable under special laws are not subject to the provisions of
this Code. This Code shall be supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should specially provide FRUSTRATED
the contrary.

The first clause should be understood to mean only that the special penal laws are controlling with ATTEMPTED
regard to offenses therein specifically punished. Said clause only restates the elemental rule of
statutory construction that special legal provisions prevail over general ones. Lex specialis derogat ACCORDING TO GRAVITY
generali. In fact, the clause can be considered as a superfluity, and could have been eliminated
altogether. The second clause contains the soul of the article. The main idea and purpose of the
article is embodied in the provision that the “code shall be supplementary” to special laws, unless the GRAVE FELONIES
latter should specifically provide the contrary.
Those with which the law attaches the capital punishment or penalties which in any of their periods
II. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY are afflictive.

A. FELONY, DEFINED (ARTICLE 3, RPC) LESS GRAVE FELONIES

Article 3. Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies (delitos). Those with which the law punishes with penalties which in their maximum period are correctional.
Felonies are committed not only by means of deceit (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa).
LIGHT FELONIES
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.
Those infractions of law or the commission of which the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not
Felonies are acts or omissions punishable by the Revised Penal Code. Felonies are those specific exceeding Forty thousand pesos (P40,000.00) or both is provided.
crimes penalized in Book Two of the Revised Penal Code. On the other hand, offenses are those
acts or omissions punishable by special penal laws.
B. ELEMENTS OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
TWO TYPES OF FELONIES
For one to be criminally liable for a felony by dolo, there must be a confluence of both an evil act
and an evil mind.
INTENTIONAL FELONIES CULPABLE FELONIES

In intentional felonies, the act or omission of
the offender is malicious. In the language of
Article 3, the act is performed with
DELIBERATE INTENT or WITH MALICE.
In culpable felonies, the act or omission of the ACTUS REUS MENS REA
offender is not malicious. The injury caused by
the offender to another person is Actus reus means guilty act. Mens rea means guilty mind.
UNINTENTIONAL, it being simply the incident
of another act performed without malice. Actus reus is the wrongful act which renders Mens rea (criminal intent) must coexist with

7

the actor criminally liable if combined with
mens rea.
actus reus (unlawful act) for a crime to exist.
In general , the definition of a criminal offense
involves not only an act or omission and its
consequences, but also the accompanying
mental state of the actor.
3. Every person owing allegiance to the Philippines, without being a foreigner, and having
knowledge of any conspiracy against the government, who does not disclose and make
known the same to the proper authority, is liable for misprision of treason. (Article 116).
It will be noted that in felonies by omission, there is a law requiring a certain act to be
performed and the person required to do the act fails to perform it.
MENTAL ELEMENT (MENS REA)

PHYSICAL ELEMENT (ACTUS REUS)

1JD4
ACT INTENTIONAL FELONIES

Act must be understood as “any bodily movement tending to produce some effect in the external
world, it being unnecessary that the same be actually produced, as the possibility of its production is
sufficient.
But the act must be one which is defined by the Revised Penal Code as constituting a felony; or, at
least, an overt act which has direct connection with the felony intended to be committed.
Example of felony by performing an act
A took the watch of B with intent to gain and without the consent of the latter. The act of
taking the watch of B, with intent to gain, constitutes the crime of theft.
OVERT ACT
On the other hand, an overt or external act is defined as some physical activity or deed, indicating
the intention to commit a particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried
out to its complete termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external
obstacles nor by the spontaneous desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen
into a concrete offense.
ONLY EXTERNAL ACT IS PUNISHED
The act must be external, because internal acts are beyond the sphere of penal law. Hence, a
criminal thought or a mere intention, no matter how immoral or improper it may be, will never
constitute a felony.
Thus, even if A entertains the idea of killing B, as long as he does not commence the commission of
the crime directly by overt act, A is not criminally liable.
OMISSION
Omission is a failure to act, which generally attracts different legal consequences from positive
conduct.
It means inaction, the failure to perform a positive duty which one is bound to do. There must be a
law requiring the doing of performance of an act.
Examples of felony by omission
DELIBERATE INTENT (DOLO) - ARTICLE 3
A felony cannot exist without intent. Since a felony by dolo is classified as an intentional felony, it is
deemed voluntary. The act is performed with deliberate intent which implies that the act is voluntary
or freely committed.
Intentional felony requires the existence of dolus malus - that the act or omission be done wilfully,
maliciously, with deliberate evil intent, and with malice afterthought. The term “dolo” or “malice” is a
complex idea involving the elements of freedom, intelligence, and intent.
The word “deceit” in the second paragraph of Article 3 is not the proper translation of the word
“dolo.” Dolus is equivalent to malice, which is the intent to do an injury to another.
When the offender, in performing an act or in incurring an omission, has the intention to do an injury
to the person, property, or right of another, such offender acts with malice. If the act or omission is
punished by the Revised Penal Code, he is liable for intentional felony.
ELEMENTS OF DOLO
Freedom refers to an act done with deliberation and with power to choose
between two things.
The Classical Theory states that a human person is essentially a moral
creature with an absolute free will to choose between good and evil. It
asserts that one should only be adjudged or held accountable for wrongful
FREEDOM acts so long as free will appears unimpaired.
Here, criminal liability is thus based on the free will and moral blame of the
actor. If a person has no freedom, he is not human but a mere tool.
Freedom is negated by irresistible force or uncontrollable fear.
Intelligence concerns the ability to determine morality of human acts, as
well as the capacity to distinguish between a licit and illicit act.

1. Anyone who fails to render assistance to any person whom he finds in an uninhabited INTELLIGENCE Without this power, necessary to determine the morality of human acts to
place wounded or in danger of dying, is liable for abandonment of persons in danger. distinguish a licit from an illicit act, no crime can exist.
(Article 275, par. 1)

2. Ano officer entrusted with collection of taxes who voluntarily fails to issue a receipt as Intelligence is negated by insanity, imbecility, or minority.
provided by law, is guilty of illegal exaction. (Article 213, par. 2[b])
Intent involves an aim or determination to do a certain act. It is the state of

8
 mind accompanying an act, especially a forbidden act. It is the use of a Actus me invito factus non est meus actus – “An act done by me against my will is not my
particular means to effect the desired results. act.” (U.S. v. Ah Chong)

It refers to the purpose of the mind and the resolve with which a person
MISTAKE OF FACT
INTENT proceeds.

Intent is a state of mind. Intent can be proved by overt acts of a person. Mistake of fact is a defense in crimes committed by dolo.
The choice of a particular means will show the true intent of the offender.
While ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance therewith (ignorantia legis non

1JD4
If there is no intent, there is no felony committed by dolo, but a felony may excusat), ignorance or mistake of fact relieves the accused from criminal liability (ignorantia facti
still exist if culpa is present. excusat).

Mistake of fact is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the person who caused injury to another.
Intent is negated by mistake of fact. He is not, however, criminally liable, because he did not act with criminal intent.

GENERAL AND SPECIFIC INTENT An honest mistake of fact destroys the presumption of criminal intent which arises upon the
commission of a felonious act.

GENERAL INTENT SPECIFIC INTENT In mistake of fact, the accused has the burden of proof that he acted in good faith.

REQUISITES OF MISTAKE OF FACT AS A DEFENSE

General criminal intent is an element of all
crimes. Evil intent must unite with an unlawful
act for there to be a felony.
The general criminal intent is presumed from
the criminal act and in the absence of any
general intent is relied upon as a defense,
such absence must be proved by the accused.
It is presumed or inferred from the very start
that the wrongful act is done since one is
presumed to have willed the natural
consequences of his own acts.
It need not be alleged in the information since
it is presumed.
A specific intent is a definite and actual
purpose to accomplish some particular thing.
It is necessary that specific intent must be
established since it cannot be presumed.
Its existence, as a matter of fact, must be
proved by the State just as any other essential
element.
This may be shown, however, by the nature of
the act, the circumstances under which it was
committed, the means employed and the
motive of the accused.
Specific intent must be alleged in the
information, and then proven by either direct or
circumstantial evidence.
1. That the act done would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believed
them to be.
2. That the intention of the accused in performing the act should be lawful.
3. That the mistake must be without fault or carelessness on the part of the accused.
MALUM PROHIBITUM AS EXCEPTION TO THE REQUIREMENT MENS REA
MENS REA IN MALA IN SE
Evil intent must unite with an unlawful act for there to be a crime. Accordingly, there can be no crime
when the criminal intent is wanting.
Accepted in this jurisdiction as material in crimes mala in se, mens rea has been defined before as
“a guilty mind, a guilty or wrongful purpose or criminal intent,” and “essential for criminal liability.”
INTENT DISTINGUISHED FROM MOTIVE

REMEMBER: INTENT MOTIVE

If there is no criminal intent, the accused cannot be found guilty of an intentional felony.
The purpose is to use a particular means to The moving power which impels one to action
The commission of the act does not in itself make a man guilty unless his intentions are. effect such a result. for a definite result. It is not an essential
element of a crime and need not be proved for
Criminal intent or mens rea must be shown in felonies committed by means of dolo. Such purposes of conviction.
intent is a mental state, the existence of which is shown by the overt acts of a person.

In intentional felonies, the existence of malicious intent must be proved beyond Generally an element of a crime except in Not an element of a crime.
reasonable doubt. unintentional circumstances.

CRIMINAL INTENT IS NECESSARY IN FELONIES COMMITTED BY MEANS OF DOLO Essential in intentional felonies. Only essential when the identity of the
perpetrator is in doubt.
Criminal intent is necessary in felonies committed by means of dolo because of the legal maxims –

Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea – “A crime is not committed if the mind of the person Generally, intent is a mental state, the existence of which is shown by the overt acts of a person.
performing the act complained of is innocent.” On the other hand, motive is established by the testimony of witnesses on the acts and statements
9
of the accused before or immediately after the commission of the offense. Such deeds or words
may indicate the motive.
CULPABLE FELONIES
CONSTRUCTIVE INTENT (CULPA) - ARTICLES 3 AND 365
According to Article 3 of the Revised Penal Code, there is fault when the wrongful act results from
imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
1JD4
In culpable felonies or criminal negligence, the injury inflicted on another person is unintentional, the
wrong done being simply the result of an act performed without malice or criminal design.
In negligence or imprudence (quasi-offense), what is principally penalized is the mental attitude or
condition behind the act, the dangerous recklessness, lack of care or foresight, the imprudencia
punible.
Between an act performed voluntarily and intentionally, and another committed unconsciously and
quite unintentionally, there exists another, performed without malice, but at the same time
punishable, though in a lesser degree and with an equal result, an intermediate act which the
Penal Code qualifies as imprudence or negligence.
The definition of reckless imprudence in Article 365 says “reckless imprudence consists in
voluntarily, but without malice, doing or failing to do an act which material damage results.”
CRIMINAL INTENT IS REPLACED BY NEGLIGENCE AND IMPRUDENCE IN CULPABLE
FELONIES
In felonies committed by means of culpa, since the doing of or failing to do an act must also also be
voluntary, there must be freedom and intelligence on the part of the offender, but the requisite of
criminal intent, which is required in felonies committed by dolo, is replaced by the requisite of
imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
Such negligence or indifference to duty or to consequence is, in law, equivalent to criminal intent.
But in felonies committed by means of culpa, the mind of the accused is not criminal. However, his
act is wrongful, because the injury or damages caused to the injured party results from imprudence,
negligence, lack of foresight or lack of skill of the accused.
ELEMENTS OF CULPA
Freedom refers to an act done with deliberation and with power to choose
between two things.
The Classical Theory states that a human person is essentially a moral
creature with an absolute free will to choose between good and evil. It
asserts that one should only be adjudged or held accountable for wrongful
FREEDOM acts so long as free will appears unimpaired.
Here, criminal liability is thus based on the free will and moral blame of the
actor. If a person has no freedom, he is not human but a mere tool.
Freedom is negated by irresistible force or uncontrollable fear.
Intelligence concerns the ability to determine morality of human acts, as
well as the capacity to distinguish between a licit and illicit act.
INTELLIGENCE Without this power, necessary to determine the morality of human acts to
distinguish a licit from an illicit act, no crime can exist.
Intelligence is negated by insanity, imbecility, or minority.
Reckless imprudence or negligence consists of a voluntary act done
without malice, from which an immediate personal harm, injury or material
NEGLIGENCE/ damage results by reason of an inexcusable lack of precaution or
IMPRUDENCE advertence on the part of the person committing it.
In contrast, simple imprudence or negligence comprises an act done
without grave fault, from which an injury or material damage ensues by
reason of a mere lack of foresight or skill.
IMPRUDENCE OR LACK OF SKILL
Imprudence indicates a deficiency of action. If a person fails to take the necessary precaution to
avoid injury to person or damage to property, there is imprudence. Imprudence usually involves lack
of skill.
Crimes cannot be committed through imprudence: murder, treason, robbery, malicious mischief, etc.
NEGLIGENCE OR LACK OF FORESIGHT
Negligence indicates a deficiency of perception. If a person fails to pay proper attention and to use
due diligence in foreseeing the injury or damage impending to be caused, there is negligence.
Negligence usually involves lack of foresight.
REASONS FOR PUNISHING ACTS OF NEGLIGENCE (CULPA)
A man must use common sense, and exercise due reflection in all his acts; it is his duty to be
cautious, careful and prudent, if not from instinct, then through fear of incurring punishment. He is
responsible for such results as anyone might foresee and for his acts which no one would have
performed except through culpable abandon. Otherwise, his own person, rights and property, and
those of his fellow beings, would ever be exposed to all manner of danger and injury.
QUESTION: May a crime be committed without criminal intent? Yes, in cases of culpa and crimes
punishable by mala prohibita.
IN INTENTIONAL FELONIES AND CULPABLE FELONIES, THE ACTS OF OMISSIONS
ARE VOLUNTARY
The adjective voluntary used in the old Penal Code is suppressed in the definition of felonies in
Article 3 of the Revised Penal Code. This omission does not mean that an involuntary act may
constitute a felony.
As in the old Penal Code, the act or omission must be voluntary and punishable by law to
constitute a felony. Article 3 classifies felonies into 1) intentional felonies, and 2) culpable felonies.
An intentional felony is committed when the act is performed with deliberate intent, which must
necessarily be voluntary.
On the other hand, in culpable felony, which is committed when the wrongful act results from
10

imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight or lack of skill, the act is also voluntary.
The only difference between intentional felonies and culpable felonies is that, in the first, the
offender acts with malice; whereas, in the second, the offender acts without malice.
IN OTHER WORDS
INTENTIONAL FELONIES (DOLO) CULPABLE FELONIES (CULPA)
Under paragraph 1, Article 4, a person committing a felony is still criminally liable even if —
There is a mistake in the MISTAKE IN IDENTITY of the victim – ERROR IN PERSONAE
In People v. Gona, the defendant went out of his house with the intention of assaulting Dunca, but in
the darkness of the evening, the defendant mistook Mapudul for Dunca and inflicted upon him a
mortal wound with a bolo. In this case, the defendant is criminally liable for the death of Mapudul.
REQUISITES OF ERROR IN PERSONAE
1. Offender committed an intentional felony; and

1JD4
In intentional crimes, the act itself is punished.
In intentional felonies, the act or omission of
the offender is malicious. In the language of
Article 3, the act is performed with deliberate
intent (with malice). The offender, in performing
the act or incurring the omission, has the
intention to cause an injury to another.
Intentional felony requires the existence of
dolus malus - that the act or omission be done
wilfully, maliciously, with deliberate evil intent,
and with malice aforethought.
In negligence or imprudence, what is
principally penalized is the mental attitude or
condition behind the act, the dangerous
recklessness, lack of care or foresight, the
imprudencia punible.
In culpable felonies or criminal negligence, the
act or omission of the offender is not malicious.
The injury caused by the offender to another
person is “unintentional, it being simply the
incident of another act performed without
malice or criminal design.”
As stated in Article 3, the wrongful act results
from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight
or lack of skill.
2. The consequent victim against whom the felony was directed is different from that
intended due to mistake of identity.
A person is criminally liable for committing an intentional felony although the consequent victim is
different from that intended due to mistake of identity.
There is a MISTAKE IN THE BLOW – ABERRATIO ICTUS
In People v. Mabugat, the accused had discharged his firearm at Juana Buralo but because of lack
of precision, hit and seriously wounded Perfecta Buralo, it was held that the accused was liable for
the injury caused to the latter.
A person who committed a felony is responsible for the direct, natural and logical consequences of
his act. He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil caused. Mistake in the blow is
characterized by aiming at one but hitting another due to imprecision.
They are liable for the consequences of their felonious act, therefore, cannot escape the criminal
liability resulting from the injury suffered by the victim. Criminal liability is incurred by any person
committing a felony, although the wrongful act be different from that which he intended.

The INJURIOUS RESULT IS GREATER THAN THAT INTENDED – PRAETER INTENTIONEM

TRANSFERRED INTENT (ARTICLE 4, PARAGRAPH 1) In People v. Cagoco, the accused, without intent to kill, struck the victim with his fist on the back part
of the head from behind, causing the victim to fall down with his head hitting the asphalt pavement
and resulting in the fracture of his head, it was held that the accused was liable for the death of the
victim, although he had no intent to said victim.
The rationale of the rule in Article 4 is found in the doctrine that “el que es causa de la causa es
causa del mal causado,” which means he who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil REQUISITES OF PRAETER INTENTIONEM
caused.
1. The intended act is felonious;
The basis of incurring criminal liability is found in Article 4 of the Code. While Article 3 refers to the 2. The resulting act is likewise a felony; and
manner by which a criminal act is committed, Article 4 deals with the person committing the act 3. The unintended albeit graver wrong was primarily caused by the actor’s wrongful acts.
resulting in criminal liability.
Any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which
Criminal liability is incurred in two ways: he intended is criminally liable.
I. By committing a felony even if the wrong produced as a consequence thereof is not 1. CONCURRENCE
intended by the offender; or
II. By impossible crime. 2. RESULTING HARM
“Although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended.” 3. CAUSATION
The causes which may produce a result different from that which the offender intended are: 1) PROXIMATE CAUSE
mistake in the identity of the victim; 2) mistake in the blow, that is, when the offender intending to do
an injury to one person actually inflicts it on another; and 3) the act exceeds the intent, that is, the Proximate cause is that cause, which, in its natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by an
injurious result is greater than that it intended. efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, and without which the result would not have occured.

