I.

BOOK I [Articles 1-99 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC)]

1. Distinguish mala in se from mala prohibita.
Mala In Se Mala Prohibita
Acts that are inherently immoral are considered Mala prohibita crimes are acts that are not inherently immoral,
mala in se, even if they are not specifically prohibited but become punishable because they are forbidden by law.
by law.
Criminal intent must be established in conjunction In these cases, the sole issue is to determine whether the law
with the elements of the crime in order for a has been violated. Criminal intent is immaterial.
conviction to be obtained.
Good faith or lack of criminal intent can be a defense Good faith or lack of criminal intent is not a defense, and
in mala in these cases, and mitigating circumstances mitigating circumstances cannot be appreciated unless the
can also be considered. special law adopts the technical nomenclature of the penalties of
the Revised Penal Code.
(Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.148560, November 19, 2001; Garcia v. CA, G.R. No. 157171, March 14, 2006)

2. Give examples of offenses punishable under special law that are considered as mala in se.
Child abuse under Section 10 of RA No. 7610, Child pornography, plunder, and violence against women are considered
by the Supreme Court as mala in se since they are inherently wrong. (Cadajas vs. People, 2022; Napoles vs. Sandiganbayan,
2017; Acharon vs. People, 2021)

3. When can the Philippines exercise jurisdiction over a crime committed on board a foreign merchant ship?
The Philippines can exercise jurisdiction over a crime committed on board a foreign merchant ship passing through the
12-mile territorial sea in the following cases:
a. If its consequences extend to the coastal State;
b. If it disturbs the peace of the country or the good order of the territorial sea;
c. If the assistance of the local authorities has been requested by the master of the ship or by a diplomatic agent of the
flag state; or
d. If it is for the suppression of traffic in narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances. (Art. 27, Convention on the Law of the Sea)
4. Distinguish Ex Post Facto Law from a Bill of Attainder.
Ex Post Facto Law Bill of Attainder
a. Makes an action done before the passing of the law and which was A legislative act which inflicts
innocent when done, criminal, and punishes such action; punishment without trial. Its essence is
b. Aggravates a crime or makes it greater than it was when committed; the substitution of a legislative for a
c. Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law judicial determination of guilt.
annexed to the crime when it was committed;
d. Alters the legal rules of evidence and receives less or different testimony The constitutional ban against bills of
than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense in attainder serves to implement the
order to convict the defendant; principle of separation of powers by
e. Assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only but in effect imposes confining legislatures to rule-making and
a penalty or deprivation of a right which when done was lawful; or thereby forestalling legislative
f. Deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful protection to which usurpation of the judicial function.
he has become entitled, such as the protection of a former conviction or
acquittal, or a proclamation of amnesty
(Salvador vs. Mapa, G.R. No. 135080, November 28, 2007; People vs. Ferrer, G.R. Nos. L-32613-14 December 27, 1972)

5. When may a law be given retroactive effect?

Penal Laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as they favor the persons guilty of a felony, who is not a habitual criminal,
as this term is defined in Rule 5 of 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. (Article 22, Revised Penal Code)

6. When may amendatory laws be applied retroactively?

When exceptional circumstances exist, such as the passage of the instant amendatory law imposing penalties more lenient
and favorable to the accused, the Court shall not hesitate to direct the reopening of a final and immutable judgment, the
objective of which is to correct not so much the findings of guilt but the applicable penalties to be imposed. (Hernan v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 217874, December 5, 2017)

7. Differentiate between Aberratio Ictus, Error in Personae, and Praeter Intentionem.

Aberratio Ictus Error in Personae Praeter Intentionem
Mistake in blow Mistake in identity Greater injury results
The offender intended to inflict harm to The offender committed the act, The offender inflicted harm on the
one person but the injury was inflicted to but there is a mistake in victim but the resulting injury was
another. ascertaining the identity of the greater than what was intended.
victim.
Three persons involved: The offender, Two persons involved: The Two persons involved: The offender
the intended victim and the actual victim offender and the victim and the victim

8. In case of aberratio ictus or mistake in the blow, the accused is generally liable for a complex crime, resulting
from a single act. Enumerate the instances where the accused may be held liable for separate crimes caused to
the target victim and the third person who was hit by mistake.
a. If the bullet that killed the target victim is different from the bullet that killed the third person;

1
 b. If the crime committed against the third person is merely a light felony such as slight physical injuries; or
c. If the crime committed against the third person is child abuse, which is an offense punishable under special law, since
components of complex crime must be felonies. (Cruz vs. People, G.R. No. 216642, 2020; People v. Violin, 1997; Patulot vs.
People, 2019)

9. What are the elements of an Impossible Crime?

1. The act performed would have been an offense against persons or property; (b) the act was done with evil intent;
2. Accomplishment is inherently impossible or means employed is either inadequate or ineffectual; and
3. Act performed should not constitute a violation of another provision of the RPC. (People v. Callao, G.R. No. 228945, 2018)

10. While at the flea market at 8:00 in the evening, AAA, BBB, and CCC hatched a plan to kill XXX. Thereafter, they
went to XXX’s house. AAA pretended to borrow a lighter from XXX who, after handing out a lighter, was
unknowingly struck on the nape. Then, AAA hacked XXX until the latter fell on the ground motionless. BBB jumped
in and stabbed XXX's chest with a knife. Thereafter, AAA and BBB took turns in slicing the body. BBB argued that
he cannot be held liable for Murder because it was legally impossible for him to kill XXX as the latter was already
dead when BBB stabbed him. Is BBB only liable for committing an impossible crime?
No. Generally, stabbing a person without knowing that he is already dead is an impossible crime. However, once an
express or implied conspiracy is proved, all of the conspirators are liable as co-principals regardless of the extent and
character of their respective participation in the commission of the crime. Here, BBB, who stabbed the dead body of the
victim, conspired with the one who previously hacked and killed the victim. The liability of the accused for murder is not
based on his act of stabbing the dead body of the victim, but on the act of his co-conspirator in line with the collective
responsibility rule. (People v. Callao, G.R. No. 228945, March 14, 2018)

11. Distinguish the three stages of execution.

Attempted Stage Frustrated Stage Consummated Stage
Offender commences the execution of the felony Offender performs all the acts of Offender performs all
by overt acts but does not perform all the acts of execution of the felony but does not the acts of execution
execution by reason of some cause or accident produce it by reason of causes and produces the
other than his own spontaneous distance. independent of the will of the offender. felony.
(Art. 6, RPC)

12. Enumerate crimes that do not have a frustrated stage.

a. Rape, since the gravamen of the offense is carnal knowledge. Hence, no matter how slight the penetration, the felony
is consummated;
b. Direct/Indirect Bribery, since the mere acceptance by the public officer of the gifts offered already consummates the
crime;
c. Corruption of Public Officers, since the mere acceptance of the offer consummates the crime. The offense requires the
concurrence of the will of both parties. When the offer is rejected, however, the offense is merely attempted;
d. Adultery, because the essence of the crime is sexual congress;
e. Physical Injury, since it cannot be determined whether the injury will be slight, less serious, or serious unless and until
consummated; and
f. Theft, because the unlawful taking immediately consummates the offense and the disposition of the thing is not an
element thereof. (People v. Zapata and Bondoc, G.R. No. L-3047, 16 May 1951; People v. Orita, G.R. No. 88724, April 3, 1990;
Valenzuela v. People, G.R. No. 160188, June 21, 2007).

13. Distinguish between complex and compound crime.

Complex Crime Compound Crime
Results when the offender commits an offense which is a necessary means for Results when the offender commits
committing another offense. (Art. 48, RPC) Only one information shall be filed only a single felonious act from which
and if proven, the penalty for the more serious crime shall be imposed two or more grave or less grave
felonies are produced
Example: If the offense charged is that the defendant abducted or carried by Example: When a single bullet
force the victim from one place to another wherein the latter was raped by the results in the death of two or more
former, the crime charged would be a complex crime of rape through abduction, persons.
the abduction being in such a case a necessary means to commit the rape.
(People v. Pineda, G.R. No. L-26222, 1967; People v Nelmida, G.R. No. 184500)

14. What are the justifying circumstances and its elements?

Elements
Self-Defense a. Unlawful aggression;
(person, right, b. Reasonable necessity of means employed to prevent or repel it; and
property, or honor) c. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.

Defense of relatives a. Unlawful aggression;

b. Reasonable necessity of means employed to prevent or repel it; and
c. In case of provocation, the one making the defense had no part therein.

Defense of stranger a. Unlawful aggression;

b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it; and
c. The person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive.

Avoidance of greater a. Evil sought to be avoided actually exists.

evil b. Evil or injury must not have been produced by the one invoking the justifying circumstances.

2
 c. Injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it; and
d. No other practical and less harmful means of preventing it.

Fulfillment of duty or a. Offender acted in performance of duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office; and
lawful exercise of b. The injury caused or the offense committed be the necessary consequence of the due
right performance of duty or the lawful exercise of such right or office.

Obedience to a. Order must have been issued by a superior;

Superior order b. The order is for some lawful Purpose; and
c. Means used to carry it out must be lawful.