The proximate legal cause is that acting first and producing the injury, either immediately, or by
setting other events in motion, all constituting a natural and continuous chain of events each having
a close causal connection with its immediate predecessor.
11

There must be a relation of “cause and effect,” the cause being the felonious act of the offender, the
effect being the resultant injuries and/or death of the victim.
EFFICIENT INTERVENING CAUSE
Efficient intervening cause is the new and independent act which itself is a proximate cause of an
injury and which breaks the causal connection between the original wrong and the injury. It is a new,
independent force intervening between a defendant’s negligent act and a plaintiff’s injury by the
negligence of a third person who had full control of the situation, whose negligence the defendant
could not anticipate or contemplate, and whose negligence resulted directly in the plaintiff’s injury.
1JD4
In Urbano v. People, the Court ruled that if there is an efficient intervening cause, there is no criminal
liability.
C. IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES (ARTICLE 4, PARAGRAPH 2, RPC)
The commission of an impossible crime is indicative of criminal propensity or criminal tendency on
the part of the actor. Such a person is a potential criminal. According to positivist thinking, the
community must be protected from anti-social activities, whether actual or potential, of the morbid
type of man called “socially dangerous person.” In an impossible crime, objectively, the offender has
not committed a felony, but subjectively, he is a criminal.
The penalty for impossible crime is provided for in Article 59 of the Revised Penal Code.
The 2nd paragraph of Article 4 defines the so-called impossible crimes.
REQUISITES OF IMPOSSIBLE CRIME:
I. That the act performed would be an offense against person or property;
II. That the act was done with evil intent; and
III. That its accomplishment was inherently impossible or the means employed was either
inadequate or ineffectual.
“Performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property”
In committing an impossible crime, the offender intends to commit a felony against persons or a
felony against property, and the act performed would have been an offense against person or
property. But a felony against persons or property should not be actually committed, for, otherwise,
he would be liable for that felony. There would be no impossible crime to speak of.
“That the act was done with evil intent”
Since the offender in an impossible crime intended to commit an offense against persons
or against property, it must be shown that the actor performed the act with evil intent, that
is, he must have the intent to do an injury to another.
“Were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the
employment of inadequate or ineffectual means”
In impossible crime, the act performed by the offender cannot produce an offense against persons or
property, because 1) the commission of the offense (against persons or against property) is
inherently impossible; or 2) the means employed is either inadequate or ineffectual.
“Inherent impossibility of its accomplishment”
This phrase means that the act intended by the offender is by its nature one of impossible
accomplishment. There must be either 1) legal impossibility, or 2) physical impossibility of
accomplishing the intended act.
Examples of impossible crimes which are punishable under the Revised Penal Code are:
1) When one tries to kill another by putting in his soup a substance which he believes to
be arsenic when in fact it is common salt; and 2) when one tries to murder a corpse.
“Would be an offense against persons”
Example: A fired at B, who was lying on bed, not knowing that B was dead hours before.
In crime against persons, as would have been in this case, it is necessary that the victim
could be injured or killed. A dead person cannot be injured or killed. Had B been alive
when he was shot, and as a consequence he died, the crime committed by A would have
been murder, a crime against persons.
There is physical and legal impossibility in this example.
“Would be an offense against property”
A, with intent to gain, took a watch from the pocket of B. When A had the watch in his
possession, he found out that it was the watch which he had lost a week before. In other
words, the watch belonged to A. Is this an impossible crime?
It is believed that it may be an impossible crime. The act performed would have been theft
had the watch been the property of B. But there is a legal impossibility of accomplishing it,
because in theft, the personal property taken must belong to another.
An employee who, having known the safe combination, opens the safe in the office for the
purpose of stealing money, but who finds the safe empty, is guilty of an impossible crime.
The act performed would have been a crime of theft were it not for the inherent
impossibility of its accomplishment. If there is no personal property that could be taken, it
is inherently impossible to commit theft.
“Employment of inadequate” means
A, determined to poison B, uses a small quantity of arsenic by mixing it with the food given
to B, believing that the quantity employed by him is sufficient. But since in fact it is not
sufficient, B is not killed. The means employed (small quantity of poison) is inadequate to
kill a person.
Where the means employed is adequate
But where the means employed is adequate and the result expected is not
produced, it is not an impossible crime, but a frustrated felony.
Thus, if the quantity of poison used is sufficient to kill an ordinary person, but the
intended victim has developed strong resistance to poison because he has been
working in a mine, the crime committed is frustrated murder.
Employment of “ineffectual means”
A tried to kill B by putting in his soup a substance which he thought was arsenic when in
fact it was sugar. B could not have been killed, because the means employed was
ineffectual. But A showed criminal tendency and, hence, he should be punished for it in
accordance with Article 4, paragraph 2, in relation to Article 59.
A, with intent to kill B, aimed his revolver at the back of the latter, A, not knowing that it
was empty. When he pressed the trigger it did not fire. The means used by A is ineffectual.
12
 TWO KINDS OF IMPOSSIBILITY
LEGAL IMPOSSIBILITY FACTUAL IMPOSSIBILITY
Legal impossibility occurs where the intended Factual impossibility occurs when extraneous
acts, even if completed, would not amount to a circumstances unknown to the actor or beyond
crime. his control prevent the consummation of the
intended crime.
Examples: 1) When one tries to kill another by
1JD4
putting in his soup a substance which he Examples: 1) When a man puts his hand in the
believes to be arsenic when in fact it is coat pocket of another with the intention to
common salt; and 2) when one tries to murder steal the latter’s wallet and finds the pocket
a corpse. empty; and 2) when the offender shoots the
place where he thought his victim would be,
although in reality, the victim was not present
in said place and thus, he failed to accomplish
his end.
REMEMBER: There is no attempted or frustrated impossible crime.
ARTICLE 6
STAGES OF FELONIES
SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE PHASE OF A FELONY
It is that portion of the acts constituting the crime, starting from the
point where the offender begins the commission of the crime to the
point where he has still control over his acts, including their act’s
natural cause.
If between these two points the offender is stopped by any cause
SUBJECTIVE PHASE outside of his own voluntary desistance, the subjective phase has not
been passed and it is an attempt.
If he is not so stopped but continues until he performs the last act, it
is frustrated, provided the crime is not produced. The acts then of
the offender reached the objective phase of the crime.
It is the result of the acts of the execution, or the accomplishment of
OBJECTIVE PHASE the crime. If subjective and objective phases are present, there is a
consummated felony.
STAGES OF FELONIES
There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission
ATTEMPTED STAGE of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts
of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some
cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.
It is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution
FRUSTRATED STAGE which would produce the felony as a consequence but which,
nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of
the will of the perpetrator.
CONSUMMATED STAGE A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its
execution and accomplishment are present.
DEVELOPMENT OF CRIME
From the moment the culprit conceives the idea of committing a crime up to the realization of the
same, his act passes through certain stages.
These stages are: INTERNAL ACTS and EXTERNAL ACTS.
INTERNAL ACTS, such as mere ideas in the mind of a person, are not punishable even if,
had they been carried out, they would constitute a crime.
Intention and effect must concur.
Mere intention producing no effect is no more than a crime than a mere effect
without the intention is a crime.
Thus, if A intended to commit treason and joined a body of armed men in the
belief that they were Makapilis, when in fact they were Guerrilleros, A was not
liable for treason, despite his intent.
EXTERNAL ACTS cover preparatory acts and acts of execution
PREPARATORY ACTS – ordinarily they are not punishable.
Ordinarily, preparatory acts are not punishable. Hence, proposal and conspiracy
to commit a felony, which are only preparatory acts, are not punishable, except
when the law provides for their punishment in certain felonies.
Examples of preparatory acts are: 1) buying poison or carrying a weapon with
which to kill the intended victim; and 2) carrying inflammable materials to the
place where a house is to be burned, etc.
For merely doing any of these acts, a person is not liable for attempted homicide
or attempted arson, because they do not constitute even the first stage of the
acts of execution of those crimes.
ACTS OF EXECUTION – they are punishable under the Revised Penal Code.
The first stage of the acts of execution of a felony is the attempted; the second
stage is the frustrated; and the last stage is the consummated.
In performing the acts of execution of a felony, the offender may reach only the
first stage or the second stage. In either case, he does not produce the felony
he intends to commit. But he is liable for attempted felony or frustrated felony, as
the case may be.
OVERT ACTS
An overt or external act is defined as some physical activity or deed, indicating the intention to
commit a particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried out to its
complete termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor
by the spontaneous desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete
offense.
13
 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PREPARATORY ACTS AND OVERT ACTS
If A bought poison from a drugstore, in preparation for the killing of B by means of poison, such an
act is only a preparatory act. It is not an overt act, because it has no direct connection with the crime
of murder which A intended to commit. The poison purchased may be used by A to kill rats and
insects. Hence, the act of buying poison did not necessarily disclose an intention to kill a person with
it.
But if A mixed the poison with the food intended for B, and the latter, not knowing that it contained
poison, put into his mouth a spoonful thereof, the act of A was more than a mere planning or
preparation for the commission of murder. The buying of poison and mixing it with the food of B who
1JD4
later put into his mouth part thereof to eat it, taken together, constituted the overt acts of murder. The
nature of the external act thus performed by A clearly indicated that he intended to commit the crime
of murder. If for some reason or another, B threw away the food with poison from his mouth, A is
liable for attempted murder.
STAGES OF EXECUTION IN RELATION TO SPECIFIC FELONIES
In determining whether the felony is only attempted or frustrated or it is consummated, 1) the nature
of the offense; 2) the elements constituting the felony; as well as 3) the manner of committing the
same, must be considered.
Crimes that do not have frustrated stage: Rape, Theft, Bribery (Corruption of Public officer), and
Physical Injuries.
MANNER OF COMMITTING THE CRIME
FORMAL CRIMES
Formal crimes are consummated in one instant, no attempt.
There are crimes, like slander and false testimony, which are consummated in one instant,
by a single act. These are formal crimes.
As a rule, there can be no attempt at a formal crime, because between the thought and
the deed there is no chain of acts that can be severed in any link. Thus, in slander, there is
either a crime or no crime at all, depending upon whether or not defamatory words were
spoken publicly.
MATERIAL CRIMES
In material crimes, there are three stages of execution. There are crimes, like homicide
and rape, which are not consummated in one instant or by a single act. These are material
crimes.
RAPE
In the case of People v. Orita, the Court ruled that there is no crime of frustrated rape.
CONSUMMATED RAPE
Clearly, in the crime of rape, from the moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his victim he
actually attains his purpose and, from that moment also the essential elements of the offense have
been accomplished. Nothing more is left to be done by the offender, because he has performed the
last act necessary to produce the crime. Thus, the felony is consummated.
Carnal knowledge - is defined as the act of a man in having sexual bodily connections with a
woman (Black’s Law Dictionary).
In People v. Hernandez, the accused lay on top of a girl nine years of age for over fifteen minutes.
The girl testified that there was partial penetration of the male organ in her private parts and that she
felt intense pain.
Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ, without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina
is sufficient to warrant conviction of the accused for consummated crime of rape.
The rule is that for the consummation of rape, perfect penetration is not essential. Any penetration
of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient.
Touching when applied to rape cases does not simply mean mere epidermal contact, stroking or
grazing of organs, a slight brush or a scrape of the penis on the external layer of the victim’s vagina,
or the mons pubis. There must be sufficient and convincing proof that the penis indeed touched the
labias or slid into the female organ, and not merely stroked the external surface thereof, for an
accused to be convicted of consummated rape. As the labias, which are required to be “touched” by
the penis, are by their natural situs or location beneath the mons pubis or the vaginal surface, to
touch them with the penis is to attain some degree of penetration beneath the surface, hence, the
conclusion that touching the labia majora or the labia minora of the pudendum constitutes
consummated rape.
ATTEMPTED RAPE
Necessarily, rape is attempted if there is no penetration of the female organ because not all acts of
execution was performed. The offender merely commenced the commission of a felony directly by
overt acts.
Attempted rape is committed, therefore, when the “touching” of the vagina by the penis is coupled
with the intent to penetrate. The intent to penetrate is manifested only through the showing of the
penis capable of consummating the sexual act touching the external genitalia of the female. Without
such showing, only the felony of acts of lasciviousness is committed.
In People v. Brocal, the accused placed himself on top of a woman, and raised her skirt in an effort
to get his knees between her legs while his hands held her arms firmly, endeavoring to have sexual
intercourse with her, but not succeeding because the offended party was able to extricate herself
and run away. The Court held that the case is attempted rape.
Jurisprudence dictates that the labia majora must be entered for rape to be consummated, and not
merely for the penis to stroke the surface of the female organ. Thus, a grazing of the surface of the
female organ or touching the mons pubis of the pudendum is not sufficient to constitute
consummated rape. Absent of any showing of the slightest penetration of the female organ, i.e.,
touching of either labia of the pudendum by the penis, there can be no consummated rape; at most,
it can only be attempted rape, if not acts of lasciviousness.
Article 335, paragraph 3, of the Revised Penal Code provides that whenever the crime of rape is
committed with the use of deadly weapon, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death (the
Court has since 1987 not imposed the death penalty whenever it was called for under the Revised
Penal Code but instead reduced the same to reclusion perpetua).
Intent to lie or penetrate the female defines the distinction between attempted rape and acts of
lasciviousness. The felony of attempted rape requires such intent; the felony of acts of
lasciviousness does not.
Merely climbing on top of a naked female does not constitute attempted rape without proof of his
erectile penis being in a position to penetrate the female’s vagina. He cannot be liable for
attempted rape without such overt acts demonstrating the intent to lie with the female.
The fundamental difference between attempted rape and acts of lasciviousness is the offender’s
intent to lie with the female. In rape, intent to lie with the female is indispensable, but this element
is not required in acts of lasciviousness.
14
 In other words, in rape, there is the intent to lie with a woman whereas in acts of lasciviousness,
such intent is absent.
THEFT
CONSUMMATED THEFT
In theft, the crime is consummated when the thief is able to take or get hold of the thing belonging
1JD4
to another, even if he is not able to carry it away.
In other words, actual taking with intent to gain of personal personal property, belonging to another,
without the latter’s consent, is sufficient to constitute consummated theft. It is not necessary that the
offender carries away or appropriate the property taken.
In the Supply Depot at Quezon City, the accused removed from the pile nine pieces of hospital linen
and took them to their truck where they were found by a corporal of the MP guards when they tried
to pass through the checkpoint. It was held that the crime committed was consummated theft.
(People v. Espiritu).
It was held that the crime of theft was consummated because the thieves were able to take or get
hold of the hospital linen and that the only thing that was frustrated, which does not constitute any
element of theft, is the use or benefit that the thieves expected to derive from the commission of the
offense.
FRUSTRATED THEFT
A truck loaded with stolen boxes of rifles was on the way out of the checkpoint in South Harbor
surrounded by a tall fence when an MP guard discovered the boxes on the truck. It was held that the
crime committed was frustrated theft, because of the timely discovery of the boxes on the truck
before it could pass out of the checkpoint.
It was held that the crime committed is that of frustrated theft, because the fact determinative of
consummation in the crime of theft is the ability of the offender to dispose freely of the stolen articles,
even if it were more or less momentarily.
ATTEMPTED THEFT
The accused was found inside a parked jeep of Captain Parker by an American MP. The jeep’s
padlock had been forced open and lying between the front seats and the gearshift was an iron bar.
Captain Parker was then inside a theater. It was held that the accused already committed to carry
out his felonious intention, and that if he did perform all the acts of execution which should have
produced the crime of theft, it was because of the timely arrival of the MP. The overt acts of the
accused consisted in forcing open the padlock, locking the gearshift to a ring attached to the
dashboard which was placed there to avoid the jeep from being stolen.
In theft, the accused must have intent to steal or animus furandi personal property, meaning the
intent to deprive another of ownership or lawful possession of personal property which intent is
apart from, but concurrent with the general criminal intent which is an essential element of a
felony of dolo (dolos malus). The animo being a state of the mind may be proved by direct or
circumstantial evidence, inclusive of the manner and conduct of the accused before, during and
after the taking of the personal property.
Animus furandi is presumed from the taking of personal property without the consent of the owner
or lawful possessor thereof. The same may be rebutted by the accused by evidence that he took
the personal property under a bona fide belief that he owns the property.
ROBBERY
CONSUMMATED ROBBERY: A robbery is consummated when all the elements necessary for its
execution and accomplishment are present. For example, if an offender successfully takes a purse
from a person by means of violence, such as threatening them with a weapon.
FRUSTRATED ROBBERY: A robbery is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of
execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not
produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. For instance, if an offender
has started to threaten a person with a weapon with the intent to steal their wallet, but is unable to
take it away due to the victim's resistance or intervention by law enforcement, it can be considered
as frustrated robbery.
ATTEMPTED ROBBERY: A robbery is attempted when the offender begins the commission of a
felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution due to some reason or
cause other than his own spontaneous desistance. For example, if an offender is in the act of trying
to threaten a person with a weapon to steal their wallet but is stopped before he can even start
threatening, it can be considered as attempted robbery.
In People v Oasis De la Cruz, et al. Baxa, Tumamao and Marcos were found guilty of attempted
robbery with homicide under article 297 of the Revised Penal Code, with aggravating circumstances
of nocturnity and dwelling. They planned and attempted to rob the residence of one Mariano
Macadangdang where they implied force and intimidation of inhabitants and eventually led to the
death of Juan Cadiz. (NOTE: Seeing the dead body of Juan Cadiz upon forced entry made them
back out and leave the house in hurry)
Animus lucrandi or intent to gain is an internal act which can be established through the over
acts of the offender. The unlawful taking of another’s property gives rise to the presumption that
the act was committed with intent to gain. This presumption holds unless special circumstances
reveal a different intent on the part of the perpetrator.
Any person who, with intent to gain, shall take any personal property belonging to another, by
means of violence against or intimidation of any person or using force upon anything, shall be
guilty of robbery.
HOMICIDE
For the crimes of parricide, homicide, and murder, the following should be considered:
1. With intent to kill, but no mortal wound is inflicted – attempted
2. With intent to kill, and mortal wound is inflicted – frustrated
3. With intent to kill and victim dies – consummated
CONSUMMATED HOMICIDE
In People v. Sazon, the accused-appellant shot the victim in the left forearm. While he and the victim
were grappling for the gun, his co-accused, who has remained at large, stabbed the victim in the
chest. The victim died and it was established that the cause of death was hemorrhage, secondary to
stab wound.
The accused-appellant was found guilty of homicide there being no qualifying circumstance to make
the killing murder. The fact that he did not inflict mortal wound is of no moment, since the existence
of conspiracy was satisfactorily shown by the evidence.
15
FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE
In Martinez v. Court of Appeals, the accused, with the intent to kill and with treachery and evident
premeditation, attacked and assaulted the victim with a bolo, where he was stabbed three times.
Thereby inflicting the victim with injuries that would have produced murder, however it did not result
in death.
The accused and also the petitioner in this case, declared that he only executed self-defense against
the assault of the victim. He declared that before the bolo incident, the victim attacked and punched
him. The CA ruled that the case is more of a “retaliation” rather than a case of self-defense. When
an unlawful aggression which has begun no longer exists, the one making the defense has no more
1JD4
right to kill or even wound the aggressor.
The unlawful aggression of the victim CEASED from the moment he retreated; there was no need
for the petitioner (accused) to follow the victim and stab him with the bolo. The petitioner should
have simply stood his ground and walked away.
ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE
In People v. Ramolete, the accused intended to kill his victim but he was not able to perform all the
acts of execution necessary to consummate the killing. The wounds inflicted did not affect vital
organs. They were not mortal. He first warned his victim before shooting him. The accused is guilty
of attempted homicide.
Intent to kill or animus interficendi is a specific intent that the State (prosecution) must allege in
the information, and then prove by either direct or circumstantial evidence, which is presumed
from the commission of a felony by dolo.
If the victim dies because of a deliberate act of the malefactors, intent to kill is conclusively
presumed. In such a case, even if there is no intent to kill, the crime is homicide because 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.
MURDER
CONSUMMATED MURDER
In People v. Trinidad, the accused was found guilty of the crime murder and attempted murder. The
perpetrator shot the two victims in the head using a carbine. Thus, killing them instantly.
FRUSTRATED MURDER
In People v. Mision, the accused stabbed his two victims as they were about to close their store in
the evening. One of the victims died while the other recovered.
The assault upon the surviving victim constituted frustrated murder, her relatively quick recovery
being the result of prompt medical attention which prevented the infection in the wound from
reaching fatal proportions which would otherwise have ensued. The attack was qualified by
treachery (alevosia).
ATTEMPTED MURDER
In People v. Trinidad, the accused shot three victims, two of which died due to carbine shots in the
head, while the other victim had gotten away from the accused. While the victim was clinging to a
moving vehicle, a spare tire was protecting and shielding his body, he got shot on his thigh.
However, the wound on his thigh was not fatal and the doctrinal rule is that where the wound inflicted
on the victim is not sufficient to cause his death, the crime is only Attempted Murder. So,the accused
can only be convicted of Attempted Murder because the accused commenced the commission of the
felony directly by overt acts BUT was unable to perform all the acts of execution.
Intent to kill or animus interficendi is a specific intent that the State (prosecution) must allege in
the information, and then prove by either direct or circumstantial evidence, which is presumed
from the commission of a felony by dolo.
If the victim dies because of a deliberate act of the malefactors, intent to kill is conclusively
presumed. In such a case, even if there is no intent to kill, the crime is homicide because 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.
PHYSICAL INJURIES
There is no crime of attempted or frustrated physical injuries because the mere inflicting of
injuries already consummates the crime. If one inflicts physical injuries on another but the latter
survives, the crime committed is either consummated physical injuries, if the offender had no
intention to kill the victim, or frustrated or attempted homicide or frustrated or attempted murder if the
offender intends to kill the victim.
In physical injuries, intent to injure or animus iniuriandi must be present in order to be found
guilty of any of the felonious acts under Articles 262 to 266 of the Revised Penal Code. The
physical injuries must be coupled with dolus malus.
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 accused cannot be found guilty of
a physical injury.
ESTAFA
FORMS OF COMMITTING ESTAFA or SWINDLING:
(a) Unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence;
(b) By means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts, and
(c) Through fraudulent means (DECEIT).
REQUISITES OF ESTAFA:
(1) There must be a false pretense, fraudulent acts or fraudulent means;
(2) Such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means must be made or executed prior
to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud;
(3) The offended party must have relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent
means and was thus induced to part with his money or property; and
(4) As a result thereof, the offended party suffered damage.
CONSUMMATED ESTAFA by means of deceit
Estafa is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
present. For example, if an offender borrowed a vehicle from the victim for a week, and after a week
the offender did not return the victim’s car by a false pretense, fraudulent acts or means where the
offended party suffered damage.
16
FRUSTRATED ESTAFA by means of deceit
In US v. Dominguez, the accused was a salesman who received a sum of seven pesos and fifty
centavos to be turned over and delivered to the cashier. However, the accused misappropriated the
money and converted it to his personal use. The accused alleged that he did not deliver the money
immediately after the sale because he had to go to the toilet. The cashier then caught up with him,
only then did the accused deliver the money.
The SC of Spain declared that the offense is frustrated because the accused performs all the acts of
execution which would have produced the crime, and nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of
causes independent of the will of the actor. SO, the appellant of this case is guilty of the frustrated
1JD4
offense of estafa.
ATTEMPTED ESTAFA by means of deceit
In U.S. v. Villanueva, the accused fraudulently assumed authority to demand fees for the Bureau of
Forestry, when he noticed that timber was cut in the forest by the complainant without permit and
used it in building his house.
The fraudulent and false representation of the accused that he was authorized to collect P6.00 is the
overt act. The refusal or inability of the complainant to give P6.00 to the accused is a cause which
prevented the latter from performing all the acts of execution.
Estafa is a felony committed by dolo (with malice). For one to be criminally liable for estafa under
paragraph 2 (d) of Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code, malice and specific intent to defraud
are required.
There can be no estafa if the accused acted in good faith because good faith negates malice and
deceit.
BRIBERY
Crimes requiring the intervention of two persons to commit them are consummated by mere
agreement.
In those crimes, like betting in sport contests (Article 197) and corruption of public officers (Article
212), which require the intervention of two persons to commit them, the same are consummated by
mere agreement. The offer made by one of the parties to the other constitutes attempted felony, if
the offer is rejected.
In view of the rule stated, it would seem that there is no frustrated bribery (corruption of public
officers). But in the case of People v. Diego Quin, it was held by the Supreme Court that where the
defendant fails to corrupt a public officer, because the latter returned the money given by the
defendant, the crime committed is frustrated bribery (frustrated corruption of public officer) under
Article 212 in relation to Article 6.
In the case of U.S. v. Te Tong, where the roll of bills amounting to P500 was accepted by the police
officer for the purpose of using the same as evidence in the prosecution of the accused for
attempted bribery (attempted corruption of a public officer), it was held that the accused who
delivered the money was guilty of attempted bribery.
ARSON
In Arson, it is not necessary that the property is totally destroyed. The crime of arson is therefore,
consummated even if only a portion of the wall or any other part of the house is burned. The
consummation of the crime of arson does not depend upon the extent of the damage caused.
(People v. Hernandez).
The fact of having set fire to some rags and jute sacks, soaked in kerosene oil, and placing them
near the wooden partition of the house, should not be qualified as consummated arson, inasmuch as
no part of the house began to burn. It is only frustrated arson.
When a person had poured gasoline under the house of another and was about to strike a match to
set the house on fire when he was apprehended, he was guilty of attempted arson. The acts
performed by him are directly connected with the crime of arson, the offense he intended to commit.
The pouring of the gasoline under the house and the striking of the match could not be for any other
purpose.
If there was a blaze, but no part of the house is burned, the crime of arson is frustrated. If any part
of the house, no matter how small, is burned, the crime of arson is consummated.
ARTICLE 8
Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in which the law
specially provides a penalty therefore. 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 a proposal when
the person who has decided to commit a felony proposes its execution to some other person or
persons.
Pascual v People
This case involved the crime of Homicide and Frustrated Homicide. The accused, Erwin Pascual y
Francisco and Wilbert Sarmiento y Muñoz, were found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. For the
death of Ernanie Rabang y Laquindanum and Joel Deang y Sese. The case highlighted the concept
of conspiracy as the accused were charged with coming to an agreement concerning the
commission of a felony and deciding to commit it.
ARTICLE 10
"Offenses not subject to the provisions of this Code. - Offenses which are or in the future may be
punishable under special penal laws are not subject to the provision of this Code. This Code will be
supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should specially provide the contrary."
- The first part of the provision states that offenses which are or may in the future be punishable
under special penal laws are not subject to the provisions of this code. This means that if a crime is
covered by a special law, then that special law will be used to judge the crime, not the code
mentioned in this provision.
- The second part of the provision states that this code will be supplementary to such laws, unless
the latter should specially provide the contrary. This means that the code can still apply in addition to
the special law, unless the special law specifically states that the code should not apply.
In Go-Tan vs. Tan, the court ruled that the parents in law should be included as respondents of the
protection order filed by the petitioner in this case this is in pursuant of the Sec 47 of the
Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004 which provides suppletory application
of the Revised Penal Code (RPC).
LEGAL MAXIMS
Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea. A crime is not committed if the mind of the person
performing the act complained of is innocent.
Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege. There is no crime when there is no law punishing it.
Actus me invito factus non est meus actus. An act done by me against my will is not my act.
17
 INTENT - Intent is the purpose to use a particular means to effect such a result.
DURATION OF PENALTIES IN THE REVISED PENAL CODE
MOTIVE - Motive is the moving power which impels one to action for a definite result.
Article 27 of Revised Penal Code CONSUMMATED FELONY - A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its
execution and accomplishment are present.
RECLUSION PERPETUA From 20 years and 1 day to 40 years
FRUSTRATED FELONY - When the offender performs all the acts of execution which would
produce the felony as a consequence but which nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
RECLUSION TEMPORAL From 12 years and 1 day to 20 years independent of the will of the perpetrator.

1JD4
PRISION MAYOR From 6 years and 1 day to 12 years ATTEMPTED FELONY - When the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt
acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of
some causes or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.
PRISION CORRECTIONAL From 6 months and 1 day to 6 years
OVERT ACTS - An overt act is some physical activity or deed, indicating the intention to commit a
ARRESTO MAYOR From 1 month and 1 day to 6 months particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried to its complete
termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the
voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete offense.
ARRESTO MENOR From 1 day to 30 days
INDETERMINATE OFFENSE - One where the purpose of the offender in performing an act is not
certain. Its nature in relation to its objective is ambiguous.
DEFINITION OF TERMS
CONSPIRACY - Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the
commission of a felony and decide to commit it.
CRIMINAL LAW - Is that branch or division of law which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and
provides for their punishment. PROPOSAL - There is a proposal when the person who has decided to commit a felony proposes
its execution to some other person or persons.
CRIME - An act committed or omitted in violation of public law forbidding or commanding it.
IMPUTABILITY - The quality by which an act may be ascribed to a person as its author or owner. It
GENERAL PRINCIPLE - Criminal law is binding on all persons who live or sojourn in Philippine implies that the act committed has been freely and consciously done and may, therefore, be put
territory. down to the doer as his very own.

TERRITORIAL PRINCIPLE - Criminal law is binding on all persons who live or sojourn in Philippine RESPONSIBILITY - The obligation of suffering the consequences of crime. It is the obligation of
territory. taking the penal and civil consequences of the crime.

PROSPECTIVITY PRINCIPLE - A penal law cannot make an act punishable in a manner in which it GUILT - Guilt is an element of responsibility, for a man cannot be made to answer for the
was not punishable when committed. consequences of a crime unless he is guilty.

FRENCH RULE - Such crimes are not triable in courts of that country, unless their commission GRAVE FELONIES - Are those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or penalties which
affects the peace and security of the territory or the safety of the state is endangered. in any of their periods are afflictive.

ENGLISH RULE - Such crimes are triable in that country, unless they merely affect things within the LESS GRAVE FELONIES - Are those which the law punishes with penalties which in their maximum
vessel or they refer to the internal management thereof. period are correctional.

FELONIES - Felonies are acts or omissions punishable by the Revised Penal Code.
ACT - Any bodily movement tending to produce some effect in the external world.
OMISSION - Is meant inaction, the failure to perform a positive duty which one is bound to do.
MISTAKE OF FACT - Is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the person who caused injury to
another.
MALA IN SE - Wrongful from their nature, those so serious in their effects on society as to call for
the almost unanimous condemnation of its members and defined and penalized by the Revised
Penal Code.
MALA PROHIBITA - Wrong merely because prohibited by statute, are violations of mere rules of
convenience designed to secure a more orderly regulation of the affairs of society. The term “mala
prohibita” refers generally to acts made criminal by special laws.
LIGHT FELONIES - Are those infractions of law for the commission of which the penalty of arresto
menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, is provided.
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES - Are those where the act of a person is said to be in accordance
with law, so that such person is deemed not to have transgressed the law and is free from both
criminal and civil liability.
EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES (Non-imputability) - Are those grounds for exemption from
punishment because there is wanting in the agent of the crime any of the conditions which make the
act voluntary, or negligent.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES - Are those which, if present in the commission of the crime, do
not entirely free the actor from criminal liability but only serve to reduce the penalty.
18
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES - Are those which, if attendant in the commission of the crime,
serve to increase the penalty without, however, exceeding the maximum of the penalty provided by
law for the offense.
GENERIC (Kind of aggravating circumstances) - Those that can generally apply to all crimes.
RESTITUTION - In theft, the culprit is duty bound to return the property stolen.
REPARATION - In case of inability to return the property stolen, the culprit must pay the value of the
property stolen.

SPECIFIC (Kind of aggravating circumstances) - Those that apply only to particular crimes.
QUALIFYING (Kind of aggravating circumstances) - Those that change the nature of the crime.
INHERENT (Kind of aggravating circumstances) - Those that must of necessity accompany the
APPEAL - A request to a higher (appellate) court for that court to review and change the decision of
a lower court.
ASSAULT - A threat or use of force on another that causes that person to have a reasonable
apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact; the act of putting another person in

1JD4
commission of the crime.
ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES - Aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and effect of
the crime and other conditions attending its commission.
INSTIGATION - Public officer or private detective induces an innocent person to commit a crime and
would arrest him upon or after the commission of the crime by him.
reasonable fear or apprehension of an immediate battery by means of an act amounting to an
attempt or threat to commit a battery.
ACQUITTAL - A jury verdict that a criminal defendant is not guilty or the finding of a judge that the
evidence is insufficient to support a conviction.
BATTERY - The application of force to another, resulting in harmful or offensive contact.

ENTRAPMENT - A person has planned or is about to commit crime and ways and means are
resorted to by a public officer to trap and catch the criminal; not a defense.

ACCIDENT - Any happening beyond control of persons, consequences of which are not
foreseeable.

TREACHERY - When the offender commits any of the crime against the person, employing means,
methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution,
without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.

IGNOMINY - Moral suffering.

CRUELTY - Deliberate intention to prolong physical suffering of the victim.

HABITUAL DELINQUENCY - Within 10 years from last release or last conviction of the crime of
falsification, robbery, estafa, theft, serious or less serious physical injuries, the offender is found
guilty of any of said crimes a third time or often.

RECIDIVISM - When the time of trial for one crime, shall have been previously convicted by final
judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of the Revised Penal Code.

QUASI-RECIDIVISM - Commits a felony after having been convicted by final judgment, before
beginning to serve such, or while serving the same, shall be punished by maximum period of penalty
prescribed by law for new felony.

OFFENSE - An act or omission that is punishable by special laws such as Republic Acts,
Presidential Decrees, Executive Orders, Memorandum Circulars, Ordinances and Rules and
Regulations.

PENALTY - Penalty is the suffering that is inflicted by the State for the transgression of a law.

COMPLEX CRIME - When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies, or when
an offense is a necessary means for committing the other, the penalty for the most serious crime
shall be imposed.

CONTINUED CRIME - A continued crime is a single crime, consisting of a series of acts but all
arising from one criminal resolution.

ABERRATIO ICTUS - Mistake in the blow.

ERROR IN PERSONAE - Mistake in the identity of the victim.

PRAETER INTENTIONEM - The injurious result is greater than that intended.

19
 There is a reasonable basis to presume that there was a threat to the life of the appellant. It would
ARTICLE 11. JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES have been fatal for the appellant to have waited for Espejo to point his gun before the appellant fired
back.

Nature. Under this Article, the acts of the actor are in accordance with law and, hence, he incurs no
criminal and civil liability. The crime as the source of obligation is not present.
Effect. An accused who invokes a justifying circumstance under Article 11 of the Revised Penal
Code admits to the commission of acts, which would otherwise engender criminal liability. However,
he asserts that he is justified in committing the acts.
B. TEST OF REAL AND IMMINENT DANGER
Senoja v. People
Self-defense. The right of self-defense proceeds from necessity and is limited by it. The right begins
where necessity does, and ends where it ends. There is, however, a perceptible difference between
necessity and self-defense, which is that, self-defense excuses the repulse of a wrong; necessity

1JD4
Conviction follows if the evidence for the accused fails to prove the existence of justifying justifies the invasion of a right. Hence, it is essential to self-defense that it should be a defense
circumstances. against a present unlawful attack.

The following are the justifying circumstances: Reasonable Necessity. Life can be taken under the plea of necessity, when necessary for the
preservation of the life of the party setting up the plea. Self-defense is an act to save life; hence, it is
● Self-defense; right and not a crime. There is a need for one, indeed, for it is a natural right for one to defend
● Defense of relative; oneself when confronted by an unlawful aggression by another.
● Defense of a stranger;
● State of necessity; It is a settled rule that to constitute aggression, the person attacked must be confronted by a real
● Fulfillment of duty; threat on his life and limb; and the peril sought to be avoided is imminent and actual, not merely
● Obedience to superior order. imaginary. Absent such an actual or imminent peril to one's life or limb, there is nothing to repel;
there is no necessity to take the life or inflict injuries on another.
SELF-DEFENSE C. REASONABLE NECESSITY

Nature. To protect, repel, and save his person and rights from impending danger and peril. It is People v. Razon
based on the impulse of self-preservation born to man and part of his nature as a human being.
It is settled that the moment the first aggressor runs away, unlawful aggression on the part of the first
A. UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION aggressor ceases to exist; and when unlawful aggression ceases, the defender no longer has any
right to kill or wound the former aggressor; otherwise, retaliation and not self-defense is committed.
People v. Manaban
Retaliation is not the same as self-defense. In retaliation, the aggression that was begun by the
Unlawful aggression is an actual physical assault or at least a threat to attack or inflict physical injury injured party already ceased when the accused attacked him, while in self-defense the aggression
upon a person. was still existing when the aggressor was injured by the accused.

A mere threatening or intimidating attitude is not considered unlawful aggression, unless the threat is The defense employed by the petitioner also cannot be said to be reasonable. The means
offensive and menacing, manifestly showing the wrongful intent to cause injury. employed by a person claiming self-defense must be commensurate to the nature and the
extent of the attack sought to be averted, and must be rationally necessary to prevent or
There must be an actual, sudden, unexpected attack or imminent danger thereof, which puts the repel an unlawful aggression.
defendant's life in real peril.
Eslabon v. People
People v. Alconga
D. SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION
The accused was no longer acting in self-defense when he pursued the victim, there being then no
more aggression to defend against, it ceased from the moment the deceased took to his heels. People v. Oriente

There can be no defense where there is no unlawful aggression. The fact that a heated or intense argument preceded the incident is not by itself sufficient
provocation on the part of the offended party. Provocation is any unjust or improper conduct of the
People v. Genosa offended party, capable of exciting, inciting, or irritating anyone.

In the legal context, self-defense requires that there be unlawful aggression, which is the most In order to be mitigating, provocation must be sufficient and should immediately precede the act.
essential element. Without unlawful aggression, there can be no self-defense, either complete or
incomplete. It is sufficient if it is adequate to excite a person to commit the wrong, which must accordingly be
proportionate in gravity. That, the provocation must immediately precede the act means that there
Nacnac v. People should not be any interval of time between the provocation by the offended party and the
commission of the crime by the person provoked.
The victim in this case is a police officer who is trained on using firearms. He reached for his own
firearm and pointed it at the petitioner. Petitioner was, therefore, justified in defending himself from a
drunk and disobedient colleague.