15. AAA was allegedly attacked by BBB, who is said to be a karate expert. The former called upon her brother CCC
who upon arrival at the fish center with his brother DDD, endeavored to punch BBB, and when he failed to make
a hit, CCC held BBB from behind. While the latter was in such position, DDD hacked him on the face and forehead
with a bolo. Can CCC and DDD avail of the justifying circumstance of defense of a relative?
No. The second requisite is lacking because the means used by CCC and DDD to prevent or repel the alleged attack by
BBB is not reasonable. Although it is true that the law does not require perfect equality of forces between the aggressor
and the person making the defense, surely, the use of a bolo against BBB who were acting in conspiracy and helping each
other against the bare hands of the victim is not at all commensurate, even if the latter is alleged to be a karate expert.
(Oliveros v. People Of The Philippines, G.R. No. 242552, March 03, 2021 [Landmark Case Q&A])

16. What are the Exempting Circumstances?

Accused is insane or imbecile
Accused is a Minor; or acted
Without Discernment
Accident
Irresistible force
Uncontrollable fear
Insuperable or lawful
cause
(Luis B. Reyes, The Revised Penal Code, Volume I)
Elements Basis
Did not act during lucid interval Lack of Intelligence
a. Accused is: 15 years old and below; or Lack of Intelligence
b. Accused is over 15 but under 18 years old, and acted
without discernment.
a. Accused performed lawful act; Lack of Negligence;
b. With due care; Lack of Intent
c. Causes injury to another by accident; and
d. Without fault/intention.
a. There is compulsion by means of physical force; Lack of Freedom
b. From a third person; and
c. Said force is irresistible.
a. Existence of an uncontrollable fear; Lack of Freedom
b. Fear must be real and imminent; and
c. Fear of an injury is greater or equal to that committed.
a. An act is required by law to be done; Lack of Intent
b. Accused fails to perform such act; and
c. Due to some lawful or insuperable cause.

17. What are the Mitigating circumstances?

Elements Basis
Not wholly A majority, but not all, elements of justifying and exempting Almost justified/exempted
excusable by circumstances are present; Incomplete Self-Defense, Defense of
Justification or Relatives and Strangers, Incomplete Accident.
Exemption
Conditional Offender is over 15 but under 18 years old acting with discernment. Diminution of intelligence
minority
No intention to There is notable and evident disproportion between the means Diminution of intent
commit so grave employed to execute the criminal act and its consequences.
a wrong

Sufficient a. Provocation must be sufficient; Diminution of intelligence

provocation or b. It must originate from the offended party; and intent
threat c. It must be personal and directed to the accused; and
d. It must be immediate to the act, i.e., to the commission of the
crime by the person who is provoked.
Immediate a. There is a grave offense done to the one committing the felony, Diminution of voluntariness
vindication of a his spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural or
grave offense adopted brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity within the
same degree;
b. The felony is committed in vindication of such grave offense; and
c. A lapse of time is allowed between the vindication and the doing
of the grave offense.
Note: The vindication need not be done by the person upon whom
the grave offense was committed.

3
 Passion or a. The accused acted upon an impulse; Diminution of intelligence
obfuscation b. The impulse must be so powerful that it naturally produces and intent
passion or obfuscation in him;
c. That there be an act, both unlawful and sufficient to produce
such condition of mind; and
d. That said act which produced the obfuscation was not far
removed from the commission of the crime by a considerable
length of time, during which the perpetrator might recover his
normal equanimity.
Voluntary Voluntary surrender: Lesser perversity of the
surrender or Plea a. Offender had not been actually arrested; offender
of Guilt b. Offender surrendered himself to a person in authority or to the
latter’s agent; and
c. Surrender was voluntary.
Plea of guilt:
a. Offender spontaneously confessed his guilt.
b. Confession of guilt was made in open court, that is, before the
competent court that is to try the case; and
c. Confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation of
evidence for the prosecution.
Physical defects a. The offender is: Diminution of voluntariness
b. Deaf and dumb, blind, or otherwise suffering from some physical
defect which thus restricts his means of action, defense, or
communication with his fellow beings; and
c. Physical defect must have a relation to the commission of the
crime.
Illness a. Illness of the offender: Diminution of intelligence
b. Must diminish the exercise of his will-power; and and intent
c. Should not deprive the offender of consciousness of his acts.
(Luis B. Reyes, The Revised Penal Code, Volume I)

18. May the court appreciate the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender even if the accused surrendered after
the filing or issuance of an information?
Yes. The Court appreciated the mitigating circumstance in case because immediately upon learning that a warrant for his
arrest was issued, and without the same having been served on him, the accused surrendered to the police. It is clear that
notwithstanding the pendency of a warrant for his arrest, the accused may still be entitled to the mitigating circumstance
in case he surrenders, depending on the actual facts surrounding the very act of giving himself up. (De Vera vs. De Vera,
G.R. No. 172832, April 6, 2009)

19. May the court appreciate the mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and restitution separately for the
imposition of penalty for the crime of malversation of public funds?
Yes. Petitioner enjoys the mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and restitution. Although restitution is akin to
voluntary surrender, as provided for in paragraph 7 of Article 13, in relation to paragraph 10 of the same Article of the
Revised Penal Code, restitution should be treated as a separate mitigating circumstance in favor of the accused when the
two circumstances are present in a case, which is similar to instances where voluntary surrender and plea of guilty are
both present even though the two mitigating circumstances are treated in the same paragraph 7, Article 13 of the Revised
Penal Code. Considering that restitution is also tantamount to an admission of guilt on the part of the accused, it was
proper for the Sandiganbayan to have considered it as a separate mitigating circumstance in favor of petitioner. (Legrama
vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 178626, June 13, 2012)

20. What are the aggravating circumstances and its elements?

Elements
Taking advantage of a. Offender is a public officer;
Public Office b. Such officer used the Influence, prestige or ascendancy which his office gives him; and
c. The same was used as means by which he realizes his purpose.

In contempt of or a. Public authority is engaged in the exercise of his functions;

with insult to public b. Public authority is not the person against whom the crime is committed;
authorities c. Offender knows him to be a public authority; and
d. His presence has not prevented the offender from committing the criminal act.

With insult or lack a. Insult or disregard was made on account of:

of regard due to i. Rank – designation or title used to fix the relative position of the offended party in
offended party by reference to others. There must be a difference in the social condition of the offender
reason of rank, age, and offended party;
or sex ii. Age - May refer to old age or tender age of the victim;
iii. Sex - Refers to the female sex; and
b. Such insult or disregard was deliberately intended.

Dwelling a. Act was committed in the dwelling, which may pertain to a:

i. building; or
ii. structure, which is
iii. exclusively used for rest and comfort;
b. Offended party must not give provocation.

4
Abuse of a. Offended party had trusted the offender;
confidence b. Offender abused such trust by committing a crime against the offended party; and
c. The abuse of confidence facilitated the commission of the crime.

Obvious a. Offended party trusted the offender;

ungratefulness b. Offender abused such trust; and
c. Act was committed with obvious ungratefulness.

Palace, Public a. In the palace of the Chief Executive, or

authorities, b. In his presence, or
Religious worship c. Where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties, or
d. In a place dedicated to religious worship.

Nighttime, a. Nighttime, uninhabited place, or band facilitated the commission of the crime; and
uninhabited place, b. Was especially sought for by the offender to insure the commission of the crime or for the
by a band purpose of impunity.

On occasion of a The offender must take advantage of the calamity or misfortune.

Calamity

Aid of Armed men a. Armed men or persons took part in the commission of the crime, directly or indirectly; and
or means to ensure b. Accused availed himself of their aid or relied upon them when the crime was committed.
impunity

Recidivism a. Offender is on trial for an offense;

b. He was previously convicted by final judgment of another crime;
c. That both the 1st and 2nd offenses are embraced in the same title of the Code; and
d. Offender is convicted of the new offense.

Reiteracion or a. Accused is on trial for an offense;

Habituality b. He previously served sentence for another offense to which the law attaches:
i. an equal or greater penalty, or
ii. For 2 or more crimes to which it attaches lighter penalty than that for the new offense;
and
c. That he is convicted of the new offense.

Price, reward, or a. There must be two or more principals:

promise i. One who gives or offers price or promise; and
ii. One who accepts it; and
b. Price, reward, or promise must be for the purpose of inducing another to perform the deed.
The price, reward or promise need not consist of or refer to material things or be actually
delivered, it being sufficient that the offer made by the principal by inducement was accepted
by the principal by direct participation before the commission of the offense.

Inundation, fire, Crime is committed by means of:

poison explosion, a. Inundation;
etc. b. Fire;
c. Poison;
d. Explosion;
e. Stranding of a vessel;
f. Intentional damage to a vessel;
g. Derailment of a locomotive; or
h. Any Other artifice involving great waste and ruin.

Evident Prosecution must prove the following:

premeditation a. Time when the offender determined to commit the crime;
b. An act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his determination; and
c. A sufficient Lapse of time between the determination and execution, to allow him to reflect
upon the consequences of his act and to allow his conscience to overcome the resolution
of his will.

Craft, fraud, or That the crime was committed by means of:

disguise a. Craft: Intellectual trickery and cunning on the part of the accused;
b. Fraud: Insidious words or machinations used to induce the victim to act in a manner which
would enable the offender to carry out his design; or
c. Disguise: Any device to conceal identity.

Superior strength or a. Notorious inequality of forces between victim and aggressor; and
means to weaken b. Offender purposely used excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense
defense available to the persons attacked.

Treachery/ Alevosia a. Offender consciously adopts particular means, methods, or forms tending directly and
specially to ensure the execution of the crime; and
b. The employment of such means gave the offended party no opportunity to defend himself

5
 or retaliate.

Ignominy The means employed or the circumstances brought must tend to make the effects of the crime
more humiliating or to put the offended party to shame.

Unlawful entry Entrance is effected by a way not intended for the purpose.

Breaking wall, floor, a. Breaking the wall, roof, floor, door, or window is a means to the commission of the crime;
roof and
b. Breaking was used as a means to effect entrance and not merely for escape.

With aid of persons Commission of the crime is committed with the aid of children under 15 years of age.
Under 15

By Motor vehicles, a. That any of the following was used:

airships, or other i. Motorized vehicles; or,
similar means ii. Other efficient means of transportation similar to automobile or airplane.
b. The same was used as means of committing the crime, such as by using the same to:
i. go to the place of the crime;
ii. carry away the effects thereof; and
iii. facilitate their escape.