20
 E. DEFENSE OF PROPERTY
People v. Apolinar
The right to property is not as important as the right to life.
Defense to property can be invoked as a justifying circumstance only when, 1) there is an attack on
the property; 2) coupled with an attack on the person of one entrusted with said property.
F. SELF-DEFENSE IN LIBEL
1JD4
People v. Chua Hong
Self-defense also applies to the crime of libel. Self-defense is man’s inborn right.
When a person is libeled, he may hit back with another libel, which, if adequate, will be justified.
However, defensive libel is only proper if there was a previous libel made.
G. SELF-DEFENSE OF CHASTITY
Rape = unlawful aggression => exemption to criminal liability
NO attempt to rape/rape is NOT possible to commit
= NO unlawful aggression => cannot be exempted from criminal liability
People v. Jaurigue
Women are permitted to use all reasonable means available within their reach under the
circumstance to defend their honor when brutally attacked.
People v. Dela Cruz
There must be an attempted rape against the woman for to her be entitled to a complete self
defense. It is not necessary for the act to be consummated, a mere danger of which justifies the
killing of the offender, provided that she has no other means to defend herself.
People v. Jaurigue
There is no self defense against chastity when the deceased sat beside the defendant at a bench
in the chapel and placed his hand on the upper portion of the thigh of a woman w/o her consent. The
said chapel was well lit with several people in attendance including the defendant’s father and a
barrio lieutenant. Rape, is not possible under the given circumstance. The defendant inflicting
mortal wound against the deceased w/c later caused his death, is evidently excessive and does
not entitle her of exemption from criminal liability.
DEFENSE OF RELATIVE
In case provocation was given by the person attacked, the person making the defense had no part in
the provocation.
Relatives covered:
- Spouses;
- Ascendants;
- Descendants;
- Legitimate, natural/adopted siblings;
- Relatives by affinity of the same degree and those by consanguinity up to 4th civil degree.
● the list is exclusive, relatives who are not mentioned are considered as strangers
People v. Arnante
Unlawful aggression is essential in justifying defense of relatives (whether complete or incomplete).
As there would be nothing to defend if such unlawful aggression is not present.
DEFENSE OF A STRANGER
The person defending is not induced by revenge or resentment or other evil motives.
People v. Bautista
Unlawful aggression on the part of the victim is essential, other requisites are unnecessary w/o it as
the defense of a stranger would not prosper w/o a leg to stand on.
Pat. Almeda v People
The location and severity of fatal wounds of the victim belie claim of defense of the stranger but is
indicative of a determined effort to kill when the victim was hit on vital parts of his body (head, heart,
chest, and neck).
There is no defense of a stranger when the accused acted with resentment. In Paera v. People, the
accused angrily threatened the victim with bodily harm when the victim refused to follow his water
distribution scheme.
STATE OF NECESSITY
People v. Punzalan
Evil must actually exist. Avoidance of greater evil/injury cannot be invoked by the accused as an
“alleged” evil. The accused’s assertions against the existence of evil w/c he sought to be avoided did
not actually exist nor conform to evidence and testimony of his own witness.
Tan v. Standard Vacuum Oil
The accused were acquitted from charges of arson as they tried to avoid greater evil or harm by
driving the truck in the middle of the street to move further from gasoline deposit houses nearby.
Accused cannot in any manner be held responsible, because he was not the cause of it, he only
took all the necessary precautions against such contingency as he was confronted with.
FULFILLMENT OF DUTY
Requisites:
1) The offender acted in the performance of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right; and
2) The injury or offense committed is the necessary consequence of the performance of
such duty or the lawful exercise of such right or office.
People v. Oanis
The accused, Oanis and Galanta, were acting in the performance of their duty to arrest Balagtas, a
notorious criminal. This fulfills the first requisite. However, they failed to meet the second requisite
because the crime they committed (killing Tecson) was not a necessary consequence of their duty.
They were supposed to arrest Balagtas, dead or alive, if he resisted and they were overpowered.
But they killed Tecson without any resistance from him and without making any previous inquiry as to
his identity. Therefore the accused cannot avail the justifying circumstance of fulfillment of duty.
21
 People v. Pajenado
The justifying circumstance of fulfillment of duty lies upon proof that the offense was the necessary
consequence of performing such duty.
Paera v. People
A Brgy. Capt. was in fulfillment of his duty to “ensure delivery of basic services” when he barred the
victims’ access to communal water tanks. However, he evaded the bounds of his office when he
chased the victims of a bladed weapon for violating his order.
1JD4
People v. Ulep
The right to kill is not absolute, and may be used only as a last resort. The law does not clothe police
officers w/ authority to arbitrarily judge the necessity to kill. They must act in conformity with sound
mind and purpose of law.
People v. Delima
The court held that unlawful aggression on the part of the victim is NOT a requisite to invoke
fulfillment of duty. The policeman in this case was after an escapee who was armed with a lance
shaped bamboo. He caught him and they engaged in a fight then the fugitive ran away (still armed).
The police ran after and shot him dead.
The fugitive’s unlawful aggression ceased when he ran away. If the policeman were a private
person, there would be no grounds for self-defense. And the killing will not be justified as the
unlawful aggression has ended when the victim was killed. However in this case the policeman was
acquitted on the ground that the killing was done in the fulfillment of duty.
There is no fulfillment of duty when the victim no longer poses a threat when killed. In People v.
Ulep, shooting the victim on his head followed by his death was unnecessary as he was already
lying on the ground after being shot on different parts of his body, thus he is incapable of mounting
an aggression.
OBEDIENCE TO LAWFUL ORDER
Both the order and means used must be lawful to avail this justifying circumstance.
Ambil, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan
The petitioner Ambil, Jr. who was then a governor ordered petitioner Apelado, Sr. in his capacity as
then Provincial Jail warden of Eastern Samar to fetch and bring Mayor Adalim from the provincial jail
to the governor’s house. Apelado then unlawfully transported Andalim without court order. Apelado
cannot invoke obedience to lawful order.
Tabuena v. Sandiganbayan
Luis A. Tabuena and Adolfo M. Peralta were initially found guilty of malversing P55 Million of Manila
International Airport Authority (MIAA) funds. They were sentenced to imprisonment and ordered to
reimburse the MIAA. However, it was contended that Tabuena was acting on an order from then
President Marcos. The case was eventually reversed and the court held that the Marcos
Memorandum is patently legal and the petitioner merely compiled to an order issued by a superior
for some lawful purpose.
People v. Barroga, 54 Phil. 247
Between a general law which enjoins obedience to a superior giving just orders and a prohibitive law
which forbids what the superior commands, the prohibitive law shall govern.
People v. Manayo
Pedro Manayao, a Makapili member, was charged with treason and multiple murder for killing 60 to
70 (supporters and relatives of guerillas fighting against the Japanese forces). It’s inferred that
Manayao may have been acting under orders from his Japanese superiors. However obedience to
superior order does not include orders from foreign sovereign, the respondent cannot invoke such
justifying circumstance.
BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROME (RA No. 9262)
Scientifically defined pattern of psychological and behavioral symptoms found in women living in
battering relationships as a result of cumulative abuse.
SEC. 26 R.A. 9262
Victim-survivors who are found by court suffering from BWS do not incur criminal and civil liability
regardless of the absence of the elements of the justifying circumstance of self-defense under RPC.
People v. Genosa
The offender must prove the cycle of violence w/c consists: Tension-building phase, Acute-battering
phase, Tranquil phase. The couple must go through the cycle at least twice for the woman to be
identified as a battered woman.
Tension-building phase
Consists of minor battering (verbal and physical abuse), where the woman tries to pacify the batterer
by nurturing behavior or passively staying out of his way. She allows herself to be abused in ways
that are “minor” to her. However this passive behavior legitimizes the abuser’s belief that he has the
right to abuse her.
Acute-battering phase
Characterized by brutality, destructiveness, could lead to death. The wife feels helpless that abuse is
something unpredictable yet inevitable and only her abuser may put an end to her suffering. Her
resistance only exacerbated her condition.
Tranquil phase
A phase when the acute battering ends, and the batterer shows nurturing behavior. While the
battered women try to convince herself that the battery will not happen again.
Expert witness (evidence)
- To understand the syndrome properly, the mind of a person who has been suffering from a
battery may not be consistent with those who have not.
- An expert opinion is necessary to clarify and refute misconceptions about battered
women.
BWS is akin to self defense
- The existence of BWS in the relationship does not justify the killing of an abusive partner.
It must be proven in the context of self defense.
- Unlawful aggression is the most essential element of self-defense. In People v. Genosa,
the court found that there was a sufficient time interval between the unlawful aggression
by the abuser and the fatal attack against him. The husband was sleeping when the
respondent shot him in his head following his death. He was no longer in the position that
threatened the wife’s safety. However when a person is already suffering from BWS
further evidence of an assault at the time of the killing is not required.
22
BWS as mitigating circumstance ((9) (10) Art. 13 RPC) PARAGRAPH 1 - AN IMBECILE OR AN INSANE PERSON, UNLESS THE LATTER HAS
ACTED DURING A LUCID INTERVAL.
- The severity of violence inflicted upon the woman resulted in “cumulative provocation w/c
broke down her psychological resistance and natural self-control” where the woman’s will
power or ability to control her actions is diminished, but she is still aware of what she is
doing. Imbecility distinguished from insanity

Passion and Obfuscation ((6) Art. 13 RPC) While the imbecile is exempt in all cases from criminal liability, the insane is not exempt if it
can be shown that he acted during a lucid interval. During the lucid interval, the insane
- The crime was committed as a result of uncontrollable bursts of passion provoked by prior acts with intelligence.
unjust/improper acts or by a legitimate stimulus so powerful as to overcome reason. The

1JD4
act (unlawful and provocative) is not far removed from the commission of the crime by a An imbecile is one who, while advanced in age, has a mental development comparable to
considerable length of time during w/c the accused might regain soundness of mind. that of children between two and seven years of age. It is one who is deprived completely
of reason or discernment and freedom of the will at the time of committing the crime.

To constitute insanity, there must be complete deprivation of intelligence or that there be a

ARTICLE 12. EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES total deprivation of the freedom of the will.

Nature. Circumstances where the law exempts the offender from criminal liability due to the absence
of any that would make an act voluntary. There is still CIVIL LIABILITY.
→ complete ABSENCE of intelligence, freedom of action, or intent on the part of the accused.
Definition
Exempting circumstances are those grounds for exemption from punishment because
there is wanting in the agent of the crime any of the conditions which make the act
voluntary or negligent.
Basis
In order that the exempting circumstance of insanity may be taken into account, it is
necessary that there be a complete deprivation of intelligence while committing the act,
that is, that the accused be deprived of reason; that he acts without the least discernment;
or that there be a total deprivation of freedom of the will.
Insanity exists when there is a complete deprivation of intelligence in committing the act,
that is, the accused is deprived of reason, he acts without the least discernment, because
there is a complete absence of the power to discern, or that there is a total deprivation of
freedom of the will. Thus, mere abnormality of mental faculties is not enough, especially if
the offender has not lost consciousness of his acts. At most, it is only a mitigating
circumstance.

The exemption from punishment is based on the complete absence of intelligence, Insanity at the time of the commission of the felony distinguished from insanity at the time of
freedom of action, or intent or on the absence of negligence on the part of the accused. the trial.

EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE BASIS When he was sane at the time of the commission of the crime, but he becomes insane at
the time of the trial, he is liable criminally. The trial, however, will be suspended until the
Insanity/Imbecility Lack of intelligence mental capacity of the accused is restored to afford him a fair trial.

Minority Lack of intelligence PARAGRAPH 2. - A PERSON UNDER NINE YEARS OF AGE.

Accident without fault or intention of causing it Lack of criminal intent

“Under nine years” to be construed as “nine years of less.”

Age of absolute irresponsibility raised to fifteen years of age.

Compulsion of irresistible force Lack of freedom Republic Act No. 9344, otherwise known as “Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006,” raised the
age of absolute irresponsibility from nine years to fifteen years of age. Under Section 6 of the said
Uncontrollable fear Lack of freedom law, a child fifteen years of age or under at the time of the commission of the offense shall be exempt
Prevented by some lawful or insuperable Lack of criminal intent from criminal liability. However, the child shall be subject to an intervention program as provided
cause under Section 20 of the same law.

Read Republic Act No. 10630 for amendments of Republic Act No. 9344

In exempting circumstances, there is a crime committed but no criminal liability arises.

PARAGRAPH 3 - A PERSON OVER NINE YEARS OF AGE AND UNDER FIFTEEN, UNLESS
Technically, one who acts by virtue of any of the exempting circumstances commits a HE HAS ACTED WITH DISCERNMENT, IN WHICH CASE, SUCH MINOR SHALL BE
crime, although by the complete absence of any of the conditions which constitute free will PROCEEDED AGAINST IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 80 OF
or voluntariness of the act, no criminal liability arises. THIS CODE.

Paragraph 3, Article 12 of the RPC impliedly repealed by Republic Act No. 9344.

Children above fifteen but below eighteen years of age who acted without discernment
exempt from criminal liability.

23
 A minor under eighteen but above fifteen must have acted with discernment to incur
criminal liability. The minor is presumed to have acted without discernment since the
phrase “unless he/she acted with discernment” indicates an exception to the general rule
that a minor under 18 but above 15 has acted without discernment.
Thus, it is incumbent upon the prosecution to prove that a minor who is over 15 but under
18 years of age has acted with discernment, in order for the minor not to be entitled to this
exempting circumstance.
Periods of criminal responsibility
1JD4
1. The age of absolute irresponsibility - 15 years and below (infancy).
2. The age of conditional responsibility - 15 years and 1 day to 18 years.
3. The age of full responsibility - 18 years or over (adolescence) to 70 (maturity).
4. The age of mitigated responsibility - 15 years and 1 day to 18 years, the offender
acting with discernment; over 70 years of age.
Meaning of “discernment.”
Discernment means the capacity of the child at the time of the commission of the offense
to understand the difference between right and wrong and the consequence of the
wrongful act.
Discernment and Intent distinguished
While both are products of the mental processes within a person, “intent” refers to the
desired act of the person while “discernment” relates to the moral significance that a
person ascribes to the said act. Hence, a person may not intend to shoot another but may
be aware of the consequences of his negligent act which may cause injury to the same
person in negligently handling the air rifle.
PARAGRAPH 4 - ANY PERSON WHO, WHILE PERFORMING A LAWFUL ACT WITH DUE
CARE, CAUSES AN INJURY BY MERE ACCIDENT WITHOUT FAULT OR INTENTION OF
CAUSING IT.
Elements:
1. A person is performing a lawful act;
2. With due care;
3. He causes an injury to another by mere accident;
4. Without fault or intention of causing it.
What is an accident?
An accident is something that happens outside the sway of our will, and although it comes
about through some act of our will, lies beyond the bounds of humanly foreseeable
consequences. If the consequences are plainly foreseeable, it will be a case of
negligence.
PARAGRAPH 5 - ANY PERSON WHO ACTS UNDER THE COMPULSION OF AN
IRRESISTIBLE FORCE.
Elements:
1. That the compulsion is by means of physical force.
2. That the physical force must be irresistible.
3. That the physical force must come from a third person.
Passion or obfuscation cannot be an irresistible force.
The irresistible force can never consist in an impulse or passion, or obfuscation. It must consist of an
extraneous force coming from a third person.
PARAGRAPH 6 - ANY PERSON WHO ACTS UNDER THE IMPULSE OF AN
UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR OF AN EQUAL OR GREATER INJURY.
This exempting circumstance also presupposes that a person is compelled to commit a crime by
another, but the compulsion is by means of intimidation or threat, not force or violence.
Elements:
1. That the threat which causes the fear is an evil greater than or at least equal to, that
which he is required to commit;
2. That it promises an evil of such gravity and imminence that the ordinary man would
have succumbed to it.
Requisites:
1. Existence of an uncontrollable fear;
2. The fear must be real and imminent; and
3. The fear of an injury is greater than or at least equal to that committed.
The accused must not have an opportunity for escape or self-defense.
A threat of future injury is not enough. The compulsion must be of such character as to
leave no opportunity to the accused for escape or self-defense in equal combat.
Distinction between irresistible force and uncontrollable fear.
In irresistible force, the offender uses violence or physical force to compel another person
to commit a crime.
In uncontrollable fear, the offender employs intimidation or threat in compelling another to
commit a crime.
“Actus me invito factus non est meus actus.” (“An act done by me against my will is not my act.”)
PARAGRAPH 7 - ANY PERSON WHO FAILS TO PERFORM AN ACT REQUIRED BY LAW,
WHEN PREVENTED BY SOME LAWFUL OR INSUPERABLE CAUSE.
Elements:
1. That an act is required by law to be done;
2. That a person fails to perform such act;
3. That his failure to perform such an act was due to some lawful or insuperable cause.
Distinction between justifying and exempting circumstances.
1. A person who acts by virtue of justifying circumstances does not transgress the law, that
is, he does not commit any crime in the eyes of the law, because there is nothing unlawful
in the act as well as in the intention of the actor. The act of such a person is in itself not
just and lawful.
In justifying circumstances, there is neither a crime nor a criminal. No civil liability, except
in Par. 4 (causing damage to another state of necessity).
24
 2. In exempting circumstances, there is a crime but no criminal liability. The act is not Types.
justified, but the actor is not criminally liable. There is civil liability, except in Pars. 4 and 7
(causing an injury by mere accident; failing to perform an act required by law when A. Incomplete Self-Defense, Defense of Relatives, Defense of Strangers
prevented by some lawful or insuperable cause) of Art. 12. B. Incomplete Fulfillment of Duty or Lawful Practise of Right or Office
C. Minority
Absolutory Causes, defined. D. The Offender had No Intention to Commit Such Grave a Wrong (Praeter Inentionem)
E. Sufficient Provocation or Threat on the Part of the Offended Party Immediately Preceding
Absolutory causes are those where the act committed is a crime but for reasons of public the Act
policy and sentiment there is no penalty imposed. F. Immediate Vindication of a Grave Offense
G. Passion and Obfuscation
Entrapment and instigation distinguished. H. Voluntary Surrender/Voluntary Plea

1JD4
I. Offender is Deaf & Dumb or Blind
There is a wide difference between an entrapment and instigation, for while in the latter (e) Illness that diminishes the Exercise of Will-power
case the instigator practically induces the would-be accused into the commission of the
offense and himself becomes a co-principal, in entrapment, ways and means are resorted
to for the purpose of trapping and capturing the lawbreaker in the execution of his criminal
plan. Entrapment is no bar to the prosecution and conviction of the lawbreaker. But when ORDINARY PRIVILEGED
there is instigation, the accused must be acquitted.

Instigation must be made by public officers or private detectives.

✅ offset by an aggravating circumstance ❌ cannot be offset
If not offset, effect is imposing a lesser penalty Effect is imposing the penalty by one or two
A criminal act may not be punishable if the accused was induced to commit it by active degrees lower than provided by law
cooperation and instigation on the part of public detectives.
If the one who made the instigation is a private individual, not performing public function,
both he and the one induced are criminally liable for the crime committed: the former, as Others not privileged (ex. Concealment of Example : incomplete self defense + minority
principal by induction and the latter, as principal by direct participation. dishonor of the mother in infanticide)

Assurance of immunity by a public officer does not exempt a person from criminal liability.
KINDS OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
ARTICLE 13. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. LACK OF INTENTION TO COMMIT SO GRAVE A WRONG
Nature. Circumstances which if presentin the commission of the crime, DO NOT entirely free the
actor from criminal liability, but serve only to REDUCE THE PENALTY - Addresses itself to the intention of the offender at the particular moment when the offender
executes or commits the criminal act not to his intention during the planning stage.
CLASSES - that the accused did not intend so grave an evil as the death of the victim does not exempt
him from criminal liability.
- The existence of praeter intentionem is determined during the execution of the criminal
Ordinary Mitigating Privileged Mitigating act.
1. The intention of the offender at the particular moment when he executes or
✓ offset a generic aggravating × cannot be offset commits the criminal act; not to his intention during the planning stage.
2. The act of concealing the body of the crime may amount to praeter intentionem.
3. There is praeter intentionem when the offender, the husband, killed his wife after
Effect (if NOT offset) : can reduce to a lesser Effect : imposing penalty by one or two he caught her in the act of adultery.
penalty degrees lower than what is provided by law 4. “Lucky punch” is indicative of a lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong.
5. It can be appreciated in favor of the accused as he had no intention to kill when
EXAMPLES : EXAMPLES : he attacked the victim. His intention was merely to inflict injuries on the victim.
● All others not privileged ● Incomplete self-defense
● minority
2. SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION

REQUISITES :
REQUISITES:
(a) Offender commits the crime
(b) There is criminal liability ❖ Provocation must be sufficient;
(c) The effect is to reduce the penalty ❖ It must be immediate to the commission of the crime; and
(d) It does not change the nature of the crime ❖ It must originate from the offended party.

“Provocation”- defined to be any unjust or improper conduct or act of the offended party, capable of
exciting, inciting, or irritating anyone.