Cruelty a. Injury caused be was deliberately increased by causing other wrong; and
b. Other wrong was unnecessary for the execution of the purpose of the offender.

21. What are the circumstances absorbed by treachery?

Circumstance Application
Abuse of superior There is an abuse of superior strength in committing murder but such should be considered as
strength absorbed in treachery.
Nighttime General Rule: The aggravating circumstance of nighttime is absorbed by treachery if it
facilitated the treacherous attack.
Exception: When nighttime is not absorbed by the aggravating circumstance of treachery. —
Inasmuch as the treachery consisted in the fact that the victims’ hands were tied at the time they
were beaten, the circumstance of nighttime is not absorbed in treachery, but can be perceived
distinctly therefrom, since the treachery rests upon an independent factual basis. A special case
therefore is present to which the rule that nighttime is absorbed in treachery does not apply.
Where both the treacherous mode of attack and nocturnity were deliberately decided upon in the
same case, they can be considered separately if such circumstances have different factual bases.
Craft General Rule: Craft is absorbed in treachery.
Exception: When craft was employed not with a view to making treachery more effective as
nighttime and abuse of superior strength would in the killing of the victim.
(People v. Layson, G.R. No. L-25177, October 31, 1969; People v. Kalipayan, G.R. No. 229829, January 22, 2018;People v. Costales,
G.R. No. 141154-56, January 15, 2002; People vs. Ong, G.R. No. L-34497 January 30, 1975; ESTRADA, Book One, page 148; People
v. San Pedro, G.R. No. L-44274, January 22, 1980; People v. Ampo-an, G.R. No. 75366. July 4, 1990; Reyes, Book One, supra at 470).

22. May the aggravating circumstance of treachery be appreciated in the crime of slight physical injuries?
Yes. Treachery exists when an offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means, methods or forms
which tend directly or especially to ensure its execution, without risk to the offender, arising from the defense that the
offended party might make. This definition sets out what must be shown by evidence to conclude that treachery existed,
namely: (1) the employment of such means of execution as would give the person attacked no opportunity for self-defense
or retaliation; and (2) the deliberate and conscious adoption of the means of execution. To reiterate, the essence of
qualifying circumstance is the suddenness, surprise and the lack of expectation that the attack will take place, thus,
depriving the victim of any real opportunity for self-defense while ensuring the commission of the crime without risk to the
aggressor. Likewise, even when the victim was forewarned of the danger to his person, treachery may still be appreciated
since what is decisive is that the execution of the attack made it impossible for the victim to defend himself or to retaliate.
(People vs. Villacorta, G.R. No. 186412, September 07, 2011)

23. At around 4:00 in the morning, AAA was awakened with a loud bang in the door of their bedroom. When she
opened the door, CCC leaped on their bed and repeatedly stabbed her husband, BBB, who was sleeping. BBB
was able to kick CCC out of the room and even close the door. Thereafter, BBB collapsed and met his demise.
CCC was charged with Murder for the death of BBB. CCC argues that the charge of Murder is incorrect because
there was no treachery considering that BBB was able to defend himself. Is treachery present in this case?
Yes. The sudden attack on while asleep in his own home amply demonstrates treachery in the commission of the crime.
The victim had no inkling of the impending attack that night; or any peril to his person as he felt secured in his home. The
victim was not able to put up an effective defense. Although he kicked and pushed the appellant out of their room, this did
not negate the presence of treachery. Even if the victim was able to retaliate as a result of his reflexes, so long as he did
not have the opportunity to repel the initial assault. (People vs. Moreno y Tazon, G.R. No. 191759, March 2, 2020, J. Hernando)

24. AAA and BBB had a confrontation. The day after, AAA entered the house of BBB and shot him. Is evident
premeditation present?
No. The elements of evident premeditation are: (1) a previous decision by the accused to commit the crime; (2) an overt
act or acts manifestly indicating that the accused clung to his determination; and (3) a lapse of time between the decision
to commit the crime and its actual execution sufficient to allow accused to reflect upon the consequences of his acts. The
confrontation between AAA and BBB one day before the killing does not constitute evident premeditation. It was not shown
how and when AAA planned to kill and how much time had elapsed before the killing was carried out; thus, evident

6
 premeditation cannot be considered. Evident premeditation must be based on external acts and must be evident, not
merely suspected, indicating deliberate planning. (People v. Manansala, G.R. No. 233104, September 02, 2020. J. Hernando)

25. What are some absolutory causes?

a. Spontaneous desistance in the attempted stage unless the overt act committed already constitutes a crime other than
that intended;
b. Attempted/frustrated light felonies except those against persons or property;
c. Accessories in light felonies;
d. Certain relatives who are accessories subject to the requisites provided therein: upon those who are such with respect
to their spouses, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity
within the same degrees;
e. Death and physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances: any legally married person;
f. Certain relatives in theft, estafa, and malicious mischief: committed or caused mutually by the following persons: (a)
spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives by affinity in the same line; (b) the widowed spouse with respect to
the property which belonged to the deceased spouse before the same shall have passed into the possession of another;
and (c) brothers and sisters and brothers–in–law and sisters–in–law, if living together;
g. The commission of a crime, or violent insanity of any other ailment requiring the compulsory confinement of the patient
in a hospital, shall be considered legal grounds for the detention of any person;
h. Battered woman syndrome;
i. Status offenses in Sections 57 and 58, R.A. 9344;
j. The provisions of this Article (On trespass to dwelling) shall not be applicable to any person who shall enter another’s
dwelling for the purpose of preventing some serious harm to himself, the occupants of the dwelling or a third person,
nor shall it be applicable to any person who shall enter a dwelling for the purpose of rendering some service to humanity
or justice, nor to anyone who shall enter cafes, taverns, inns and other public houses, while the same are open;
k. In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness and rape, the marriage of the offender with the offended party
shall extinguish the criminal action or remit the penalty already imposed upon him. The provisions of this paragraph
shall also be applicable to the co–principals, accomplices and accessories after the fact of the above–mentioned
crimes;
l. Mistake of fact;
m. Repeal of a penal law, either absolute or modification of the penalty when favorable to the offender; or
n. Instigation by reason of public policy. (Article 6 (3), 7, 16, 20, 24, 247, 280, 332, & 344; Section 26, R.A. 9262)

26. Who are liable as Principal, Accomplice or Accessory?

Principal a. Principal by Direct Participation - those who take a direct part in the execution of the act;
b. Principal by Inducement - those who directly force or induce others to commit it; and
c. Principal by Indispensable Cooperation - those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by
another act without which it would not have been accomplished.

Accomplice Those persons who, not being considered as principal in Art. 17, cooperate in the execution of the
offense by previous or simultaneous acts.

Accessory 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:
a. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime;
b. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in order to
prevent its discovery; or
c. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principal of the crime, provided the
accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or whenever the author of the crime 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.
(Article 17-19, Revised Penal Code)

27. AAA was an accomplice in the crime of murder. BBB, friend of AAA, fetched him so that he can escape from the
investigating officers. May BBB be liable as an accessory? If not, what crime can he be made liable for?
No, he is not liable as an accessory because he assisted in the escape of an accomplice to the crime and not the principal.
However, BBB may still be liable for obstruction of justice which penalizes assisting the escape of any person he knows,
or has reasonable ground to believe or suspect, has committed any offense under existing penal laws in order to prevent
his arrest, prosecution and conviction. (Article 19, Sec. 1(c), PD 1829)

28. Distinguish conspiracy as a felony from conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal liability
Conspiracy as felony Conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal liability
As a felony, conspirators do not need to actually As a manner of incurring criminal liability, if they commit treason,
commit treason, rebellion, insurrection, etc., it rebellion, etc., they will be held liable for it, and the conspiracy which
being sufficient that two or more persons agree they had before committing the crime is only a manner of incurring
and decide to commit it. criminal liability, not a separate offense.
(Luis B. Reyes, The Revised Penal Code, Volume I)

29. What is conspiracy and proposal to commit conspiracy?

Conspiracy Proposal to Commit Conspiracy
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons There is a proposal when the person who has decided to commit a
come to an agreement concerning the commission felony proposes its execution to some other person or persons.
of a felony and decide to commit it.
(Art. 8, RPC)

7
30. What are the punishable conspiracies under the Revised Penal Code?
a. Conspiracy to commit rebellion;
b. Conspiracy to commit coup d'etat;
c. Conspiracy to commit treason; and
d. Conspiracy to commit sedition. (Art. 136, 115, 14, Revised Penal Code)

31. Distinguish Recidivism, Habituality, Quasi-Recidivism, and Habitual Delinquency.

Recidivism
A recidivist is one who, at
the time of his trial for one
crime, shall have been
previously convicted by
final judgment of another
crime embraced in the
same title of this Code.
It is enough that a final
judgment has been
rendered in the first
offense.
Previous and subsequent
offenses are included in
the same title.
An aggravating
circumstance.
(Reyes, Revised Penal Code, p. 384)
Habituality Quasi-recidivism
The offender has been
previously punished by an
offense to which the law
attaches an equal or
greater penalty or for two or
more crimes to which it
attaches a lighter penalty.
It is necessary that the
offender shall have served
out his sentence for the first
offense.
Previous and subsequent
offenses must not be
embraced in the same title.
Not always an aggravating
circumstance.
Habitual delinquency
Before beginning to If within a period of ten years from
serve his sentence, the date of his release or last
or while serving the conviction of the crimes of serious or
same after having less serious physical injuries, robo,
been convicted by hurto, estafa or falsification, he is
final judgment, found guilty of any if said crimes a
commits a felony. third time or oftener.
There is final There is final judgment or the
judgment in the first offender has been released for the
offense but the first offense.
sentence has not yet
been served out.
Any offense. Only the crimes of serious or less
serious physical injuries, robo, hurto,
estafa or falsification are involved.
Special aggravating Extraordinary aggravating
circumstance. circumstance.

32. What are the punishable acts under P.D. No. 1829 or the “Obstruction of Justice” Law?
Any person who knowingly or willfully obstructs, impedes, frustrates or delays the apprehension of suspects and the
investigation and prosecution of criminal cases by committing any of the following acts, among others:
a. Preventing witnesses from testifying in any criminal proceeding or from reporting the commission of any offense;
b. Altering, destroying, suppressing or concealing any paper, record, document, or object, with intent to impair its verity,
authenticity, legibility, availability, or admissibility as evidence in any investigation of or official proceedings in, criminal
cases, or to be used in the investigation of, or official proceedings in, criminal cases;
c. Harboring or concealing, or facilitating the escape of, any person he knows, or has reasonable ground to believe or
suspect, has committed any offense under existing penal laws in order to prevent his arrest prosecution and conviction;
d. Publicly using a fictitious name for the purpose of concealing a crime, evading prosecution or the execution of a
judgment, or concealing his true name and other personal circumstances for the same purpose or purposes; or
e. Delaying the prosecution of criminal cases by obstructing the service of process or court orders or disturbing
proceedings in the fiscal's offices, in Tanodbayan, or in the courts. (Sec. 1, P.D. No. 1829)

33. For bumping AAA's car, BBB was found guilty of the crime of property damage through reckless imprudence, and
the court sentenced him to pay a P6,000 fine. When the judgment was to be executed, BBB was found to be
insolvent. Upon learning this fact, the prosecutor replied that the latter should suffer subsidiary imprisonment
which the court denied because the judgment finding him guilty did not include the said penalty. The prosecution
appealed. Later, the court issued an arrest warrant for BBB so that he could serve subsidiary imprisonment to
pay the fine. BBB petitioned for habeas corpus, claiming that his detention was unlawful. Will the petition prosper?
Yes. The petition for habeas corpus will prosper. Subsidiary penalty is not an accessory penalty which inheres to a principal
penalty and may therefore be imposed even if it is not expressly provided in the sentence. It is a penalty in lieu of the
penalty imposed in the sentence. Hence, unless the judgment or sentence expressly provides for subsidiary imprisonment,
the culprit cannot be made to undergo the same. As the facts show that there is no judgment sentencing the accused to
suffer subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvent to pay the fine imposed upon him, because the said subsidiary
imprisonment is not stated in the judgment finding him guilty, it is clear that the court could not legally compel him to serve
said subsidiary imprisonment. (People vs. Fajardo, G.R. No. 43466. May 25, 1938)

34. What are the exceptions to the applicability of the Indeterminate Sentence Law?
The Act shall not apply to:
a. To persons convicted of offenses punished with reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment;
b. To those convicted of treason, conspiracy, or proposal to commit treason;
c. To those convicted of misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition, or espionage;
d. To those convicted of piracy;
e. To those who are habitual delinquents;
f. To those who have escaped from confinement or evaded sentence;
g. To those who having been granted conditional pardon by the Chief Executive shall have violated the terms thereof; or
h. To those whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year, not to those already sentenced by final
judgment at the time of approval of this Act, except as provided in Section 5 hereof. (Sec 2, Act 4103)

35. A was found guilty of homicide. The trial court recognized the following mitigating factors: passion and
obfuscation, lack of intent to commit such a serious wrong, illiteracy, and voluntary surrender. It also recognized
the aggravating factor of nocturnality. Homicide is punishable by reclusion from society for a period ranging from
twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years. Determine the appropriate punishment to be meted out to
the accused by applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, taking into account the relevant aggravating and
mitigating circumstances.

8
 One potentially aggravating factor (nocturnality) and four potentially mitigating factors (passion and obfuscation, no intent
to commit a wrong as serious as that committed, and voluntary surrender) are apparent. Par. 4, Art. 64 is applicable in the
case. As a result, the modifying circumstances will be offset, leading to an excess of three mitigating circumstances. This
will support lowering the penalty to the bare minimum duration. The lowering of the penalty to the next lower degree under
paragraph 5 of said Article will not be justified by the existence of an aggravating circumstance, even if there are four
mitigating circumstances, as this is only applicable if there is no aggravating circumstance present. The maximum sentence
under the Indeterminate Sentence Law should be the minimum of the penalty, which is 12 years and 1 day to 14 years
and 8 months, since the crime committed was homicide and the corresponding punishment is reclusion temporal. The
punishment that is next lower in degree, which is prision mayor in its entirety (6 years and 1 day to 12 years), will therefore
serve as the minimum punishment. Therefore, the appropriate sentence would range from a minimum of 6 years and 1
day to a maximum of 12 years and 1 day. It would be very logical to impose the minimum of the minimum sentence under
the isl and the minimum of the maximum sentence due to the remaining mitigating circumstances after the off-setting.
(Act No. 4103, as amended)

36. What are the requisites of the three-fold rule?

The following are the requisites of the three-fold rule:
a. The maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than three (3) times the length of time
corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon him;
b. But in no case to exceed forty (40) years; and
c. This rule shall apply only when the convict is to serve four (4) or more sentences successively.
The three-fold rule applies only when the convict has to serve continuous imprisonment for several offenses. If the convict
already served sentence for one (1) offense, that imprisonment will not be considered. (RPC, Art. 70; Alejandro v. Director of
Prisons, G.R. No. L-3215, October 6, 1949).

37. Who are disqualified to apply for probation under the Probation Law (P.D. 968, as amended by R.A. 10707)?
a. Those sentenced to serve a max. term of more than six (6) years;
b. Crimes against national security convicts;
c. Those previously convicted by final judgement of an offense punished by imprisonment of more than six (6) months
and one (1) day and/or fine of more than one hundred thousand pesos (P1,000.00);
d. Those who have been once in probation under this Decree;
e. Those who are already serving sentence at the time the substance provisions of this Decree became applicable; or
f. Drug trafficker and pushers, regardless of penalty imposed by court, as amended by the Comprehensive Dangerous
Drugs Act of 2002. (Sec. 9, P.D. 968; Sec. 24. R.A. 9165)

38. What is the legal effect of an application for probation on the judgment of conviction?
The judgement becomes final. Once an offender has filed an application for probation, such act is already considered as
a waiver of his right to appeal. As a result of the finality of the decision, there is no more period of appeal.
XPN: When a judgment of conviction imposing a non-probationable penalty is appealed or reviewed, and such judgment
is modified through the imposition of a probationable penalty, the defendant shall be allowed to apply for probation based
on the modified decision before such decision becomes final. (Sec. 4, PD 968, as amended by RA 10707).

39. Is an accused who has applied and was granted community service in a previous case disqualified to apply
probation in a subsequent case?
No. Under the Probation Law and RPC, probation or community service shall be availed of only once. However, these two
remedies can be successively availed. Here, availing community service in a previous case means that the penalty
imposed in that case is not higher than arresto menor or arrestor mayor. Hence, he can apply for probation in the present
case since what is disqualified to apply for probation are those who have been previously convicted by final judgment of
an offense punished by imprisonment of more than six months and one day. (A.M. No. 20-06-14-SC, October 6, 2020)

40. XXX is charged with the sale of dangerous drugs. Pursuant to a plea-bargaining agreement, he pleaded guilty to
the lesser offense of possession of drug paraphernalia, the penalty of which does not exceed 6 years of
imprisonment. Can XXX apply for probation?
Yes. Under Section 24 of RA No. 9165, any person convicted for drug trafficking or pushing cannot avail of the privilege
granted by the Probation Law. Here, possession of drug paraphernalia is not considered as drug trafficking or pushing.
Hence, XXX may apply for probation. (Pascua vs. People, G.R. No. 250578, September 07, 2020)

41. Who is considered a “Child in Conflict with the Law” and what are their rights, under the Juvenile Justice and
Welfare Act (RA 9344, as amended)?
A Child in Conflict with the Law is a person under 18 years of age who is alleged, accused of, or adjudged as having
committed an offense under Philippine Laws. His/her right include the following:
a. the right not to be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
b. the right not to be imposed a sentence of capital punishment or life imprisonment, without the possibility of release;
c. the right not to be deprived, unlawfully or arbitrarily, of his/her liberty; detention or imprisonment being a disposition of
last resort, and which shall be for the shortest appropriate period of time;
d. the right to be treated with humanity and respect, for the inherent dignity of the person, and in a manner which takes
into account the needs of a person of his/her age. In particular, a child deprived of liberty shall be separated from adult
offenders at all times. No child shall be detained together with adult offenders. He/She shall be conveyed separately
to or from court. He/She shall await hearing of his/her own case in a separate holding area. A child in conflict with the
law shall have the right to maintain contact with his/her family through correspondence and visits, save in exceptional
circumstances. (Sec. 4(e), R.A. 9344)

42. What is included in “Community Service” under the Community Service Act?
Community service shall consist of any actual physical activity which inculcates civic consciousness, and is intended
towards the improvement of a public work or promotion of a public service. (Art. 88a [3], RPC, as amended by Sec. 3, RA 11362)

9
43. What is the effect of violation of the Community Service Act?
If the defendant violates the terms of the community service, the court shall order his/her re-arrest and the defendant shall
serve the full term of the penalty, as the case may be, in jail, or in the house of the defendant as provided under Article 88.
(Art. 88a [4], RPC, as amended by Sec. 3, R.A. No. 11362)

44. What is included in civil liability for felonies?

a. Restitution;
b. Reparation of the damage caused;
c. Indemnification for consequential damages. (Art. 104, Revised Penal Code)