25
“Sufficient”- means adequate to excite a person to commit the crime and must accordingly be
proportionate to its gravity. It is not enough that the provocative act be unreasonable or annoying.
● Sufficient provocation is any unjust or improper conduct or act of the victim adequate
enough to excite a person to commit a wrong, which is accordingly proportionate in gravity.
● Factor. In order to determine the sufficiency of a provocation for the purpose of mitigating
a crime, one must look into:
a. the act constituting the provocation,
b. the social standing of the provoked, and
c. the place and time when the provocation is made.
1JD4
● It is sufficient when:
a. The law speaks of provocation either as a mitigating circumstance or as an
essential element of self-defense, the reference is to an unjust or improper
conduct of the offended party capable of exciting, inciting, or irritating anyone.
● Unlawful aggression can be appreciated as sufficient provocation.
3. IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF GRAVE OFFENSE
Requisites:
❖ The act should be committed in the immediate vindication of a grave offense; and
❖ To the one committing a felony, his spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural
or adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same degree.
➔ Two accused were provoked to commit two murders because of the indecent
propositions made to the women by the victim and his companions. For the
accused, this is the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation or
vindication of a grave offense to his wife.
● There can be no immediate vindication of a grave offense when the accused had sufficient
time to recover his equanimity.
4. PASSION OR OBFUSCATION
Requisites:
❖ An unlawful act sufficient to produce passion and obfuscation was committed by the
intended victim;
❖ The crime was committed within reasonable length of time from the commission of the
unlawful act that produced obfuscation in the accused's mind; and
❖ The passion and obfuscation arose from lawful sentiments and not from a spirit of
lawlessness or revenge.
CONCEPT:
● There is passional obfuscation when the crime was committed due to an uncontrollable
burst of passion provoked by prior unjust or improper acts, or due to illegitimate stimulus
so powerful as to overcome reason.
● The accused must establish that:
(1) He acted upon an impulse
(2) Impulse must be so powerful that it naturally produces passion and obfuscation.
● Special motives must be established. The guilty party must act under the impulse of such
special motives originating from lawful sentiments.
● The act must be within a considerable period of time.
● It need not be felt only in the seconds before the commission of the crime. It may build up
and strengthen over time until it can no longer be repressed and will ultimately motivate
the commission of the crime.
● Passion and obfuscation as affecting the mind and resulting in lack of reason and
self-control must originate from lawful sentiments.
● Passion and obfuscation may be appreciated in favor of a mother protecting her child.
The spontaneity of the acts of the accused against the minor is just a product of the
instinctive reaction of a mother to rescue her own child from harm and danger. There is
mitigating circumstance because she lost her reason and self-control, thereby diminishing
the exercise of her will power.
● A battered wife may be given mitigating circumstances of passion and obfuscation. In
physical battering, no considerable period of time within which the battered wife could
recover her normal equanimity.
● Excitement that comes with a quarrel is not obfuscation.
● Acts done in the spirit of revenge cannot be considered acts done with passion and
obfuscation.
● For it to be mitigating, it must originate from lawful feelings, not from vicious, unworthy,
and immoral passions. The turmoil and unreason that result from a wounded ego were not
enough to obfuscate one’s sanity and self-control. Nor would a raised temper, or anger
mitigate.
● If the accused acted with jealousy out of an illicit romantic relationship, there is no passion
and obfuscation.
5. ILLNESS
REQUISITES:
(1) Illness of the offender must diminish the exercise of his will-power; and
(2) Such illness should not deprive the offender of consciousness of his acts.
CONCEPTS:
● When the offender completely lost the exercise of will-power.
● Mild behavior disorder as a consequence of illness the accused had in early life,
● Schizophrenia may be considered mitigating circumstance if it diminishes the exercise of
the will power of the accused.
● Psychological paralysis is an illness that diminishes the exercise of will power. The cyclical
nature and the severity of the violence inflicted upon the accused resulted in “cumulative
provocation which broke down her psychological resistance and natural self-control”, and
“difficulty in concentrating or impairment of memory.
6. ANALOGOUS CIRCUMSTANCES
J. These are examples of analogous circumstances:
● Defendant who is 60 years old with failing eyesight is similar to a case of one over 70
years old;
● Jealousy similar to passion and obfuscation;
● Voluntary restitution of property, similar to voluntary surrender.
● The act of the accused is similar to incomplete self-defense.
● Extreme poverty and necessity as a mitigating circumstance.
● Extreme poverty may also be considered as mitigating circumstances arising from
irresistible force or uncontrollable fear.
One who was arrested without resistance may be considered of similar nature and analogous to that
of.
Incomplete Self-Defense, Defense of Relatives, Defense of Strangers
BURDEN OF PROOF : Offended Party
● → voluntary surrender.
The following are held not analogous:
● Killing a wrong person;
● One resisting arrest is not the same as voluntary surrender;
● Running amuck;
26
 ● Mere membership in a cultural minority (uncivilized Igorot tribes and others who live far
away from the centers of civilization).
● Repentance and remorse does not fall as one of those similar or analogous.
ARTICLE 14. AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
Nature. Those which serve to increase the penalty without exceeding the maximum provided by law
because of the greater perversity of the offender as shown by:
a) Motivating power of the commission of the crime
1JD4
b) Time of commission
c) Place of commission
d) Means employed
e) Personal circumstances of the offender
Aggravating circumstances must be alleged in the information and must be proved during trial.
KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Generic
- Generally apply to all crimes
- Increasing the penalty to its maximum period, but not to the next higher degree
- Can be offset by an ordinary mitigating circumstance
- Applies to Art. 14, paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 14, 18, 19 and 20
2. Specific
- Only apply to particular crimes
- Increase the penalty to its maximum period, but cannot be increased to the next
higher degree
- Cannot be offset by an ordinary mitigating circumstance
- Quasi-recidivism, complex crimes (Art. 48), Use of loose firearm in the
commission of the crime, and habitual delinquency are examples
3. Qualifying
- Change the nature of the crime
- Changes not only the nature of the crime, but also the name of the crime and
the offender becomes liable for the new offense which is more serious in nature
- Applies to Art. 14, paragraphs 7, 8, 12, 13, 15, 16, 21
4. Inherent
- Those that essentially accompany the commission of the crime and does not
affect the penalty
SECTION 9, RULE 110 OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Cause of the accusation. — The acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense and the
qualifying and aggravating circumstances must be stated in ordinary and concise language and not
necessarily in the language used in the statute but in terms sufficient to enable a person of common
understanding to know what offense is being charged as well as its qualifying and aggravating
circumstances and for the court to pronounce judgment.
ARTICLE 62 OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE
Effects of the attendance of mitigating or aggravating circumstances and of habitual delinquency.
— Mitigating or aggravating circumstances and habitual delinquency shall be taken into account for
the purpose of diminishing or increasing the penalty in conformity with the following rules :
1. Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a crime specially punishable by law or
which are included by the law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefor shall not be
taken into account for the purpose of increasing the penalty.
2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating circumstances inherent in the crime to
such a degree that it must of necessity accompany the commission thereof.
3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from the moral attributes of the offender, or
from his private relations with the offended party, or from any other personal cause, shall only serve
to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices and accessories as to whom such
circumstances are attendant.
4. The circumstances which consist in the material execution of the act, or in the means employed to
accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of those persons only who had
knowledge of them at the time of the execution of the act or their cooperation therein.
TYPES OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Take Advantage of Public Position
REQUISITES:
(1) the offender is a public officer
(2) used the influence, prestige, and ascendancy of his office the commission of the crime
The essential question in this aggravating circumstance is whether the accused abused his office in
order to commit the crime. If he did not, there is no abuse of public position.
If the abuse of office is an integral element of the felony (e.g. falsification of public document by a
public officer, bribery, malversation), the aggravating circumstance is not considered because these
crimes cannot be committed except by a public officer.
2. Contempt or Insult to Public Authorities
REQUISITES:
(1) Public Authority is engaged in exercise of his functions
(2) The said person is not the person against whom the crime is committed
(3) The offender committed a crime despite the presence of a public authority showing his
lack of respect for public authorities
Public Authority - any person directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as an individual or as a
member of some court or governmental corporation, board, or commission, shall be deemed a
person in authority. (Art. 152) (e.g. mayors, judges, prosecutors, punong barangay, members of
sangguniang barangay and lupon tagapamayapa)
This circumstance is not present when the victim is a mere agent of a person in authority.
Agent of the person or authority - A person who, by direct provision of law or by election or by
appointment by competent authority, is charged with the maintenance of public order and the
protection and security of life and property, such as a barrio councilman, barrio policeman and
barangay leader and any person who comes to the aid of persons in authority
A teacher or professor is not a person in authority under this circumstance.
27
 Nighttime - period of darkness at the end of dusk and ending at dawn. There must be proof that the
3. Disregard of Rank, Age, or Sex offender took advantage of the nighttime. In the absence of such proof, this circumstance cannot be
and Dwelling of the Offended Party appreciated.

REQUISITES: TWO TESTS TO DETERMINE NIGHTTIME:

(1) Objective test - nocturnity is aggravating because it facilitates the commission of the crime
(1) Act of deliberate intention to disregard or insult age, sex, or rank (2) Subjective test - nocturnity is aggravating because it was purposely sought by the offender
(2) Proof of fact of disregard and deliberate intent
Uninhabited place - one where there are no houses at all, a considerable distance from town, or
Rank - refers to a high position or standing, or difference in the social condition of the offender and where the houses are scattered at a great distance from each other. The description of the place,
and the impossibility on the part of the victim in receiving help must also be taken from consideration

1JD4
the offended party.
in determining an uninhabited place.
Age - refers to the tender or old age of the offended party.
Band - when more than three armed malefactors have acted together in the commission of the
Sex - only applies to the female sex. Can only be appreciated when there is proof that the accused crime.
deliberately intended to offend or show manifest disrespect to the victim.
7. On Occasion of Calamity or Misfortune
Dwelling - a sanctuary worthy of respect. It extends to every dependency of the house which forms
an integral part thereof. It is not necessary for the victim to own the place for it to be called a
dwelling. Deliberate and purposive intent is not needed for this circumstance to be appreciated. REQUISITES:
There must be no provocation on the part of the victim.
(1) The offender must take advantage of the calamity or misfortune
This circumstance only applies to crimes against person, not on crimes against property. (2) The crime was committed during the conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic, or
calamity or misfortune
4. Abuse of Confidence and Obvious Ungratefulness
8. Aid of Armed Men
REQUISITES:
REQUISITES:
(1) The offended party trusted the offender
(2) The offender abused such trust (1) That armed men or persons took part in the commission of the crime, directly or indirectly
(3) The abuse of confidence facilitated the commission of the crime (2) That the accused availed himself of their aid or relied upon them when the crime was
committed
In order for this circumstance to be appreciated, there must be a relationship of trust and confidence
between the accused and the victim, and that the culprits took advantage of the trust reposed in This circumstance is not present when it is shown that the accused as well as those who cooperated
them by the offended party. The confidence between the parties was immediate and personal, such with him in the commission of the crimes in question acted under the same plan and for the same
that it gave the accused some advantage or made it easier for them to commit the criminal act. purpose.

5. Palace of the Chief Executive of Where Public Authorities are Engaged in the Discharge 9. Recidivism
of their Duties, or in a Place Dedicated to Religious Worship.
REQUISITES:
THREE CIRCUMSTANCES:
(1) That the offender is on trial for an offense
(1) When the crime is committed in the palace of the chief executive or in his presence (2) That he was previously convicted by final judgment of another crime
(2) Where the public authorities are discharged for their duties (3) That both the first and second offenses are embraced in the same title of the Code
(3) In a place of religious worships (4) That the offender is convicted of the new offense

The public authority is engaged in the performance of his duty. The offender must have the intention
to commit a crime when he entered the place. Recidivism Habitual Delinquency

Crimes covered in RPC Robbery, Theft, Estafa,

6. Nighttime, Uninhabited Place, or Band Crimes covered Falsification, Serious or Less
Serious Physical Injuries
ELEMENTS:
No period required Conviction of specified crimes
(1) When it facilitated the commission of the crime must take place within ten years
(2) When especially sought for by the offender Period from the date of last conviction or
(3) When the offender took advantage thereof for the purpose of impunity release

28
 burn the building, the crime would be arson; it there is intent to kill, and fire is used to cover up the
Number of Conviction Two convictions There must be third conviction of killing, the crime would be homicide or murder, and arson.
required the crimes specified
Explosion - RA 8294 provides that illegal possession of firearms and explosives are considered as
Offsetting Being a generic circumstance, it It cannot be offset by any an aggravating circumstance, not a separate offense, when used to commit other crimes under RPC.
may be offset mitigating circumstance It must first be first established that the possession was illegal

Effect If not offset, it increases the It provides for the imposition of The mere use of explosives is not an aggravating circumstance. The explosives must be unlawfully
penalty additional penalty manufactured or possessed explosives. (Sec 3, P.D. No. 1886 as amended by RA No. 8294)

1JD4
13. Evident Premeditation
10. Habituality
REQUISITES:
REQUISITES:
(1) The time when the offender determined to commit the crime
(1) The accused is on trial for an offense (2) An act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his determination
(2) He previously served sentence for another offense with an equal or greater penalty than (3) A sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution, to allow him to reflect
the new offense on the consequences of his act
(3) He is convicted for the new offense
To warrant a finding of evident premeditation, it must appear not only that the accused decided to
commit the crime prior to the moment of its execution but also, that this decision was the result of
Recidivism Habituality meditation, calculation, reflection, or persistent attempt. The prosecution must present any evidence
as to when the plan to kill was determined by the accused.
Nature There is a previous The offender is previously
conviction. punished. The law does not prescribe a time frame that must elapse from the time the felon has decided to
commit a felony up to the time he commits it.
Crimes Covered The crimes are embraced in The crimes are not There is an overt act when there are some physical activity or deed, indicating the intention to
the same title of the code. necessarily embraced in the commit a particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried out, to its
same title of the code. complete termination following its natural course without being frustrated by external obstacles nor
by the spontaneous desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete
Effect If present, it is always Not always aggravating; it offense.
aggravating. depends upon the sound
discretion of the court. Mere threats do not amount to evident premeditation.

11. Price, Reward, or Promise
REQUISITES:
(1) There must be two or more offenders, the one who gives or offers the price, and the other
who accepts it
(2) The price, reward, or promise is given for the purpose of inducing another to do the crime
The offeror becomes a principal by inducement while the offeree becomes a principal by direct
participation.
The inducement must be the primary consideration in the commission of the crime.
12. By Means of Inundation, Fire, Poison, Explosion, Stranding of a Vessel or Intentional
Damage Thereto, or Derailment of a Locomotive, or by the Use of any Artifice Involving
Great Waste and Ruin
Fire - The intent of the offender is material. When fire is used with the intent to kill a person who may
be in a house and that objective is attained, the crime would be murder; if the main objective is to
If the killing resulted in death to persons other than the intended victims, the circumstance of evident
premeditation cannot be considered.
14. Craft, Fraud, or Disguise
REQUISITES:
(1) The offender used craft, fraud, or disguise
(2) If such is used to aid in the execution of the criminal design
This circumstance denotes intellectual trickery or cunning resorted to by an accused to aid in the
execution of his criminal design or to lure the victim into a trap and to conceal the identity of the
accused.
Craft - circumstance characterized by trickery or cunning resorted to by the accused. It involves
intellectual trickery in order not to arouse suspicion.
Fraud - direct inducement by insidious words or machinations.
Disguise - resorting to any device that will conceal identity. (e.g. the accused covered his face with a
bonnet, covered his face with a handkerchief to avoid being recognized)

29

15. Abuse of Superior Strength or Means to Weaken Defense
REQUISITES:
(1) In superior strength, (a) there is deliberate intent to take advantage of superior strength,
(b) that there is evidence of relative physical strength and notorious inequality of forces,
(c) the purpose is to overpower
(2) In means to weaken defense, the purpose to weaken the victim's resisting power
(3) Applicable to crimes against persons only
1JD4
Abuse of superior strength is present when there is a notorious inequality of forces between the
victim and the aggressor.
There are no fixed and invariable rules regarding abuse of superior strength or employing means to
weaken the defense of the victim.
Superiority does not always mean numerical superiority. It depends upon the relative strength of the
aggressor against the victim. Even if the offenders outnumber the victim, it must be established that
the offenders purposely sought the advantage of their superior strength.
There is abuse of superior strength even if there is only one malefactor and one victim.
16. Treachery
REQUISITES:
(1) The employment of means, method, or manner of execution which will ensure the safety
of the malefactor from defensive or retaliating acts on the part of the victim, no opportunity
being given to the latter to defend himself to retaliate
(2) Deliberate or conscious adoption of such means, method, or manner of execution
ELEMENTS:
(1) The victim was in no position to defend himself when attacked
(2) The offender deliberately adopted the specific manner of the attack
The essence of treachery lies in the suddenness of the attack that leaves the victim unable to defend
himself, thereby ensuring the commission of the offense.
It is not enough that the attack was sudden and unexpected, there must be a showing that the mode
of attack was deliberately or consciously adopted ensuring that it would be impossible for the victim
to retaliate or defend himself.
Treachery is not present when the decision to attack was arrived at on the spur of the moment
because the conscious choice of the manner of the attack that would pose no risk to the aggressor
was not present.
There is also no treachery when the assault was preceded by a heated exchange of words between
the accused and the victim or when the victim is aware of the hostility of the accused towards him.
The same goes with impulse killing and chance encounters.
The killing of minor children, by the reason of their tender years, could not be expected to put up a
defense, is treacherous.
Attack from behind is treachery.
Treachery is a generic aggravating circumstance to robbery with homicide.
Treachery and Abuse of Superior Strength - In treachery, the victim was not given the opportunity
to defend himself. In abuse of superior strength, it does not mean that the victim was completely
defenseless.
17. Ignominy
It is a circumstance pertaining to the moral order which adds disgrace and obloquy to the material
injury caused by the crime. There is ignominy where the acts tend to make the effects of the crime
more humiliating or shameful to the victim.
This is applicable to crimes against chastity, rape, less serious physical injuries, light or grave
coercion, and murder.
In rape, there is ignominy when the missionary position (male superior female inferior) and when the
entry is from behind (the same position as dogs do).
18. Unlawful Entry
There is unlawful entry when the entrance is effected by a way not intended for that purpose.
When one who acts without respect to walls erected by men to guard their property and provide for
personal safety, shows a greater perversity and audacity.
There is no unlawful entry when the accused freely enters the victim's residence.
19. Breaking Wall, Roof, Floor, Doors, or Windows
This circumstance is used as a means to the commission of the crime, or as a means to effect
entrance.
20. Aid of Persons under Fifteen Years of Age or by Means of Motor Vehicles, Motorized
Watercraft, Airships, or Other Similar Means
a. Below 15 years old
For this circumstance to apply, the crime is committed with the aid of a person below 15 years of
age.
This circumstance is not present if the minor himself is the sole offender
It is intended to prevent or discourage the exploitation of minors by criminals who are taking
advantage irresponsibility and the leniency of the law for youthful offender (Justice Regalado)
b. By means of motor vehicle
Motor vehicle is any vehicle propelled by any power other than muscular power using the public
highways except toad rollers, trolley cars, street sweepers, sprinklers, lawn mowers, bulldozers,
graders, fork-lifts, amphibian trucks, and cranes if not used on public highways, vehicles which run
only on rails or tracks, and tractors, trailers and traction engines of all kinds used exclusively for
agricultural purposes.
The use of a motor vehicle is aggravating when it is purposely used either to commit the crime or
to facilitate escape, but not when the use thereof was merely incidental and was not purposely
sought to facilitate the commission of the crime or to render escape of the offender easier and his
apprehension difficult. (e.g. kidnapping, snatching while riding a motorcycle)
30
RA No. 11235 (Motorcycle Prevention Act) g. Possession of dangerous drugs, regardless the degree of purity
i. Party, social gathering, or in the proximate company of at least 2 persons,
Two ways the use of motorcycle is punished: regardless of quantity
h. Possession of apparatus and other paraphernalia fit for introducing dangerous drugs into
(1) The use of motorcycle as a means to commit a crime constituting a grave, less grave, or the body
light felony under the RPC or in the escape from the crime scene, regardless of the stage i. Party, social gathering, or in the proximate company of at least 2 persons
of commission i. Cultivation or culture of plants which are dangerous drugs or are sources thereof
(2) The use of a seized motorcycle in the commission of the crime i. The land is part of the public domain
ii. Organizes, manages or acts as financier
21. Cruelty