II. BOOK II (Articles 114-365 of the RPC) and Related Special Laws
45. Is Section 4 of RA 11479, the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) unconstitutional?
Only the proviso. The main part of Section 4 chiefly pertains to conduct. It is plain and evident from the language used that
the enumeration refers to punishable acts, or those pertaining to bodily movements that tend to produce an effect in the
external world, and not speech. The acts constitutive of the crime of terrorism are clearly forms of conduct unrelated to
speech, in contradistinction with the enumeration in the proviso, which are forms of speech or expression, or are
manifestations thereof. The proviso’s “Not Intended Clause” is void for vagueness and overbroad. (Calleja v. Executive
Secretary, G.R. No. 252578, December 07, 2021 [Landmark Case Q&A])

46. What are the punishable acts of Terrorism under the Anti-Terror Act (ATA) of 2020?
a. Engages in acts intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person, or endangers a person's life;
b. Engages in acts intended to cause extensive damage or destruction to a government or public facility, public place or
private property;
c. Engages in acts intended to cause extensive interference with, damage or destruction to critical infrastructure;
d. Develops, manufactures, possesses, acquires, transports, supplies or uses weapons, explosives or of biological,
nuclear, radiological or chemical weapons; and
e. Release of dangerous substances, or causing fire, floods or explosions
when the purpose of such act, by its nature and context, is to intimidate the general public or a segment thereof, create an
atmosphere or spread a message of fear, to provoke or influence by intimidation the government or any international
organization, or seriously destabilize or destroy the fundamental political, economic, or social structures of the country, or
create a public emergency or seriously undermine public safety;
f. Threatens to engage in the above enumerated activities;
g. Planning, Training, Preparing, and facilitating the Commission of Terrorism;
h. Conspiracy to Commit Terrorism;
i. Proposal to Commit Terrorism;
j. Inciting to Commit Terrorism;
k. Recruitment to and Membership in a Terrorist Organization; or
l. Providing Material Support to Terrorists. (Sec. 4-12, ATA 2020)

47. What is a “terrorist organization” under the Anti-Terrorism Act?

It refers to any entity organized for the purpose of engaging in terrorism, or those proscribed under Sec. 26 of the Act or
the United Nations Security Council-designated terrorist organization. (Sec. 3(m), ATA 2020)

48. Who are liable for Terrorism?

a. Terrorist Individuals - any natural person who commits any of the acts defined and penalized under Sections 4-12 of the
ATA;
b. Terrorist Organization, Association or Group of Persons - any entity organized for the purpose of engaging in terrorism,
or those proscribed under Section 26 of the United Nations Security Council-designated terrorist organization; and
c. Accessory - any person who takes part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manner: (a) by profiting
himself/herself or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime; (b) by concealing or destroying the body of
the crime, or the effects, or instruments thereof, in order to prevent its discovery; or (c) by harboring, concealing, or
assisting in the escape of the principal or conspirator of the crime. (Secs. 3 (l) & (m), 14, ATA)

49. What are the requisites to be liable for providing support to terrorists under Sec. 12 of the Anti-Terrorism Act?
a. Provides material support to any terrorist individual or terrorist organization, association or group of persons committing
any of the acts punishable under Section 4; and
b. Knowing that such individual or organization, association, or group of persons is committing or planning to commit such
acts. (Sec. 12, ATA 2020)

50. How long can the law enforcement agent or military personnel detain a person suspected of committing
Terrorism?
14 days. Any law enforcement agent or military personnel, who, having been duly authorized in writing by the ATC has
taken custody of a person suspected of committing acts of Terrorism shall, without incurring any criminal liability for delay
in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities, deliver said suspected person to the proper judicial
authority within a period of fourteen (14) calendar days counted from the moment the said suspected person has been
apprehended or arrested, detained, and taken into custody by the law enforcement agent or military personnel. The period
of detention may be extended to a maximum period of (10) calendar days if it is established that (1) further detention of
the person/s is necessary to preserve evidence related to terrorism or complete the investigation; (2) further detention of
the person/s is necessary to prevent the commission of another terrorism; and (3) the investigation is being conducted
properly and without delay. (Sec. 29, ATA 2020)

10
51. Distinguish between Evasion of Service of Sentence, Delivery of Prisoners from Jails, and Infidelity in the Custody
of Prisoners.
Evasion of Service of Sentence
(Art. 157)
The offender is the escaping
convict.
Only for convicted prisoners.
Committed only be means of dolo.
(Art. 156, 156, 223, and 224, RPC)
Delivery of Prisoners from Jails Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners
(Art. 156) (Art. 223 & 224)
The offender is the person who The offender is the custodian who consented
removed from jail or penal to the escape of a prisoner in his custody or
establishment the person confined whose negligence allowed the escape of the
therein or helped in their escape. prisoner.
Can be either a detention or Can be either a detention or convicted
convicted prisoner. prisoner.
Committed only be means of dolo. Can be committed by means of dolo or culpa.

52. What are difference between direct assault, indirect assault, and disobedience to persons in authority?
Direct Assault Indirect Assault Disobedience to a person in
authority and his agent
Committed by: Committed by making use of force or Committed by resisting or
a. Employing force or intimidation for the intimidation seriously disobeying
attainment of any of the purpose
enumerated in defining the crimes of
rebellion and sedition; or
b. Attacking, employing force, or
seriously intimidating or resisting
Committed against any person in Committed against any person coming Committed against any person in
authority or any of his agents, while to the aid of the authorities or their authority, or the agents of such
engaged in the performance of official agents on occasion of the commission person while engaged in the
duties of any of the crimes defined in the next performance of official duties
preceding article
(Article 148, 149, 151, Revised Penal Code)

53. AAA, a teacher, caught her student, BBB, cheating in the exams. BBB punched AAA to stop her from disclosing
the cheating incident to the Discipline Office. XXX, BBB’s classmate, came to stop BBB’s display of violence, but
the latter punched and kicked XXX for meddling in their conversation. Can XXX file a complaint against BBB for
Direct Assault?
Yes. Direct assault may be committed against persons in authority or their agents. A teacher is deemed as a person in
authority in the commission of Direct Assault. Thus, persons who come to the aid of teachers, shall be deemed an agent
of a person in authority. Here, XXX was attacked by BBB because he was trying to stop the latter from attacking AAA. As
such, BBB committed direct assault against XXX, an agent of A. (Article 148, 152, RPC)

54. What is the effect of the use of loose firearms in the commission of a crime?
Effect of Use of Loose Firearm
When inherent in the commission of a crime The use of loose firearm shall be considered as an
punishable under the Revised Penal Code or other aggravating circumstance.
special laws
If the crime committed with the use of a loose firearm The penalty for illegal possession of firearm shall be
is penalized by the law with a maximum penalty lower imposed in lieu of the penalty for the crime charged.
than that prescribed for illegal possession of firearm
If the / crime committed with the use of a loose rearm The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be
is penalized by the law with a maximum penalty which imposed in addition to the penalty for the crime punishable
is equal to that imposed for illegal possession of under the Revised Penal Code or other special laws of
firearm which he/she is found guilty.
If the violation of this Act is in furtherance of, or The violation under this act shall be absorbed as an
incident to, or in connection with the crime of element of the crime of rebellion or insurrection, or
rebellion, insurrection, or attempted coup d’ etat attempted coup d’ etat.
If the crime is committed by the person without using The violation of this Act shall be considered as a distinct
the loose firearm and separate offense.
(Sec. 29, R.A. 10591)

55. How is Falsification of Public Document committed and what are its elements?
Falsification of Public Document is committed when the public document is simulated in a manner so as to give it the
appearance of a true and genuine instrument, thus, leading others to errors as to its authenticity. Falsification of Public
Documents has the following elements:
a. The offender is a public officer, employee, or notary public;
b. The offender takes advantage of his or her official position; and
c. The offender falsifies a document by committing any of the acts enumerated in Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code.
(People vs. Mondejar, G.R. Nos. 245931-32, April 25, 2022; People vs. Gil-Roflo, G.R. Nos. 249564 & 249568-76. March 21, 2022.
J. Hernando)

11
56. Distinguish Falsification and Estafa as a complex crime and as separate crimes.
Complex crime of estafa through Falsification and estafa as separate crimes
falsification of document
When falsification of public, official or When falsification of public, official or commercial document is not a
commercial document is a necessary means necessary means to commit other crimes, this is not a complex crime.
to commit estafa, offender is liable for a Thus, when falsification of public, official or commercial document is a
complex crime under Article 48 of RPC. merely a means to conceal estafa, the crimes are separate.
(Ilumin vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 85667, February 23, 1995; People vs. Monteverde, G.R. No. 139610, August 12, 2002)

57. If a person executed 2 inconsistent affidavits, will the person automatically be liable for perjury?
No. There is no perjury solely on the basis of two contradictory statements. There must be further evidence that will show
which of the two sworn statements is false (U.S. vs. Capistrano 40 Phil. 902).