1JD4
ARTICLE 15. ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES
REQUISITES:
(1) That the injury caused be deliberately increased by causing other wrong
Nature. Those which must be taken into consideration as aggravating or mitigating circumstances
(2) That the wrong be unnecessary for the execution of the purpose of the offender
according to the nature and effects of the crime, and other conditions attending its commission. They
(3) Deliberate prolonging of the physical suffering
are not aggravating per se.
For cruelty to be appreciated, it must be shown that the accused, for his pleasure and satisfaction,
3 Types. Relationship – Intoxication – Degree of Instruction/Education
caused the victim to suffer slowly and painfully as he inflicted on him unnecessary physical or moral
pain. It is aggravating because there was deliberate increasing of suffering of the victim which
denoted the offender’s sadism and consequently a marked degree of malice and perversity. RELATIONSHIP
Inflicting various successive wounds upon a person to cause his death without appreciable time
between the infliction of one wound to another does not constitute cruelty. → offended party is one of the ff:
➔ Spouse
The sheer number of wounds is not a test for determining cruelty. It must be proved that the accused ➔ Ascendant or descendant (step-parents & step-children included)
enjoyed inflicting injuries upon the victim and that it is intended to prolong the suffering of the victim. ➔ Legitimate sibling (natural or adopted)
➔ Relative by affinity in the same degree
X Common-law relationships
Aggravating Circumstances under Special Penal Laws X Relationship between uncle & niece
X Private relationships (Employer & maid)
Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act (RA 10591)
1. When MITIGATING
Use of loose firearm in the commission of the crime
a. In crimes against property
b. Less serious physical injuries + offended party is relative of lower degree than
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (RA 9165)
offender
a. Use of dangerous drug in the commission of the crime
b. Importation of dangerous drugs (even for floral, decorative, and culinary purposes) and/or
2. When AGGRAVATING
controlled precursors and essential chemicals if the transportation was through the use of
a. In crimes against persons + offended party is relative of higher or equal degree
a diplomatic passport, facilities, and other means involving the offender’s official status
b. In crimes against chastity
c. Sale, administration, delivery, distribution, and transportation of dangerous drugs
c. In homicide or murder + relative of lower degree
i. Within 100 meters from a school
ii. If minors/mentally incapacitated individuals are used as runners, couriers, and
3. NEITHER mitigating or aggravating
messengers of drug pushers
a. In parricide, adultery or concubinage (since relationship is already an element of
iii. If the victim is a minor, or the drug involved be the proximate cause of the death
the crime)
of the victim
d. Maintenance of a den, dive, or resort where any controlled precursor and essential
4. When EXEMPTING
chemical is sold or used
a. Theft, estafa & malicious mischief
i. When delivered to a minor who is allowed to use the same in such place
b. Accessories who conceal or destroy the body of the crime or harbor, conceal or
ii. The drug be the proximate cause of the death of the person of the person using
assist in the escape
the same in such den, dive, or resort
c. Physical injuries committed by spouse or parent to wife/daughter in the act of
e. Manufacture of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals
committing sexual intercourse
i. Any phase conducted in presence or with help of minors
ii. established/undertaken within 100m of residential, business, church, or school
premises INTOXICATION
iii. Laboratory is secured/protected by booby traps
iv. Concealed with legitimate business operation
v. Employment of practitioner, chemical engineer, public official, or foreigner → offender’s mental facilities must be affected by drunkenness
f. Manufacture or delivery of equipment, instrument, apparatus, and other paraphernalia for → impaired the will power of the accused where he could not comprehend the wrongfulness of his
dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursor and essential chemicals acts
i. Use of a minor or a mentally incapacitated individual to deliver such equipment, → state of intoxication must be PROVED considering that mere drinking of liquor prior to the
instrument, instrument, apparatus, or other paraphernalia commission of the crime DOES NOT necessarily produce a state of intoxication
31
 REQUISITES:
a. Participated in the criminal resolution
HABITUAL / INTENTIONAL NOT habitual or subsequent to the plan to b. Carried out their plan and personally took part in its execution by acts which directly
commit tended to the same end

✓ aggravating ✓ mitigating
REQUISITES : REQUISITES :
(a) Must be excessive and habitual use (a) @ time of commission, there must
or specific purpose to commit the be a certain amount of intake of
crime by getting drunk alcohol as to blur his reason +
deprive him of certain degree of
To establish conspiracy, it is not essential that there be proof of the previous agreement and decision
to commit the crime. It is sufficient that the malefactors acted in concert pursuant to the same
objective.
To hold an accused guilty as co-principal by reason of conspiracy, it must be established that he
performed an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, either by directly participating in the actual

1JD4
control commission of the crime, by lending moral assistance to his co-conspirators, by exerting moral
(b) Same intoxication is NOT ascendancy over the rest of the conspirators as to move them to executing the conspiracy.
HABITUAL or SUBSEQUENT TO
THE PLAN TO COMMIT When conspiracy has been established, evidence to who among the accused rendered the fatal
blow is not necessary. All the conspirators are liable as co-principals regardless of the intent and
PROOF NEEDED : amount of alcohol intake + character of their participation because the act of one is the act of all.
the effect on the accused
● He should NOT be a regular alcohol A co-conspirator does not have to participate in every detail of the execution.
drinker as to increase his alcohol
tolerance Conspiracy may be implied if it is proved that two or more persons aimed by their acts towards the
● There must be NO considerable accomplishment of the same unlawful object.
amount of time lapsed before the
commission
BY INDUCEMENT
*Drug addiction is NOT an aggravating circumstance
Those who directly force or induce others to commit a crime.
DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION OR EDUCATION
Inducement per se is not punishable if it is merely a proposal. The proposal is no more than a
criminal proposition and as a general rule, it is not punishable.
→ lack of sufficient intelligence & knowledge of the full significance of one’s act.
× illiteracy Principal by inducement is the more guilty than other principals because without the inducement, the
× mere membership in a cultural minority crime would not have been committed.
✓ trial courts determine WoN there is lack of intelligence
WAYS OF INDUCEMENT:
Examples. Members of uncivilized tribes. 1. By directly forcing another to commit a crime.
a. By using irresistible force
General Rule. it is usually mitigating b. By causing uncontrollable fear
Exceptions.
● In crimes of murder, theft & robbery THE ACTUAL PERPETRATOR HAS NO CRIMINAL LIABILITY UNDER ARTICLE 12 (EXEMPTING
● If offender is exceptionally intelligent & mentally alert to realize the significance of his acts CIRCUMSTANCES)
Aggravating : when offender has a high degree of education & availed of such education to his
advantage 2. By directly inducing another to commit a crime
a. By giving price, offering reward, or promise
(Example : lawyer who commits falsification or doctor who kills victims by means of poison) b. By using words of command
REQUISITES:
1. Inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring the commission of the crime
2. Such inducement be the determining cause of the commission
ARTICLE 17. PRINCIPALS
The following are considered principals: BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION
1. Those who take direct part in the execution of the act.
2. Those who directly force or induce others to commit it. REQUISITES:
3. Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it 1. Participation of the subject accused in the criminal resolution
would not have been accomplished. 2. Performance by him of another act indispensable to the accomplishment of the crime
EXAMPLES:
BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION/CONSPIRACY 1. Providing weapon or tools
2. Providing the mode of transportation
3. Dragging the victim to the place of execution
32
 4. Holding on to the victim to prevent him from resisting is guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive,
or is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime.
If the cooperation is not indispensable, the offender is regarded as mere accomplice.
REQUISITES:
1. Knowledge of the commission of the crime
ARTICLE 18. ACCOMPLICES 2. Subsequent participation in it by any of the three above-cited modes

The penalty for accessories is lower by two (2) degrees than that prescribed by law for the
Accomplices are those, not being principals, who cooperate in the execution of the offense by consummated felony.
previous or simultaneous acts.
TWO CLASSES OF ACCESSORIES:

1JD4
REQUISITES: 1. FIRST CLASS OF ACCESSORY - A public officer who uses his public functions
1. There be a community of design 2. SECOND CLASS OF ACCESSORY - A private person
2. He cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts with the
intention of supplying material or moral aid in the execution of the crime in an efficacious Distinction between accessory under RPC and offender under Obstruction of Justice (PD
ways 1829):
3. There must be a relation between the acts done by the principal and those attributed to
the person charged as accomplice
Revised Penal Code Obstruction of Justice
An accomplice is not part of the conspiracy. They merely cooperate with the principal in the Accessory
execution of the crime either by previous or simultaneous act. Their liability is individual from from
the principals. Offender The offender is merely The offender is not an
An accomplice must have the knowledge of the criminal intention of the principal. accessory who is either: a) a accessory but a principal in
public officer who abuses the offense for violation of PD
There must be knowledge of and participation in the criminal act. public functions or b) a private 1829
individual
Participation must be of minor character.
Crimes Committed a) If public offender, any crime Any crime under the RPC or
committed by the principal offense under special penal
Conspirators Accomplices laws
b) If by private person, only
Knowledge of criminal intent They themselves have Only come to know about it the crimes of treason,
decided upon such course of after the principals have parricide, murder, attempt to
action reached the decision take the life of the Chief
Executive, or is known to be
habitually guilty of some other
Commission of the crime Conspirators decide that a Accomplices merely assent to crime
crime should be committed the plan and cooperate in its
accomplishment
Conviction It is required that the principal It is not necessary that the
be declared guilty og any of principal be convicted first.
Participation Conspirators are the authors Accomplices are merely the specified crimes The person can be charged
of the crime instruments who perform acts without the principal having
not essential to the been convicted.
perpetration od the offense
Nature Malum in se Malum Prohibitum

ARTICLE 19. ACCESSORIES

ARTICLE 21 - 46. PENALTIES
Accessories are those who, having knowledge of the commission of the crime, and without having
participated therein, either as principals or accomplices, take part subsequent to its commission in
any of the following manners: Definition of Penalty. The suffering that is inflicted by the State for the transgression of a law.
1. By profiting themselves of assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime
2. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in Purpose. To secure justice. In service and satisfaction of the State’s duty.
order to prevent its discovery 3-Fold Purpose under the RPC :
3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principals of the crime, provided (1) Retribution
the accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or whenever the author of the crime (2) Correction or Reformation
(3) Social Defense

33
 2. The commitment of a minor to any of the institutions mentioned in Article 80 and for the
ART 21. Penalties that may be imposed. – No felony shall be punishable by any penalty not purposes specified therein.
prescribed by law prior to its commission.
3. Suspension from the employment of public office during the trial or in order to institute
DOCTRINE: There is no crime if there is no law punishing it. proceedings.

ART 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. – Penal laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as they 4. Fines and other corrective measures which, in the exercise of their administrative or
favor the person guilty of a felony, who is not a habitual criminal, as this term is defined in Rule 5 of disciplinary powers, superior officials may impose upon their subordinates.
Article 62 of this Code, although at the time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has been
pronounced and the convict is serving the same. 5. Deprivation of rights and the reparations which the civil law may establish in penal form.

1JD4
GEN RULE: criminal laws have prospective effect. RATIONALE : They are not considered penalties because they are not imposed as a result of judicial
EXCEPTION: to give them a retroactive effect when favorable to the accused. proceedings. Par 1, 3 & 4 are merely preventive measures before conviction of offenders.

NOT APPLICABLE TO CIVIL LIABILITIES

Reason : the rights of the offended persons or innocent 3rd parties are not w/in the gift of arbitrary
disposal of the State. CLASSIFICATION OF PENALTIES

APPLICABLE TO SPECIAL LAWS ART 25. Penalties which may be imposed. – The penalties which may be imposed, according to this
The provisions of this article are applicable even to special laws which provide more favorable Code, and their different classes, are those included in the following:
conditions to the accused.
Scale
CRIMINAL LIABILITY UNDER THE REPEALED LAW SUBSISTS Principal Penalties
Capital punishment:
(1) When the provisions of the former law are reenacted Death.
(2) When the repeal is by implication
(3) When there is a saving clause
Afflictive penalties:
Reclusion perpetua,
ART 23. Effect of pardon by the offended party. – A pardon by the offended party does not Reclusion temporal,
extinguish criminal action except as provided in Article 344 of this Code; but civil liability with regard Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification,
to the interest of the injured party is extinguished by his express waiver. Perpetual or temporary special disqualification,
Prision mayor.
RATIONALE: A crime committed is an offense to the State. Only the Chief Executive can pardon the
offenders. Correctional penalties:
*compromise DOES NOT extinguish criminal liability. Only civil liability.
Prision correccional,
EXCEPTION: In crimes of adultery or concubinage, the offended party can no longer institute Arresto mayor,
criminal prosecution if he shall have consented or pardoned the offenders. Suspension,
Destierro.
CIVIL LIABILITY Light penalties:
Arresto menor,
2 Classes of Injuries : Public censure.
(1) Social Injury → produced by the disturbance & alarm which are the outcome of the
offense Penalties common to the three preceding classes:
(a) Sought to be repaired through the imposition of the corresponding penalty Fine, and
(State has interest) Bond to keep the peace.
(b) Offended party can no longer relieve the offender from penalty

(2) Personal Injury → caused to the victim of the crime who suffered damage either to his Accessory Penalties
person, to his property, to his honor or to her chastity Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification,
(a) Repaired through indemnity (State cannot interfere) Perpetual or temporary special disqualification,
(b) Offended party may waive it (must be expressed) Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for, the profession or calling.
Civil interdiction,
ART 24. Measures of prevention or safety which are not considered penalties. – The following shall Indemnification,
not be considered as penalties. Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and proceeds of the offense,
1. The arrest and temporary detention of accused persons, as well as their detention by Payment of costs.
reason of insanity or imbecility, or illness requiring their confinement in a hospital.

34
 ART 27. Reclusion perpetua. - Any person sentenced to any of the perpetual penalties shall be
CLASSIFICATION OF PENALTIES pardoned after undergoing the penalty for thirty years, unless such person by reason of his conduct
or some other serious cause shall be considered by the Chief Executive as unworthy of pardon.
PRINCIPAL PENALTIES ACCESSORY PENALTIES
→ those expressly imposed by the court in the → those that are deemed included in the Reclusion temporal. - The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be from twelve years and one day to
judgment of conviction imposition of the principal penalties twenty years.

PRINCIPAL PENALTIES MAY BE CLASSIFIED AS : Prision mayor and temporary disqualification. - The duration of the penalties of prision mayor and
temporary disqualification shall be from six years and one day to twelve years, except when the
penalty of disqualification is imposed as an accessory penalty, in which case its duration shall be that

1JD4
DIVISIBLE INDIVISIBLE of the principal penalty.
→ have no fixed duration
Ex. Death & Reclusion Perpetua Prision correccional, suspension, and destierro. - The duration of the penalties of prision
correccional, suspension and destierro shall be from six months and one day to six years, except
CLASSIFICATION ACCORDING TO SUBJECT-MATTER : when suspension is imposed as an accessory penalty, in which case, its duration shall be that of the
principal penalty.
1. Corporal (death)
2. Deprivation of freedom (reclusion, prision, arresto) Arresto mayor. - The duration of the penalty of arresto mayor shall be from one month and one day
to six months.
3. Restriction of freedom (destierro)
4. Deprivation of rights (disqualification & suspension)
5. Pecuniary Arresto menor. - The duration of the penalty of arresto menor shall be from one day to thirty days.

Bond to keep the peace. - The bond to keep the peace shall be required to cover such period of time
CLASSIFICATION ACCORDING TO GRAVITY : as the court may determine.

1. Capital (death)
2. Afflicative (reclusion, absolute & special disqualification, prision mayor) PENALTY MINIMUM MAXIMUM
3. Correcional (prision correcional, arresto mayor, suspension & destierro)
4. Light (arresto menor & public censure) Reclusion Perpetua 20 years & 1 day 40 years
5. Accessory (fines & bond to keep the peace)
Reclusion Temporal 12 years & 1 day 20 years
ART 26. When afflictive, correctional, or light penalty. - A fine, whether imposed as a single of as an
alternative penalty, shall be considered an afflictive penalty, if it exceeds One million two hundred Prision Mayor 6 years & 1 day 12 years
pesos (P1,200,000); a correctional penalty, if it does not exceed One million two hundred pesos
(P1,200,000) but is not less than Forty thousand pesos (P40,000); and a light penalty if it be less
than Forty thousand pesos (P40,000). (As amended by RA 10951). Prision Correcional 6 months & 1 day 6 years

RULE: Pennalties cannot be imposed in the alternative. Arresto Mayor 1 month & 1 day 6 months

Arresto Menor 1 day 30 days

FINES :
1. Afflictive - over P1.2M Bond to keep the peace The period during which the bond shall be effective is
2. Correctional - P40k - P1.2M discretionary to the courts.
3. Light Penalty - less than P40k

BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE (By analogy) : In what cases can DESTIERRO be imposed?
1. Afflictive - over P1.2M
2. Correctional - P40k - P1.2M (a) Serious physical injuries or death under exceptional circumstances
3. Light Penalty - less than P40k (b) In case of failure to give bond for good behavior
(c) As a penalty for the concubine or concubinage
(d) In cases where after reducing the penalty by one or more degrees destierro is the proper
penalty
DURATION OF PENALTIES
ART 28. Computation of penalties. - If the offender shall be in prison, the term of the duration of the
temporary penalties shall be computed from the day on which the judgment of conviction shall have
become final.