58. When is Illegal Sale of Dangerous Drugs consummated in a buy-bust operation?

In a buy-bust operation, the receipt by the poseur-buyer of the dangerous drug and the corresponding receipt by the seller
of the marked money consummate the illegal sale of dangerous drugs. (People vs. Batino, G.R. No. 254035. November 15,
2021. J. Hernando)

59. What are the elements of Illegal Sale and Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs and Illegal Possession of Drug
Paraphernalia?
Illegal Sale of Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs Illegal Possession of Drug Paraphernalia
Dangerous Drugs
a. The identity of the a. The accused was in possession of an item a. Possession or control by the accused of
buyer and the seller, or object identified as a prohibited drug; any equipment, apparatus, or other
the object, and the b. Such possession was not authorized by paraphernalia fit or intended for smoking,
consideration; and law; and consuming, administering, injecting,
b. The delivery of the c. The accused freely and consciously ingesting, or introducing any dangerous
thing sold and the possessed the said drug, for the illegal drug into the body; and
payment therefor. possession charge. b. Such possession is not authorized by law.
(People vs. Ortega, G.R. No. 240224. February 23, 2022; CICL XXX vs. People, G.R. No. 230964. March 2, 2022; People vs. Batino,
[G.R. No. 254035. November 15, 2021. J. Hernando)

60. May the police officers simply bypass the rule on chain of custody under RA 9165, otherwise known as
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002?
No, they may not. The procedure laid out in Section 21, Article II of RA 9165 is considered substantive law and not merely
a procedural technicality. The law requires that the police authorities implementing RA 9165 strictly comply with the chain
of custody procedure. It requires the apprehending team, after seizure and confiscation, to immediately conduct a physical
inventory of, and photograph, the seized drugs in the presence of: (a) the accused or the persons from whom such items
were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative or counsel; (b) a representative from the media; (c) a
representative from the DOJ; and (d) an elected public official. These four (4) witnesses should be present at the time of
the apprehension of the accused and must all sign the copies of the inventory and obtain a copy thereof. However, failure
to strictly do so does not, ipso facto, render the seizure and custody over the illegal drugs as void and invalid if: (a) there
is justifiable ground for such noncompliance; and (b) the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized evidence were
preserved. (People vs. Del Rosario, G.R. No. 235658, June 22, 2020)

61. X and Y were drinking in Y’s house. Y made a joke which offended X. X then smashed the beer bottle on Y’s head,
causing the latter’s death. X later tested positive for a dangerous drug. He then claims insanity as an exempting
circumstance in the charge of Homicide. Is this defense tenable?
No. The defense is not tenable because the use of dangerous drugs does not amount to insanity that can exempt a person.
Using drug intoxication as a defense is perplexing taking into consideration that the use of dangerous drugs is considered
a qualifying circumstance under Section 25 of RA 9165. (People vs. Pilen, G.R. No. 254875, February 13, 2023, J. Hernando)

62. Distinguish Direct bribery from Indirect bribery.

Direct Bribery
In direct bribery, there is an agreement between the
public officer and the giver of the gift or present. In
direct bribery, the offender agrees to perform or
performs an act or refrains from doing something
because of the gift or promise.
(Pozar vs. CA, G.R. No. L-62439, October 23, 1984).
Indirect Bribery
In indirect bribery, usually, no agreement between the public
officer and the giver exists. In indirect bribery, it is not
necessary that the officer should do any particular act or even
promise to do an act, as it is enough that he accepts gifts
offered to him by reason of his office.

63. Distinguish Malversation and Technical Malversation.

Malversation
The public officer misappropriates public funds for his
own personal use or allows any other person to take
such public funds for the latter's personal use.
(Article 217; Article 220, Revised Penal Code)
Technical Malversation
The public officer applies public funds under his
administration not for his or another's personal use,
but to a public use other than that for which the fund was
appropriated by law or ordinance.

64. AAA, the Vice-Mayor, signed, and persuaded Sangguniang Bayan (SB) members to sign, the Minutes of the SB
which misrepresented that SB deliberated on the issuance of 2 resolutions giving AAA the authority to enter into
a contract with BBB, wherein BBB was granted the authority to extract surplus sand and gravel supply from the
river in exchange for its services. Is AAA guilty of violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act (RA) 3019?
Yes, there is. AAA is the Vice Mayor at the time material to the offense charged. He deliberately acted with manifest
partiality and bad faith when he, as the presiding officer of the SB, signed the Minutes and persuaded the other

12
 sangguniang members to sign it, knowing fully well that there were certain items not included nor discussed on the regular
session. As a result thereof, AAA was given the authority to enter into a contract with BBB, which was grossly
disadvantageous to the government. BBB was given unwarranted benefits, advantage, or preference by virtue of the
contract, not in the form of monetary compensation, but by getting the surplus supply of sand and gravel extracted from
the river, despite not having the necessary permit to do so. The said benefit, advantage, or preference would not have
been probable without the participation of AAA, as the presiding officer of the SB, in enacting the Resolutions, through
falsification of the Minutes. (People vs. Mondejar, G.R. Nos. 245931-32. April 25, 2022. J. Hernando)

65. What is the meaning of “combination or series” in the definition of ill-gotten wealth in RA 7080?
In the context of R.A. No. 7080, "combination" means that at least two of the enumerated acts found in Section 1(d), i.e.,
one of any of the enumerated acts, combined with another act falling under any other of the enumerated means may
constitute the crime of plunder. With respect to the term "series," the majority states that it has been understood as
pertaining to "two or more overt or criminal acts falling under the same category". (Joseph Estrada vs Sandiganbayan, G.R.
No. 148560, November 19, 2001)

66. What is the penalty for Public Officers who commit the unlawful acts under the Child Marriage Law?
Such public officers shall be dismissed from the service and may be perpetually disqualified from holding office, at the
discretion of the courts. (Sec. 4, R.A. 11596)

67. What are the elements of Qualified Trafficking in Persons?

The elements of Qualified Trafficking in Persons are as follows:
1. The act of "recruitment, transportation, transfer or harbouring, or receipt of persons with or without the victim's
consent or knowledge, within or across national borders";
2. The means used which include "threat or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse
of power or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or
benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another" ; and
3. The purpose of trafficking is exploitation which includes "exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of
sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs. (People vs. XXX, G.R.
No. 225288. June 28, 2021. J. Hernando)

68. Are the crimes under Section 5 (i) and 5 (e) of RA No. 9262,otherwise known as the “Anti-Violence Against Women
and Their Children Act” mala in se?
Yes. Sec 5 (i) causing mental or emotional anguish and Sec 5 (e) attempting to compel or compelling to engage or desist
in a conduct are mala in se and hence there must thus be a concurrence of both actus reus and mens rea to constitute a
crime. (Acharon vs. People [En Banc], G.R. No. 224946, November 9, 2021)

69. May a woman, here in the Philippines, file a case under the Anti-VAWC Act for psychological abuse against her
husband who had an extramarital affair abroad?
Yes. Section 7 of R.A. No. 9262 contemplates that acts of violence against women and their children may manifest as
transitory or continuing crimes. Thus, even if the extra-marital affair causing the offended wife mental and emotional
anguish is committed abroad, the same does not place a prosecution under R.A. No. 9262 absolutely beyond the reach of
Philippine courts. (AAA v. BBB, G.R. No. 212448, January 11, 2018)

70. What are the protection orders that may be issued under RA 9262?
Barangay Temporary Protection Order Permanent Protection
Protection Order (TPO) Order (PPO)
(BPO)

Issued by the Punong Issued by the court to grant any, some or all
Barangay ordering of the reliefs mentioned in this Act, namely:
the perpetrator to a. prohibition from committing acts of
desist from violence against women and children;
committing acts b. prohibition from harassment or
under Section 5 (a) communicating with petitioner;
and (b) of this Act. c. Removal and exclusion of the respondent
from the residence of the petitioner;
d. Directing the respondent to stay away from
petitioner and designated family or
household member;
e. Directing lawful possession and use by
petitioner of an automobile and other
essential personal effects and directing the
appropriate law enforcement officer to
accompany the petitioner to their
residence;
f. Granting a temporary or permanent
custody of a children to the petitioner;
g. Directing the respondent to provide
support to the woman and/or her child if
entitled to legal support;
h. Prohibition of the respondent from any use
or possession of any firearm or deadly
weapon and order him to surrender the
same to the court;
i. Restitution for actual damages caused by
Issued by the court to grant any, some or all of
the reliefs mentioned in this Act, namely:
a. prohibition from committing acts of
violence against women and childred;
b. prohibition from harassment or
communicating with petitioner;
c. Removal and exclusion of the respondent
from the residence of the petitioner;
d. Directing the respondent to stay away from
petitioner and designated family or
household member;
e. Directing lawful possession and use by
petitioner of an automobile and other
essential personal effects and directing the
appropriate law enforcement officer to
accompany the petitioner to their
residence;
f. Granting a temporary or permanent
custody of a children to the petitioner;
g. Directing the respondent to provide
support to the woman and/or her child if
entitled to legal support;
h. Prohibition of the respondent from any use
or possession of any firearm or deadly
weapon and order him to surrender the
same to the court;
i. Restitution for actual damages caused by

13
 the violence inflicted;
j. Directing the DSWD or any appropriate
agency to provide petitioner’s needs; and
k. Other forms of relief as the court deems
necessary.
the violence inflicted;
j. Directing the DSWD or any appropriate
agency to provide petitioner’s needs; and
k. Other forms of relief as the court deems
necessary.

Issued on the date of Issued on the date of filing of the application Issued after notice and hearing.
filing after ex parte after ex parte determination that such order
determination of the should be issued.
basis of the
application.

Effective for fifteen Effective for 30 days. Effective until revoked by a court upon
(15) days. application of the person in whose favor the
order was issued.

A petition for protection order may be filed by any of the following:

a. the offended party;
b. parents or guardians of the offended party;
c. ascendants, descendants or collateral relatives within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity;
d. officers or social workers of the DSWD or social workers of local government units (LGUs);
e. police officers, preferably those in charge of women and children's desks;
f. Punong Barangay or Barangay Kagawad;
g. lawyer, counselor, therapist or healthcare provider of the petitioner;
h. At least two (2) concerned responsible citizens of the city or municipality where the violence against women and their
children occurred and who has personal knowledge of the offense committed.
(Sec. 9, 14, 15, 16, RA 9262)

71. What is child pornography under R.A. No. 9775?

Child pornography refers to any representation, whether visual, audio, or written combination thereof, by electronic,
mechanical, digital, optical, magnetic or any other means, of child engaged or involved in real or simulated explicit sexual
activities. (Sec. 3(b), R.A. No. 9975)

72. Is the possession of child pornography punishable without the intent to sell, distribute, publish, or broadcast?
Yes. The authors of this statute intended to penalize even the mere possession, for personal use or enjoyment, of child
pornography. The law, as enacted, considers possession with intent to sell, distribute, or publish to be distinct and separate
from mere possession. (Cabias vs. People, G.R. No. 247348, November 16, 2021)

73. When is there an attempt to commit child prostitution?

There is an attempt to commit child prostitution in the following instances:
a. When any person who, not being a relative of a child, is found alone with the said child inside the room or cubicle of
a house, an inn, hotel, motel, pension house, apartelle or other similar establishments, vessel, vehicle or any other
hidden or secluded area under circumstances which would lead a reasonable person to believe that the child is about
to be exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse; or
b. When any person is receiving services from a child in a sauna parlor or bath, massage clinic, health club and other
similar establishments. (Sec. 6, R.A. 7610)

74. Who may be held guilty of child trafficking?

Any person who shall engage in trading and dealing with children including, but not limited to, the act of buying and selling
of a child for money, or for any other consideration, or barter. (Sec. 7, R.A. No. 7610)

75. May a person be liable for Obscene Publication and Indecent Shows even if the child consents to the act?
Yes. R.A. No. 7610 provides that any person who shall hire, employ, use, persuade, induce or coerce a child to perform in
obscene exhibitions and indecent shows are liable. The person is liable even if he obtains the consent of the child through
persuasion, coercion, etc. (Sec. 9, RA 7610,as amended by RA 11648)

76. X wanted to humiliate AAA by pouring boiling water on him. However, due to the splash of the water, BBB (2 years
old) and CCC (3 months old) were also hit, causing burns on their skins and faces. What crime/s is X liable for?
X is liable for 2 counts of child abuse and physical injuries.The accused is liable for child abuse when he inflicted physical
injuries on BBB and CCC although there is no intent to degrade, debase, or demean their intrinsic worth and dignity as
human beings. In fact, the intention of the accused is merely to inflict injury on AAA but because of aberratio ictus or
mistake of blow the minors were also injured. Because of Article 4 of RPC, the accused is liable for the wrongful act done
even though it differs from the wrongful act intended. (Patulot vs. People, G.R. No. 235071, January 7, 2019)

77. What is Facilitation of Child Marriage under R.A. 11596, otherwise known as the Child Marriage Law?
Facilitation of Child Marriage refers to the act of causing, fixing, facilitating or arranging the child marriage of contracting
parties that leads to their marriage and cohabitation. (Sec. 4(f), R.A. 11596)

78. What is child marriage?

Child marriage refers to any marriage entered into where one or both parties are children as defined in the paragraph
above, and solemnized in civil or church proceedings, or in any recognized traditional, cultural or customary manner. It
shall include an informal union or cohabitation outside of wedlock between an adult and a child, or between children. (Sec.
3(b), RA 11596)

79. What are the unlawful acts under the Child Marriage Law?
1. Facilitation of Child Marriage;

14
 2. Solemnization of Child Marriage; or
3. Cohabitation of an Adult with a child outside wedlock. (Sec. 4, R.A. 11596)

80. Who may initiate a complaint for a violation of the Child Marriage Law?
Any concerned individual can initiate a complaint under the Child Marriage law because its violations are deemed as
public crimes. (Sec. 5, RA 11596)

81. What are the elements of Statutory Rape?

Statutory Rape has the following elements: (1) that a man had carnal knowledge of a woman; and (2) that the offended
party is under 16 years of age. (People vs. XXX, G.R. No. 255491. April 18, 2022. J. Hernando)

82. What are the elements of qualified rape?

a. Sexual congress;
b. With a woman;
c. Done by force and without consent;
d. The victim is under [eighteen] years of age at the time of the rape; and
e. The offender is [either] a parent (whether legitimate, illegitimate or adopted), (ascendant,stepparent, guardian, relative
by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent) of the victim. (People
vs. XXX, G.R. No. 238405. December 7, 2020. J. Hernando)

83. What are the requisites to avail of the exempting circumstance of close-age in Statutory Rape?
a. The victim is between 13-16 years old;
b. The age difference between the victim and the offender is not more than 3 years;
c. The sexual intercourse is consensual, non-abusive, and non-exploitative.
Note: Non-abusive shall mean the absence of undue influence, intimidation, fraudulent machinations, coercion, threat,
physical, sexual, psychological, or mental injury or maltreatment, either with intention or through neglect, during the conduct
of sexual activities with the child victim. Non-exploitative shall mean there is no actual or attempted act or acts of unfairly
taking advantage of the child's position of vulnerability, differential power, or trust during the conduct of sexual activities.
(RA 11648)

84. AAA is a feeble-minded person. His chronological age is 25 years old but his mental age is 10 years old. BBB is
also a feeble-minded person. Her chronological age is 22 years old but her mental age is 12 years old. They had
sexual intercourse.
a. Can BBB file a complaint for statutory rape against AAA?
Yes. Rape is committed by a person who shall have carnal knowledge of another person when the offended party is under
16 years of age. The word “age” in the phrase “16 years of age” refers to chronological age or mental age. Decision-making
is a function of the mind. Hence, a person's capacity to decide whether to give consent or to express resistance to an adult
activity is determined not by his or her chronological age but by his or her mental age. Therefore, in determining whether
a person falls under the statutory age, the interpretation should be in accordance with either the chronological age of the
child if he or she is not suffering from intellectual disability, or the mental age if intellectual disability is established.Since
the mental age of BBB is under 16 years, having sex with her is statutory age. (Article 266-A of RPC, as amended by RA No.
11648; People v. Daniega, G.R. No. 212201, June 28, 2017))

b. Can AAA file a complaint for statutory rape against BBB?

Yes. RA No. 11648 makes rape through carnal knowledge a gender-free crime. Since the mental age of AAA is under 16
years old, having sex with him is statutory age. (People vs. Roxas, G.R. No. 200793, June 04, 2014)

c. Can AAA and BBB in their respective cases for rape invoke the exempting circumstance of imbecility?
No. In an exempting circumstance of imbecility, the mental age of the offenders shall be considered to determine if they
are imbecile. The mental age of an imbecile is at least 7 years while the mental age of a moron or feeble-minded person
is at least 12 years. Since AAA and BBB are feebleminded persons, whose mental age is higher than that of an imbecile,
the exempting circumstance of imbecility cannot be appreciated. (People vs. Roxas, G.R. No. 200793, June 04, 2014)

d. Can AAA and BBB in their respective cases for rape invoke the exempting circumstance of close age?
No. Applying the Daniega principle by analogy, the word “age” in the phrase “when the age difference between the parties
is not more than three (3) years” refers to chronological age and mental age. However, the exempting circumstance of
close age cannot be appreciated if the mental or chronological age of the victim is under 13 years. In this case, the mental
age of AAA and BBB is under 13 years. Hence, they cannot respectively invoke this exempting circumstance. (People v.
Daniega, G.R. No. 212201, June 28, 2017)

85. Differentiate the following crimes:

Crime Committed Example
Rape Offender, with the principal objective to
rape the victim, dragged the latter to a
nearby place devoid of any witness.
Special Complex Offender, transported the victim to a
Crime of Kidnapping house, and raped her 4 times.
with Rape There is no showing that the offender
touched the sensitive part of the body of
the victim immediately after the abduction
or statement showing lewd intent.
Explanation
The dragging constitutes Forcible Abduction
absorbed in the crime of Rape.
Doctrine of Absorption applies since the forcible
abduction is a necessary means to commit the
rape.
The crime is kidnapping since there is no
showing of lewd intent at the time of abduction,
and the victim was raped in the course of
detention.

15
 Complex Crime of Immediately after abduction, the offender The forcible abduction with lewd design is
Rape through touched the sensitive body part of the considered a necessary means to commit the
Forcible Abduction victim, and brought her to a house, motel first rape.
or a place where the latter was raped, the However, the subsequent rapes shall be
place being at a considerable distance considered as separate crimes.
from the place where she was abducted.
(People v. Almanzor, 2002; People v. Mirandilla, Jr., 2011; People v. Jose, 1971)

86. Summarize the applicable laws for the crimes of Acts of lasciviousness, Rape by Carnal Knowledge, and Sexual
Assault depending on the age of the victim.
Crime Committed Under 16 years old or 16 years old or below 18 years old and
demented 18, or 18 under special above
circumstances
Acts of Lasciviousness Acts of Lasciviousness under Lascivious conduct under Not applicable
committed against children Article 336 of the RPC in relation Section 5 (b) of R.A. No.
exploited in prostitution or to Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610. 7610.
other sexual abuse
Sexual Assault committed Sexual Assault under Article 266- Lascivious Conduct
against children exploited in A (2) of the RPC in relation to under Section 5 (b) of
prostitution or other sexual Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610. R.A. No. 7610.
abuse
Sexual Intercourse committed Rape under Article 266-A (1) of Sexual Abuse under
against children exploited in the RPC. Section 5 (b) of R.A.
prostitution or other sexual No. 7610.
abuse
Rape by carnal knowledge Rape under Article 266-A (1) in relation to Art. 266-B of the Rape under
RPC. Article 266-A (1)
of the RPC.
Sexual Assault Sexual Assault under Article 266- Lascivious Conduct Sexual Assault
A (2) of the RPC in relation to under Section 5 (b) of under Article
Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610. R.A. No. 7610. 266-A (2) of the
RPC.
(People v. Tulagan, G.R. No. 227363, March 12, 2019)
Note: Comparative table in Tulagan case was adjusted in relation to the age of sexual consent of 16 years as provided
by RA 11648.