35
If the offender be not in prison, the term of the duration of the penalty consisting of deprivation of
liberty shall be computed from the day that the offender is placed at the disposal of the judicial
authorities for the enforcement of the penalty. The duration of the other penalties shall be computed
only from the day on which the defendant commences to serve his sentence.
RULES FOR COMPUTATION OF PENALTIES :
RULE # 1 : When the offender is in prison : the duration of temporary penalties is from the DAY
ON WHICH JUDGMENT BECOMES FINAL
1JD4
RATIONALE = the arrest and temporary detention of the accused is not considered a penalty
RULE # 2 : When the offender is NOT in prison : the duration of penalty consisting in deprivation
of liberty is from the DAY that the OFFENDER is placed AT THE DISPOSAL OF THE JUDICIAL
AUTHORITIES
RULE # 3 : Duration of other penalties : from the day the offender COMMENCES TO SERVE HIS
SENTENCE (including if he’s in preventive imprisonment)
Examples of TEMPORARY PENALTIES :
(1) Temporrary absolute disqualification
(2) Temporary special disqualification
(3) Suspension
ART 29. Period of preventive imprisonment deducted from term of imprisonment. - Offenders who
have undergone preventive imprisonment shall be credited in the service of their sentence consisting
of deprivation of liberty, with the full time during which they have undergone preventive
imprisonment, if the detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in writing to abide by the same disciplinary
rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, except in the following cases:
1. When they are recidivists or have been convicted previously twice or more times of any crime;
and
2. When upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence they have failed to surrender
voluntarily.
[DISCLAIMER : Ommitted part of the article since its better explained if I provide an example, see
below]
EXAMPLE #1 : A was accused of homicde punishable by reclusion temporal. Because he could not
put a bail of P15,000.00, A was detained pending trial which lasted for 2 years. If after trial, A was
found guilty and sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of from 6 years and 1 day to 12 years and
one day, the full period od A’s preventive imprisonment of 2 years shall be deducted from 12
years and 1 day, assuming he complied with the requirements. But if A did not comply, only ⅘ of the
2 years during which he has undergone preventive imprisonment will be deducted.
EXAMPLE #2 : If B had been detained for 5 months and 10 days pending his trial for less serious
physical injuries and after trial he is sentenced to 4 months of arresto mayor, he should be released
immediately.
TIME ALLOWANCE FOR STUDY, TEACHING & MENTORING
PRIVILEGE : 15 DAYS for each month of studying, teaching or mentoring services.
ADDITIONAL : 15 DAYS deduction if pursuing a post-graduate or college degree, primary or
secondary education, vocational/technical skill or values development programs.
OFFENDERS WHO ARE NOT ENTITLED TO FULL OR ⅘ TIME OF PREVENTIVE
IMPRISONMENT :
(A) Recidivists
(B) Those who failed to surrender voluntarily
(C) Habitual delinquents who, w/in a period of 10 years from release were again convicted of
a crime for a 3rd time or oftener
(D) Escapees
(E) Persons charged w/ heinous crimes
ART 30. Effects of the penalties of perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification. - The penalties
of perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification for public office shall produce the following
effects:
1. The deprivation of the public offices and employments which the offender >may have held even if
conferred by popular election.
2. The deprivation of the right to vote in any election for any popular office or to be elected to such
office.
3. The disqualification for the offices or public employments and for the exercise of any of the rights
mentioned.
In case of temporary disqualification, such disqualification as is comprised in paragraphs 2 and 3 of
this article shall last during the term of the sentence.
4. The loss of all rights to retirement pay or other pension for any office formerly held.
ART 31. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification. - The penalties of
perpetual or temporal special disqualification for public office, profession or calling shall produce the
following effects:
1. The deprivation of the office, employment, profession or calling affected;
2. The disqualification for holding similar offices or employments either perpetually or during the term
of the sentence according to the extent of such disqualification.
ART 32. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification for the exercise of
the right of suffrage. - The perpetual or temporary special disqualification for the exercise of the right
of suffrage shall deprive the offender perpetually or during the term of the sentence, according to the
nature of said penalty, of the right to vote in any popular election for any public office or to be elected
to such office. Moreover, the offender shall not be permitted to hold any public office during the
period of his disqualification.
ART 33. Effects of the penalties of suspension from any public office, profession or calling, or the
right of suffrage. - The suspension from public office, profession or calling, and the exercise of the
right of suffrage shall disqualify the offender from holding such office or exercising such profession or
calling or right of suffrage during the term of the sentence.
The person suspended from holding public office shall not hold another having similar functions
during the period of his suspension.
36
ART 34. Civil interdiction. - Civil interdiction shall deprive the offender during the time of his sentence
of the rights of parental authority, or guardianship, either as to the person or property of any ward, of
marital authority, of the right to manage his property and of the right to dispose of such property by
any act or any conveyance inter vivos.
CIVIL INTERDICTION = deprives the person of the rights to manage her property and to dispose of
such property through donation.
ART 35. Effects of bond to keep the peace. - It shall be the duty of any person sentenced to give
bond to keep the peace, to present two sufficient sureties who shall undertake that such person will
1JD4
not commit the offense sought to be prevented, and that in case such offense be committed they will
pay the amount determined by the court in the judgment, or otherwise to deposit such amount in the
office of the clerk of the court to guarantee said undertaking.
The court shall determine, according to its discretion, the period of duration of the bond.
Should the person sentenced fail to give the bond as required he shall be detained for a period
which shall in no case exceed six months, is he shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave
felony, and shall not exceed thirty days, if for a light felony.
ART 36. Pardon; its effect. - A pardon shall not work the restoration of the right to hold public office,
or the right of suffrage, unless such rights be expressly restored by the terms of the pardon.
A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon
him by the sentence.
EFFECTS OF PARDON (by the President)
1. Shall not restore the right to hold public office or the right of suffrage
a. Exception : when any or both such rights is or are expressly restored by the
terms of pardon
Example : When Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo pardoned former President Estrada which states “I
hereby grant executive clemency to Joseph Ejercito Estrada… He is hereby restored to his civil and
political rights.”
The pardon granted to him was absolute, meaning, it was not only unconditional, it was unrestricted
in scope, complete and plenary in character.
2. Shall not exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil indemnity. (no exceptions)
LIMITATIONS UPON THE EXERCISE OF THE PARDONING POWER
a. Such power can only be exercised AFTER CONVICTION
b. Does NOT extend to cases of impeachment
c. Does NOT extend to cases involving violation of election laws rules and regulations where
there is no favorable recommendation from the COMELEC
PARDON BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE PARDON BY OFFENDED PARTY
✓ extinguishes the criminal liability of the × does not extinguish criminal liability
offender
× cannot include the civil liability imposed ✓ can waive the civil liability
✓ can only be granted AFTER the conviction × pardon should be given BEFORE the
and may be extended to any of the offenders institution of the criminal prosecution and must
be extended to BOTH
ART 37. Cost; What are included. - Costs shall include fees and indemnities in the course of the
judicial proceedings, whether they be fixed or unalterable amounts previously determined by law or
regulations in force, or amounts not subject to schedule.
RULES :
● Costs are chargeable to the accused ONLY IF THERE IS CONVICTION. In cases of
acquittal, each party bears his own expenses.
● No costs shall be allowed against the Republic of the Philippines, unless otherwise
provided by law (Rule 142, Sec 1, Rules of Court)
ART 38. Pecuniary liabilities; Order of payment. - In case the property of the offender should not be
sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary liabilities, the same shall be met in the following order:
1. The reparation of the damage caused.
2. Indemnification of consequential damages.
3. The fine.
4. The cost of the proceedings.
ART 39. Subsidiary penalty. - If the convict has no property with which to meet the fine mentioned in
the paragraph 3 of the nest preceding article, he shall be subject to a subsidiary personal liability at
the rate of one day for each eight pesos, subject to the following rules:
1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision correccional or arresto and fine, he shall remain under
confinement until his fine referred to in the preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his subsidiary
imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the term of the sentence, and in no case shall it continue
for more than one year, and no fraction or part of a day shall be counted against the prisoner.
2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine, the subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed
six months, if the culprit shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not
exceed fifteen days, if for a light felony.
3. When the principal imposed is higher than prision correccional, no subsidiary imprisonment shall
be imposed upon the culprit.
4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be executed by confinement in a penal institution, but
such penalty is of fixed duration, the convict, during the period of time established in the preceding
rules, shall continue to suffer the same deprivations as those of which the principal penalty consists.
5. The subsidiary personal liability which the convict may have suffered by reason of his insolvency
shall not relieve him, from the fine in case his financial circumstances should improve. (As amended
by RA 5465, April 21, 1969).3
ART 40. Death; Its accessory penalties. - The death penalty, when it is not executed by reason of
commutation or pardon shall carry with it that of perpetual absolute disqualification and that of civil
interdiction during thirty years following the date sentence, unless such accessory penalties have
been expressly remitted in the pardon
37
ART 41. Reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal; Their accessory penalties. - The penalties of not in subject of lawful commerce. Since confiscation is an accessory penalty it is
reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal shall carry with them that of civil interdiction for life or automatically imposed pursuant to Article 73.
during the period of the sentence as the case may be, and that of perpetual absolute disqualification
which the offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to the principal penalty, unless the same
shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon.
ARTICLE 48. COMPLEX CRIMES
● When reclusion perpetua is imposed as a penalty next higher than that provided by law,
what is to be the accessory penalty?
Definition. A single act which constitutes two or more crimes, or when an offense is a
When the penalty imposed is reculusion perpetua as a penalty next higher in degree, the necessary means for committing the other.

1JD4
accessory penalty shall be that under article 40 but the offender shall not be given the
benefit of the provision of article 27 until 40 years have elapsed, otherwise, there could be ● At least 2 crimes must be committed
no difference at all between reclusion perpetua when imposed as a penalty next higher in ● A complex crime is only one crime as contemplated by law because the offender
degree and when it is imposed as a penalty imposed as fixed by law. (People v. Bago) has only one criminal intent but it resulted in 2 or more crimes.
● A complex crime refers only to felonies which are punished in the RPC
● Article 48 applies only to cases where RPC does not provide a definite specific
● What are the accessory penalties of reclusion perpetua imposed as a penalty and penalty for a complex crime
reclusion perpetua imposedas next higher? ● One information should be filed when a complex crime is committed.
● When a complex crime is charged and 1 offense is not proven, the accused can
The accessory of reclusion perpetua as a penalty is provided in article 41: Civil interdiction
be convicted of the other.
for life or during the period of sentence as the case may be, and perpetual and absolute
disqualification which the offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to the principal Penalty. The penalty for the most serious crime in its maximum period.
penalty, unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon.
NO COMPLEX CRIME in the following:
As a penalty next higher, the accessory penalties is that under article 40 for death penalty, 1. In case of continuing crimes
when it is not executed by reason of commutation or pardon: perpetual absolute 2. When one offense is committed to conceal the other
disqualification and that of civil interdiction during 30 years following the date of sentence,
unless such accessory penalties have been expressly remitted in the pardon. (This
3. When the other crime is an indispensable part or an element of the other
distinction, has been obliterated by RA 9346 banning death penalty) offenses as defined
4. Where one of the offenses is penalized by a special law
ART 42. Prision mayor; Its accessory penalties. - The penalty of prision mayor, shall carry with it that 5. When the law provides one single penalty for special complex crime:
of temporary absolute disqualification and that of perpetual special disqualification from the right of a. Robbery with Homicide
suffrage which the offender shall suffer although pardoned as to the principal penalty, unless the b. Robbery with Rape
same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. c. Rape with Homicide
d. Kidnapping with Serious Physical Injuries
ART 43. Prision correccional; Its accessory penalties. - The penalty of prision correccional shall
carry with it that of suspension from public office, from the right to follow a profession or calling, and e. Kidnapping with Homicide
that of perpetual special disqualification from the right of suffrage, if the duration of said
imprisonment shall exceed eighteen months. The offender shall suffer the disqualification provided in KINDS OF COMPLEX CRIME
the article although pardoned as to the principal penalty, unless the same shall have been expressly
remitted in the pardon. 1. Compound Crime (Delito Compuesto)
- Single act constitute 2 or more grave/less grave felonies.
ART 44. Arresto; Its accessory penalties. - The penalty of arresto shall carry with it that of - Ex. Throwing grenade results in the death of others.
suspension of the right too hold office and the right of suffrage during the term of the sentence.
Requisites:
ART 45. Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds or instruments of the crime. - Every penalty 1. only a single (1) act is performed by the offender.
imposed for the commission of a felony shall carry with it the forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime 2. That the single act produces 2/more grave or less grave felonies, i.e.:
and the instruments or tools with which it was committed. a. 2 or more grave felonies,
b. 1 or more grave felonies & 1/more less grave felonies, or
Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated and forfeited in favor of the c. 2 or more less grave felonies.
Government, unless they are property of a third person not liable for the offense, but those articles
which are not subject of lawful commerce shall be destroyed.
2. Complex Crime Proper (Delito Complejo)
- When an offense is a necessary means for committing the other.
- Ex. Estafa through falsification of public documents.
● What is required before the proceeds or instruments of the crime may be confiscated?
Requisites:
The proceeds or instruments which are the property of third persian who have no a. At least 2 offenses are committed.
complicity in the crime cannot be confiscated unless the said articles are contraband or
b. One or some of the offenses must be necessary to commit the other.
c. Both or all the offenses must be punished under the same statute.
38
—-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Continued Crime (Delito Continuado) ARTICLES 46 - 71. APPLICATION OF PENALTIES
- Single crime consisting of a series of acts arising from one criminal resolution.
Although there are a series of acts, there is only one crime committed. Hence, Art.46 - Penalty to be imposed upon principals in general.
only one penalty shall be imposed. GENERAL RULE: The penalty described by law in general terms shall be imposed upon the
- Not a complex crime principals for a consummated felony.

Requisites: EXCEPTION:When the penalty to be imposed upon the principal in frustrated or attempted felony is
1. Plurality of acts performed during a period of time. fixed by law.
2. Unity of penal provisions violated.

1JD4
3. Unity of criminal purpose or aim.
Special Complex Crime (Composite Crimes)
- 2 or more crimes are committed but are treated by law as a single indivisible
and unique offense for being the product of one criminal impulse.
- Not a complex crime but one crime made up of several violations and one
criminal intent.
- Special Complex Crimes under RPC; robbery w/ homicide, robbery w/ rape,
kidnapping w/ serious physical injuries/ murder/ homicide, and rape with
homicide.
Doctrine of Absorption
- A crime that is ascertained to be an inherent part, an element, or that is made in
furtherance of the other crime is not treated as a separate offense but is
deemed included in the other crime.
- The crimes must be punished by the same statute and the trial court must have
jurisdiction over both offenses.
- Ex. In rebellion, in that common crimes, such as murder, and offenses under
special laws which are perpetuated in furtherance of the political offense, are not
penalized as distinct crimes. They are deemed part and parcel of the rebellion
itself.
Transitory/ Continuing Crimes
- crimes where some acts material and essential to the crimes and requisite to
their commission occur in one municipality or territory and some acts are done
in another place.
Section 15(a), Rule 110 of the 2000 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure
Graduation of Penalties:
1. By degrees
- Refers to:
a. Stages of execution (consummated, frustrated, or attempted) and;
b. Degree of the criminal participation of the offender. (principal,
accessory, or accessory)
2. By periods
- Maximum, medium, and minimum
- Refers to the proper period of the penalty which should be imposed when
aggravating or mitigating circumstances attend the commission of the crime.
Art.47- In what cases the death penalty shall not be imposed; Automatic Review of Death
Penalty Cases.
This provision is no longer of any force or effect because the substantive provisions thereof being
inconsistent with An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines, while the
procedural measures are superseded by the present Revised Rules of Court.
Art.48- Penalty for complex crimes.
It is one where a single act constitutes two or more grave of less grave felonies or where an offense
is necessary means for committing the other.
Concept
1. In complex crime, although 2 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.
2. The offender has only one criminal intent, hence there is only one penalty imposed for the
commission of a complex crime.
NOTE: When in obedience to an order several accused simultaneously shot many persons, without
evidence how many are killed, there is only a single offense, there being a single criminal impulse.
The accused are criminally liable for as many offenses resulting from pressing the trigger of the
automatic armalites.
Ine information should be filed when a complex crime is committed.

a. Subject to existing laws, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the Two kinds of complex crimes:
1. Compound crime- a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies.
court or municipality or territory where the offense was committed or where any
of its essential ingredients occurred. Requisites of compound crime:
1. That only a single act is performed by the offender.
- In transitory or continuing offenses, the rule is settled that the court of either 2. That the single act produces:
a. Two or more grave felonies
province where any of the essential ingredients of the crime took place has b. One or more grave and one or more less grave felonies; r
jurisdiction to try the case. There are, however, crimes which although all the c. Two or more less grave felonies.
elements thereof for its consummation may have occurred in a single place, yet
by reason of the very nature of the offense committed, the violation of the law is Light felonies produced by the same act should be treated and punished as a separate offense or
may be absorbed by the grave felony.
deemed to be continuing, and this is called continued crime
When the crime is committed by force or violence, slight physical injuries are absorbed such as in
direct assault and rape. The slight physical injuries are the necessary consequence of the force or
violence inherent in the crime of rape.
39
Art.48 speaks of two or more grave or less grave felonies resulting from a single act. One of two
offenses charged in the same information being punishable under the Penal Code and the other
being punishable under an ordinary act of the Legislature, the two offenses are separate and distinct,
and cannot be treated as a complex crime.
ILLUSTRATIONS OF COMPOUND CRIMES:
1. When a single bullet successively killed two victims.
2. The killing of one victim and the wounding of another arising from the accused’s single act
of hacking the first victim.
3. The single act of throwing a grenade at one person injuring others.
1JD4
2. Complex Crime Proper- an offense is a necessary means for committing the other. The first
offense must be consummated.
Requisites of complex crime proper:
1. That at least two offenses are committed;
2. That one or some of the offenses must be necessary to commit the other; and
3. That both or all of the offenses must be punished under the same statute.
Examples of complex crime proper:
1. Complex crime of estafa through falsification of public documents;
NOTE: there is no complex crime of estafa thru falsification of private documents as both crimes
require damage as an element which if used for one renders the other incomplete, hence the query
is as to which crime was committed first.
If the falsification of a private document is committed as a means to commit estafa, the proper crime
to be charged is falsification. If the estafa can be committed without the necessity of falsifying a
document, the proper crime to be charged is estafa.
2. Complex crime of forcible abduction with rape;
The crime of forcible abduction with rape is a complex crime that occurs when the abductor has
carnal knowledge of the abducted woman under the following circumstances; (1) by using force or
intimidation; (2) when the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and (3) when the
woman is under 12 years of age or is demented. However, where the main objective of the culprit
for the abduction of the victim of rape was to have carnal knowledge of her, he could be convicted
only of rape.
NO COMPLEX CRIME IN THE FOLLOWING CASES:
1. In case of Continuous crimes;
2. When one offense is committed to Conceal the other;
3. When the other is an Indispensable part or an element of the other offenses;
4.Where one of the offenses is penalized by a special law;
5. When the provision provides for a Two- tiered penalty, e.g. usurpation of property, malicious
procurement of a search warrant, bribery, maltreatment of prisoners; and
6. Arson with (multiple) homicide.
Note: Art.48 is intended to favor the accused.
Reason: The offender is deemed less perverse than when he commits said crimes through separate
and distinct acts.
In complex crimes, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied
in its maximum period.
Art.49-Penalty to be imposed upon the principals when the crime committed is different from
that intended
Rules on penalty when crime committed is different from that intended:
1. If the penalty for the felony committed be higher than the penalty for the offense which the
accused intended to commit, the lower penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period.
This article is not applicable if the acts committed by the guilty person shall constitute an attempt or
frustration of another crime, if the law prescribes a higher penalty for either of the latter offenses, in
which case the penalty provided for the attempted or frustrated crime shall be imposed in its
maximum period.
It applies only to cases of error in personae and the penalty for the crime committed is different from
that of the crime intended. Also, it is applicable only when the intended crime and the crime actually
committed are punished with different penalties.
Jurisprudence instructs that art.49 has no application to cases where a more serious consequence
not intended by the offended result from his felonious act and befalls the same person, as in praeter
intentionem.
Art.50- Penalty to be imposed upon principals of a frustrated crime.
Penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony.
Ex.
(1) FOR FRUSTRATED MURDER: ONE DEGREE LOWER THAN RECLUSION PERPETUA,
WHICH IS RECLUSION TEMPORAL
(2) FOR FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE: ONE DEGREE LOWER THAN RECLUSION TEMPORAL,
WHICH IS PRISION MAYOR
Art.51- Penalty to be imposed upon principals of attempted crime.
Penalty lower by 2 degrees than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony.
Ex.
(1) FOR ATTEMPTED MURDER: TWO DEGREES LOWER THAN RECLUSION PERPETUA,
WHICH IS PRISION MAYOR
(2) FOR ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE: TWO DEGREES LOWER THAN RECLUSION TEMPORAL,
WHICH IS PRISION CORRECCIONAL
Art. 52 - Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in a consummated crime.
Penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the consummated.
Ex,
(1) FOR BEING AN ACCOMPLICE IN MURDER, ONE DEGREE LOWER THAN RECLUSION
PERPETUA, WHICH IS RECLUSION TEMPORAL
(2) FOR ABEING AN ACCOMPLICE IN HOMICIDE: ONE DEGREE LOWER THAN RECLUSION
TEMPORAL, WHICH IS PRISION MAYOR
Art. 53 - Penalty to be imposed upon accessories to the commission of a consummated
felony.
Penalty lower by 2 degrees than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony.
(1) FOR BEING AN ACCESSORY IN MURDER: TWO DEGREES LOWER THAN RECLUSION
PERPETUA, WHICH IS PRISION MAYOR
(2) FOR BEING AN ACCESSORY IN HOMICIDE: TWO DEGREES LOWER THAN RECLUSION
TEMPORAL, WHICH IS PRISION CORRECCIONAL
Art. 54 - Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in a frustrated crime.
Penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the frustrated felony.
40
Ex.
(1) FOR BEING AN ACCOMPLICE IN FRUSTRATED MURDER: ONE DEGREE LOWER THAN
RECLUSION TEMPORAL, WHICH IS PRISION MAYOR
(2) FOR BEING AN ACCOMPLICE IN FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE: ONE DEGREE LOWER THAN
PRISION MAYOR, WHICH IS PRISION CORRECCIONAL
Art. 55 - Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of a frustrated felony.
Penalty lower by 2 degrees than that prescribed by law for the frustrated felony.
1JD4
Ex.
(1) FOR BEING AN ACCESSORY IN FRUSTRATED MURDER: TWO DEGREES LOWER THAN
RECLUSION TEMPORAL, WHICH IS PRISION CORRECCIONAL
(2) FOR BEING AN ACCESSORY IN FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE: TWO DEGREES LOWER THAN
PRISION MAYOR, WHICH IS ARRESTO MAYOR
Art. 56 - Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in an attempted crime.
Penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the attempted felony.
Ex.
(1) FOR BEING AN ACCOMPLICE IN ATTEMPTED MURDER: ONE DEGREE LOWER THAN
PRISION MAYOR, WHICH IS PRISION CORRECCIONAL
(2) FOR BEING AN ACCOMPLICE IN ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE: ONE DEGREE LOWER THAN
PRISION CORRECCIONAL, WHICH IS ARRESTO MAYOR
Art. 57 - Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of an attempted crime.
Penalty lower by 2 degrees than that prescribed by law for the attempted felony.
Ex.
(1) FOR BEING AN ACCESSORY IN ATTEMPTED MURDER: TWO DEGREES LOWER THAN
PRISION MAYOR, WHICH IS ARRESTO MAYOR
(2) FOR BEING AN ACCESSORY IN ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE: TWO DEGREES LOWER THAN
PRISION CORRECCIONAL, WHICH IS ARRESTO MENOR
CONSUMMATED FRUSTRATED
PRINCIPAL 0 1
ACCOMPLICE 1 2
ACCESSORY 2 3
NUMBER OF DEGREES TO WHICH THE PENALTY MUST BE LOWERED WITH RESPECT TO
CONSUMMATED FELONY
Art. 58 - Additional penalty to be imposed upon certain accessories.
Those accessories falling within the terms of Art. 19(3) who should act with abuse of their public
functions, shall suffer the additional penalty of absolute perpetual disqualification if the principal shall
be guilty of grave felony, and that of absolute temporary disqualification if he shall be guilty of a less
grave felony.
Art. 59 - Penalty to be imposed in case of failure to commit the crime because the means
employed or the aims sought are impossible.
If a person intended to commit an offense and has already performed all the acts for execution but
the crime was not produced because the act intended was impossible to accomplish or the means
employed by the person are essentially inadequate to produce the result desired by him, the court
shall impose upon him the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine ranging from 200 to 500 pesos.
IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES:
The penalty for impossible crime is arresto mayor or a fine ranging from 200-500 pesos.
Basis for the imposition of proper penalty:
1. Social danger, and
2. Degree of criminality shown by the offender.
Art.60- exceptions to the rules established in Article 50 to 57.
Arts.50-57, which refer to the rules regarding graduating penalties shall not apply if:
1. The law expressly prescribes the penalty provided for frustrated or attempted felony; or
2. The law expressly prescribes the penalty to be imposed on accomplices or accessories.
Art.61- Rules for graduating penalties.
According Arts.50-57, thye penalty prescribed by law for the shall be lowered by degrees.
1. When the penalty prescribed is single and indivisible- the penalty next lower in degree
shall be that immediately following the indivisible penalty in the respective graduated scale
in Art.71.
Example:
A single and indivisible penalty is reclusion perpetua. In scale 2 in Art.71, the penalty
immediately following reclusion perpetua is reclusion temporal.
The penalty next lower in degree therefore, is reclusion temporal.
2. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of 2 indivisible crime is composed
of 2 indivisible penal;ties, or of 1 or more divisible penalties, or of 1 or more divisible
penalties to be imposed to their full extent.
- The penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately following the lesser
of the penalties prescribed in the respective graduated scale.
ATTEMPTED
Example:
2 Two indivisible penalties are reclusion perpetua to death. This is the penalty for
parricide. The penalty immediately following the lesser of the penalty, which is
reclusion perpetua, is reclusion temporal.
3
4 Ex.2
Two divisible penalties to be imposed to their full extent are prision correccional
to prision mayor. The penalty immediately following the lesser of the penalties is
arresto mayor.
3. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of 1 or 2 indivisible penalties and
the maximum period of another divisible penalty.
41
 - The penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the medium and
minimum periods of the proper divisible penalty and the maximum period of that
immediately following in said respective graduated scale.
4.
Example:
The penalty for murder of reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua.
Thus, the penalty for murder consists of one divisible penalty of reclusion temporal in its a
maximum period. The proper divisible penalty is reclusion temporal. The penalty
immediately following reclusion temporal is prison mayor. The penalty next lower is
composed of the medium and minimum periods of reclusion temporal and the maximum of
prison mayor.
Ex. 1 or more mitigating 0 aggravating in the crime of Parricide punishable by reclusion
perpetua to death, RP is applied.
When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances attended the commission of the act,
the court shall reasonably allow them to offset one another in consideration of their
number and importance, for the purpose of applying the penalty in accordance with the
preceding rules, according to the result of such compensation.
Ex. 1 mitigating 1 aggravating in the crime of Parricide punishable by reclusion perpetua to
death, RP is applied.

1JD4
Art. 64 - Rules for the application of penalties which contain three periods.

4. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of several periods corresponding
to different divisible penalties.
- The penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the period immediately
following the minimum prescribed and of the two next following, which shall be
taken from the penalty prescribed if possible; otherwise from the penalty
immediately following in the abovementioned respective graduated scale
(RPC,Art.61)
The court shall observe the following rules for applying penalties in cases in which the penalties
prescribed by law contain three periods, whether it be a single divisible penalty or composed of 3
different penalties, according to whether there are or are not mitigating or aggravating
circumstances:
1. When there are neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances, they shall impose the
penalty prescribed by law in its medium period.

5. When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime in some manner not specially provided for
in the four proceeding rules, the courts, proceeding by analogy, shall impose the
corresponding penalties upon those guilty as principals of the frustrated felony, or of
attempting to commit the same, and upon accomplices and accessories.
- The rules provided for in the article should also apply in determining the
minimum of the indeterminate under the ISLAW.
- It will be noted that each paragraph of the article begins with the phrase “when
the penalty prescribed for the felony” or “crime.” Hence, in lowering the penalty,
the penalty prescribed by the RPC for the crime is the basis, without regard to
the mitigating or aggravating circumstances. It is only after the penalty next
lower in degree is already determined that the mitigating and/or aggravating
circumstances should be considered.
Example:
Ex. 0 mitigating and 0 aggravating in the crime of homicide, penalty is medium period of
Reclusion Temporal which is 14 yrs 8 mos 1 day to 17 yrs 4 mos.
2. When only a mitigating circumstance is present in the commission of the act, they shall
impose the penalty in its minimum period.
Ex. 1 mitigating and 0 aggravating in the crime of homicide, penalty is minimum period of
Reclusion Temporal which is 12 yrs 1 day to 14 yrs 8 mos.
3. When an aggravating circumstance is present in the commission of the act, they shall
impose the penalty in its maximum period.
Ex. 0 mitigating and 0 aggravating in the crime of homicide, penalty is maximum period of
Reclusion Temporal which is 17 yrs 4 mos 1 day to 20 yrs

- The penalty next lower than prison correccional in its minimum and medium
periods is arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods.
- The penalty next lower to prison mayor in its maximum period is prision mayor
in its medium period.
Art. 63 - Rules for the application of indivisible penalties
The court shall apply a single indivisible penalty, as the law prescribes, regardless of any mitigating
or aggravating circumstances that may have attended the commission of the deed.
In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of 2 indivisible penalties, the following
rules shall be observed:
1. When in the commission of the deed there is present only one aggravating circumstance,
the greater penalty shall be applied.
2. When there are neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstances, the lesser penalty shall
be applied.
Ex. 0 mitigating and 0 aggravating in the crime of Parricide punishable by reclusion
perpetua to death, RP is applied.
3. When the commission of the act is attended by some mitigating circumstances and there
is no aggravating circumstance,, the lesser penalty shall be applied.
Art. 68 - Privileged mitigating circumstance.
4. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall
reasonably offset those of one class against the other according to their relative weight.
Ex. 2 mitigating and 1 aggravating in the crime of homicide, penalty is minimum period of
Reclusion Temporal which is 12 yrs 1 day to 14 yrs 8 mos.
5. When there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstances
are present, the court shall impose the penalty next lower to that prescribed by law, in the
period that it may deem applicable, according to the number and nature of such
circumstances.
Ex. 3 mitigating and 0 aggravating in the crime of homicide, penalty is degree lower than
Reclusion Temporal which is Prision Mayor, the period of which is upon the discretion of
the court.
6. Whatever may be the number and nature of aggravating circumstances, the courts shall
not impose a greater penalty than that prescribed by law, in its maximum period.
Ex. 0 mitigating and 7 aggravating in the crime of homicide, penalty is maximum period of
Reclusion Temporal which is 17 yrs 4 mos 1 day to 20 yrs
7. Within the limits of each period, the court shall determine the extent of the penalty
according to the number and nature of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances and
the greater and lesser extent of the evil produced by the crime.
42
 1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties; and as to pecuniary penalties,
When the offender is a minor, the court has discretion to lower the penalty by one or two degrees liability, therefore, is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before the
lower than the prescribed penalty. final judgment.
2. By service of the sentence.
Ex.
3. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects.
(1) A minor, who acted with discernment, committed the crime of homicide. 4. By absolute pardon.
= penalty is lowered by one or two degrees than reclusion temporal, which may be prision 5. By prescription of the crime.
mayor or prision correccional. 6. By prescription of the penalty.
7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article 344 of this Code.
Art 70 - Successive Service of Sentences

1JD4
Article 90. Prescription of Crimes. Crimes punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or reclusion
When the culprit has to serve two or more penalties, he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature temporal shall prescribe in twenty years.
of the penalties will so permit.

Otherwise, the order of their severity shall be followed- so that they may be executed successively. Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall prescribe in fifteen years. Those punishable by a
correctional penalty shall prescribe in ten years; with the exception of those punishable by arresto
PENALTIES WHICH MAY BE SIMULTANEOUSLY SERVED: mayor, which shall prescribe in five years.
1. Perpetual absolute disqualification
2. Perpetual special disqualification The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall prescribe in one year. The offenses of oral
3. Temporary absolute disqualification defamation and slander by deed shall prescribe in six months. Light offenses prescribe in two
4. Suspension months.
5. Destierro
6. Public censure When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one, the highest penalty shall be made the basis of the
7. Fine and Bond to keep the peace
8. Civil interdiction application of the rules contained in the first, second, and third paragraphs of this article.
9. COnfiscation and payment of costs

THE THREE-FOLD RULE (3:4:40)

OFFENSES AND PENALTIES PRESCRIPTION
1. The maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than 3 times the length
of time corresponding tot he most severe of the penalties imposed upon him. Punishable by death, reclusion 20 years
2. But in no case to exceed 40 years. perpetua, reclusion temporal
3. This rule shall apply only when the convict is to serve 4 or more sentences successively.

NOTE: Punishable by other afflictive penalties 15 years

- This rule applies only when the convict has to serve continuous imprisonment for several
offenses. If the convict already served a sentence for one offense, that imprisonment will Punishable by a correctional penalty 10 years
not be considered. (except those punishable by arresto
mayor)
4. Subsidiary imprisonment forms part of the penalty.
5. All of the penalties, even if imposed for different crimes by different courts at different
times, cannot exceed three-fold the most severe penalty. Punishable by arresto mayor 5 years
6. If the sum total of all the penalties does not exceed the most severe of all the penalties
multiplied by three, the three-fold rule does not apply. Libel or other similar offenses 1-year
EXAMPLE:
- A person is sentenced to suffer- 14 years,8 months and 1 day for homicide; 17 years, 4 Oral defamation and slander by deed 6 months
months and 1 day in another casel 14 years, 8 month in the third case; and in a case of
frustrated homicide, he is sentenced to 12 years, or a total of 59 years,8 months and two Light offenses 2 months
days.

The most severe of those penalties is 17 years, 4 months and a 1 day. Three times that
penalty is 52 years and 3 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 4o years
only.
ARTICLES 89 - 99. EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
Article 91. Computation of prescription of offenses. The period of prescription shall commence to
run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities, or their
agents, and shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information, and shall commence to
run again when such proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or acquitted or are
unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him.

The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philippine Archipelago.
Article 89. Criminal liability is totally extinguished:
43
WHEN DOES PRESCRIPTION COMMENCE? Article 96. Effect of commutation of sentence. The commutation of the original sentence for another
- From the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities, or of a different length and nature shall have the legal effect of substituting the latter in place of the
their agents. former.

WHEN DOES THE PRESCRIPTION INTERRUPT AND WHEN DOES IT RUN AGAIN?
- It shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information. It shall commence to run
again when such proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted, acquitted,
or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him.
DOES THE PRESCRIPTION RUN WHEN THE OFFENDER LEAVES THE COUNTRY?
Article 97. Allowance for good conduct. The good conduct of any offender qualified for credit for
preventive imprisonment pursuant to Article 29 of this Code, or of any convicted prisoner in any
penal institution, rehabilitation or detention center or any other local jail shall entitle him to the
following deductions from the period of his sentence:
1. During the first two years of imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of 20 days for
each month of good behavior during detention.

1JD4
- No. The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the PH 2. During the third to fifth year, inclusive of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a reduction
Archipelago. of 23 days for each month of good behavior during detentions.
3. During the following years until the tenth year, inclusive, of his imprisonment, he shall be
Article 92. When and how penalties prescribe. The penalties imposed by final sentence prescribe as allowed a deduction of 25 days for each month of good behavior during detention.
follows: 4. During the eleventh and successive years of imprisonment, he shall be allowed a
1. Death and reclusion perpetua, in twenty years. deduction of 30 days for each month of good behavior of during detention.
2. Other afflictive penalties, in fifteen years. 5. At any time during the period of imprisonment, he shall be allowed another deduction of 15
3. Correcional penalties, in ten years, with the exception of the penalty of arresto mayor, days, in addition to numbers one to four hereof, for each month of study, teaching, or
which prescribes in five years. mentoring services rendered.
4. Light penalties, in one year.

YEARS OF IMPRISONMENT ALLOWABLE DEDUCTION

PENALTIES IMPOSED BY FINAL PRESCRIPTION
SENTENCE First two years 20 days for each month

Death and reclusion perpetua 20 years Third to Fifth year 23 days for each month

Other afflictive penalties 15 years The following years until the 10th year 25 days for each month

Correccional penalties, except the 5 years 11th and successive years 30 days for each month
penalty of arresto mayor
Any time during the period of Another deduction of 15 days, in
Light penalties 1-year imprisonment addition to above stated, for each
month of study, teaching, or
mentoring services rendered
Article 93. Computation of the prescription of penalties. The period of prescription of penalties shall
commence to run from the date when the culprit should evade the service of his sentence, and it Article 98. Special time allowance for loyalty. A deduction of one-fifth of the period of his sentence
shall be interrupted if the defendant should give himself up, be captured, should go to some foreign shall be granted to any prisoner who, having evaded his preventive imprisonment or the service of
country with which this Government has no extradition treaty, or should commit another crime before his sentence under the circumstances mentioned in Article 158, gives himself up to the authorities
the expiration of the period of prescription. within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation announcing the passing away of the
calamity or a catastrophe referred to in the said article. A deduction of two-fifths of the period of his
Article 94. Criminal liability is extinguished partially: sentence shall be granted in case said prisoner chooses to stay in the place of his confinement
1. By conditional pardon. notwithstanding the existence of a calamity or catastrophe enumerated in Art.158 of this Code.
2. By commutation of the sentence.
3. For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he is undergoing The article shall apply to any prisoner whether undergoing preventive imprisonment or serving a
preventive imprisonment or serving his sentence. sentence.

Article 95. Obligation incurred by a person granted conditional pardon. Any person who has been Article 99. Who grants time allowances. (Amended by R.A. 10592)
granted conditional pardon shall incur the obligation of complying strictly with the conditions imposed
therein, otherwise, his non-compliance with any of the conditions specified shall result in the
revocation of the pardon, and provisions of Article 159 shall be applied to him.

44
 ARTICLE 100 - 113. CIVIL LIABILITY
Article 100. Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. - Every person criminally liable for a felony is
also civilly liable.
Article 101. Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases. - The exemption from criminal liability
established in subdivisions 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of Article 12 and in subdivision 4 of Article 11 of this Code
does not include exemption from civil liability, which shall be enforced subject to the following rules:
1JD4
First. In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of Article 12, the civil liability for acts committed by an
imbecile or insane person, and by a person under nine years of age, or by one over nine but under
fifteen years of age, who has acted without discernment, shall devolve upon those having such
person under their legal authority or control, unless it appears that there was no fault or negligence
on their part.
Should there be no person having such insane, imbecile or minor under his authority, legal
guardianship or control, or if such person be insolvent, said insane, imbecile, or minor shall respond
with their own property, excepting property exempt from execution, in accordance with the civil law.
Second. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of Article 11, the persons for whose benefit the harm
has been prevented shall be civilly liable in proportion to the benefit which they may have received.
The courts shall determine, in sound discretion, the proportionate amount for which each one shall
be liable.
When the respective shares cannot be equitably determined, even approximately, or when the
liability also attaches to the Government, or to the majority of the inhabitants of the town, and, in all
events, whenever the damages have been caused with the consent of the authorities or their agents,
indemnification shall be made in the manner prescribed by special laws or regulations.
Third. In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of Article 12, the persons using violence or causing
the fears shall be primarily liable and secondarily, or, if there be no such persons, those doing the act
shall be liable, saving always to the latter that part of their property exempt from execution.
Article 102. Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers, tavernkeepers and proprietors of establishments.
- In default of the persons criminally liable, innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and any other persons or
corporations shall be civilly liable for crimes committed in their establishments, in all cases where a
violation of municipal ordinances or some general or special police regulation shall have been
committed by them or their employees.
Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft within
their houses from guests lodging therein, or for the payment of the value thereof, provided that such
guests shall have notified in advance the innkeeper himself, or the person representing him, of the
deposit of such goods within the inn; and shall furthermore have followed the directions which such
innkeeper or his representative may have given them with respect to the care and vigilance over
such goods. No liability shall attach in case of robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons unless committed by the innkeeper's employees.
Article 103. Subsidiary civil liability of other persons. - The subsidiary liability established in the next
preceding article shall also apply to employers, teachers, persons, and corporations engaged in any
kind of industry for felonies committed by their servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices, or employees
in the discharge of their duties.
CHAPTER 2 - WHAT CIVIL LIABILITY INCLUDES
Article 104. What is included in civil liability. - The civil liability established in Articles 100, 101, 102,
and 103 of this Code includes:
1. Restitution;
2. Reparation of the damage caused;
3. Indemnification for consequential damages.
Article 105. Restitution; How made. - The restitution of the thing itself must be made whenever
possible, with allowance for any deterioration, or diminution of value as determined by the court.
The thing itself shall be restored, even though it be found in the possession of a third person who
has acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter his action against the proper person, who may
be liable to him.
This provision is not applicable in cases in which the thing has been acquired by the third person in
the manner and under the requirements which, by law, bar an action for its recovery.
Article 106. Reparation; How made. - The court shall determine the amount of damage, taking into
consideration the price of the thing, whenever possible, and its special sentimental value to the
injured party, and reparation shall be made accordingly.
Article 107. Indemnification; What is included. - Indemnification for consequential damages shall
include not only those caused the injured party, but also those suffered by his family or by a third
person by reason of the crime.
Article 108. Obligation to make restoration, reparation for damages, or indemnification for
consequential damages and actions to demand the same; Upon whom it devolves. - The obligation
to make restoration or reparation for damages and indemnification for consequential damages
devolves upon the heirs of the person liable.
The action to demand restoration, reparation, and indemnification likewise descends to the heirs of
the person injured.
Article 109. Share of each person civilly liable. - If there are two or more persons civilly liable for a
felony, the courts shall determine the amount for which each must respond.
Article 110. Several and subsidiary liability of principals, accomplices and accessories of a felony;
Preference in payment. - Notwithstanding the provisions of the next preceding article, the principals,
accomplices, and accessories, each within their respective class, shall be liable severally (in
solidum) among themselves for their quotas, and subsidiaries for those of the other persons liable.
The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first against the property of the principals; next, against that
of the accomplices, and, lastly, against that of the accessories.
Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary liability has been enforced, the person by whom
payment has been made shall have a right of action against the others for the amount of their
respective shares.
45
Article 111. Obligation to make restitution in certain cases. - Any person who has participated
gratuitously in the proceeds of a felony shall be bound to make restitution in an amount equivalent to
the extent of such participation.

CHAPTER 3 - EXTINCTION AND SURVIVAL OF CIVIL LIABILITY

Article 112. Extinction of civil liability. - Civil liability established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103 of
this Code shall be extinguished in the same manner as obligations, in accordance with the

1JD4
provisions of the Civil Law.

Article 113. Obligation to satisfy civil liability. - Except in case of extinction of his civil liability as
provided in the next preceding article the offender shall continue to be obliged to satisfy the civil
liability resulting from the crime committed by him, notwithstanding the fact that he has served his
sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty or other rights, or has not been required to serve the
same by reason of amnesty, pardon, commutation of sentence or any other reason.

46