87. Who are the victims of qualified seduction?

a. A minor, sixteen and over but under eighteen years of age; or
b. Sister or descendant. (Art. 337, RPC, as amended by RA. 11648)

88. AAA was a lessee of a market stall owned by the municipality headed by Mayor BBB. Upon the failure of AAA to
pay for her rental, Mayor BBB padlocked her stall and seized her goods while she was on vacation. AAA filed a
case for grave coercion against Mayor BBB before the Sandiganbayan but the court found the accused guilty of
unjust vexation. Is the court correct?
Yes. The second paragraph of the Article 287 is broad enough to include any human conduct which, although not
productive of some physical or material harm, could unjustifiably annoy or vex an innocent person. Compulsion or restraint
need not be alleged in the Information, for the crime of unjust vexation may exist without compulsion or restraint. However,
in unjust vexation, being a felony by dolo, malice is an inherent element of the crime. Good faith is a good defense to a
charge for unjust vexation because good faith negates malice. The paramount question to be considered is whether the
offender's act caused annoyance, irritation, torment, distress or disturbance to the mind of the person to whom it is directed.
The main purpose of the law penalizing coercion and unjust vexation is precisely to enforce the principle that no person
may take the law into his hands and that our government is one of law, not of men. It is unlawful for any person to take into
his own hands the administration of justice. (Maderazo vs. People, G.R. No. 165065, September 26, 2006)

89. What are the elements of kidnapping for ransom?

1. Intent on the part of the accused to deprive the victim of his/her liberty;
2. Actual deprivation of the victim of his/her liberty; and
3. Motive of the accused, which is extorting ransom for the release of the victim. (People vs. Cornista y Reotutar, G.R. No.
218915. February 19, 2020. J. Hernando)

90. In Robbery with Homicide, must the victim of the Robbery be the victim of the Homicide?
No, the victim of the robbery does not need to be the victim of the Homicide. It is immaterial if the victim of the homicide is
the bystander, responding policeman, or one of the robbers. (People vs. Daguman, G.R. No. 219116, August 26, 2020, People
vs. Barut, G.R. No. L42666 March 13, 1979, People vs. Pelagio, G.R. No. L-16177, May 24, 1967, People vs. Casabuena, G.R. No.
246580, June 23, 2020)

91. May a special complex crime of robbery with homicide and double frustrated homicide be charged?
No. The offense should be designated as robbery with homicide alone, regardless of the number of homicides or injuries
committed. These other felonies have, at the most and under appropriate circumstances, been considered merely as
generic aggravating circumstances which can be offset by mitigating circumstances. The term "homicide" in paragraph 1
of Article 294 is used in its generic sense, that is, any act that results in death. Any other act producing injuries short of
death is integrated in the "homicide" committed by reason or on the occasion of the robbery, assuming, of course, that the
homicide is consummated. If no death supervenes, the accused should be held liable for separate crimes of robbery and
frustrated or attempted homicide or murder (provided that there was intent to kill) if the latter offenses were not necessary
for the commission of the robbery, or for a complex crime of robbery and frustrated or attempted homicide or murder under

16
 Article 48 of the Code if the latter offenses were the necessary means for the commission of robbery. (People vs. Labuguen
y Francisco, G.R. No. 223103. February 24, 2020. J. Hernando)

92. Should complete penetration be required for robbery with rape to be committed?
No. The slightest penetration is sufficient. As long as the attempt to insert the penis results in contact with the lips of the
vagina, even without rupture or laceration of the hymen, the rape is consummated. (People v. Agan, G.R. No. 228947, June
22, 2020)

93. Distinguish violation of B.P. 22 from Estafa.

B.P. 22
Deceit and damage are not required.
Mere issuance of the check that is dishonored gives rise to a
presumption that the drawer knows of the insufficiency of
funds. The drawer may be convicted of violating BP 22 if the
issuance of the check is premised on a pre-existing obligation.
Mala prohibita
Principally a crime against public interest as it does injury to
the banking system
(Peter Nierras vs. Judge Dacuycuy,G.R. Nos. 59568-76, 11 January 1990)
Estafa
Deceit and damage are essential requisites.
If the issuance of the check is premised on a pre-
existing obligation, it will negate criminal liability.
Mala in se
Essentially a crime against property

94. Distinguish the following crimes:

Qualified Theft Estafa through Misappropriation or Conversion
If the accused received the property with the consent of If the accused received the property with the consent of the
the owner but merely acquired physical possession in owner and acquired legal/juridical possession by virtue of
doing so (by reason of contract of employment, obligation trust, commission, administration, or obligation involving
to immediately return the property). Misappropriation shall the duty to make delivery or return.
be considered as taking without consent.
Physical possession - possession of an employee such Juridical possession - officers of a company with discretion
as bank teller, collector, cash custodian or branch on how to use company property/fund to further its interest.
manager. There is abuse of confidence since the property a. A bank president who holds money in trust for the bank;
is accessible to the employee. b. A corporate treasurer who receives money for safe-
keeping; or
c. A corporate officer with discretion option on how to use
bending machine
Note: Directors, however, have generally no juridical
possession over corporate funds.
(Manjares vs. People, G.R. No. 207249. May 14, 2021; People vs. Go, G.R. No. 191015, August 6, 2014; U.S. vs. Sevilla, G.R. No. 18056,
March 16, 1922; D’Aigle vs. People, G.R. No. 174181, June 27, 2012; G.R. No. 192925, December 9, 2016)

95. What are the elements of Syndicated Estafa?

a. Estafa or Other Forms of Swindling, as defined in Articles 315 and 316 of the RPC, is committed;
b. The Estafa or Swindling is committed by a syndicate of five 5 or more persons; and
c. Defraudation results in the misappropriation of moneys contributed by stockholders, or members of rural banks,
cooperative, "samahang nayon[s]," or farmers' association, or of funds solicited by corporations/associations from the
general public. (Debuque vs. Nilson, G.R. No. 191718, May 10, 2021. J, Hernando)

96. BBB bought a second-hand iPhone 14 from AAA who was standing behind a tree and selling it for a “rush price”
of Php2,000 at the night market. It later on turned out that the phone was stolen by AAA from XXX while the latter
was fitting on clothes. In a charge under P.D. 1612, otherwise known as the Anti-fencing law, can BBB put up as
a valid defense the lack of knowledge that the thing was stolen?
No. The crime of fencing may be committed when the accused knows or should have known that the property is stolen
property. There is a presumption of intent to gain and knowledge that the property is stolen when found in the person’s
possession. If, however, the property seems to be a proceed of the crime of robbery or theft based on circumstantial
evidencee, the lack of knowledge cannot be used as a defense. Here, BBB bought the new iPhone model for a “rush price”
from AAA who did not have any permit to sell second hand articles and was merely standing behind a tree in a night
market. Thus, the defense set up by BBB is not tenable. (Sec. 2(a), Sec. 6, P.D. 1612)

97. How do you prove the presumption of Fencing under P.D. 1612?
Mere possession of any good, article, item, object, or anything of value which has been the subject of robbery or thievery
shall be prima facie evidence of fencing. (Sec. 5, P.D. 1612)
Note: The presumption does not offend the presumption of innocence enshrined in the fundamental law. It only shifted the
burden of evidence to the defense. Burden of proof is upon the fence to overcome the presumption .

98. Is nullity of the prior or subsequent marriage celebrated under the Civil Code or under the Family Code available
as a defense in bigamy even without a judicial declaration of nullity?
Yes. To summarize and for future guidance, the parties are not required to obtain a judicial declaration of absolute nullity
of a void ab initio first and subsequent marriages in order to raise it as a defense in a bigamy case. The same rule now
applies to all marriages celebrated under the Civil Code and the Family Code. Article 40 of the Family Code, which states
that the absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be invoked for purposes of remarriage on the basis solely of a final
judgment declaring such previous marriage void, did not amend Article 349 of the RPC, and thus, did not deny the accused
the right to collaterally attack the validity of a void ab initio marriage in the criminal prosecution for bigamy. (Pulido vs.
People, G.R. No. 220149. July 27, 2021. J. Hernando)

99. When will consent be a valid defense in the R.A. No. 9995 or the Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009?
The prohibitibited acts in the law state that the taking of the photo or video shall be without the consent of the subject who
has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Thus,if there is consent from the subject of the photo taking or video recording,

17
 then the subject consented to give up whatever privacy, decency, or modesty he or she may at least have. (Sec.4(a) R.A.
No. 9995)

100. sWhen does a person have a reasonable expectation of privacy?

A person has a reasonable expectation of privacy under circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that
he/she could disrobe in privacy, without being concerned that an image or a private area of the person was being captured;
or circumstance in which a reasonable person would believe that a private area of the person would not be visible to the
public, regardless of whether that person is in a public or private place. (Sec. 3, R.A. No. 9995)

101. Distinguish Child Abuse, Rape, Acts of Lasciviousness, and Sexual Abuse.
Child Abuse Rape Acts of Lasciviousness Sexual Abuse (RA 7610)
The accused commits an The accused has carnal The accused commits Children, whether male or
act of sexual intercourse knowledge of another person. any act of lasciviousness female, who for money,
or lascivious conduct. or lewdness. profit, or any other
consideration or due to the
coercion or influence of
any adult, syndicate or
group, indulge in sexual
intercourse or lascivious
conduct, are deemed to
be children exploited in
prostitution and other
sexual abuse.
a. Psychological and a. By a man who shall have carnal a. that the offender a. The accused commits
physical abuse, knowledge of a woman under commits any act of the act of sexual
neglect, cruelty, sexual any of the following lasciviousness or intercourse or lascivious
abuse and emotional circumstances: lewdness; conduct;
maltreatment; i. Through force, threat, or b. that it is done under any b. The said act is
b. Any act by deeds or intimidation; of the following performed with a child
words which debases, ii. When the offended party is circumstances: (a) exploited in prostitution
degrades or demeans deprived of reason or through force, threat, or or subjected to other
the intrinsic worth and otherwise unconscious; intimidation; (b) when sexual abuse; and
dignity of a child as a iii. By means of fraudulent the offended party is c. The child, whether male
human being; machination or grave abuse of deprived of reason or or female, is below 18
c. Unreasonable authority; and otherwise unconscious; years of age.
deprivation of his basic iv. When the offended party is (c) by means of
needs for survival, under sixteen (16) years of fraudulent machination
such as food and age or is demented, even or grave abuse of
shelter; or though none of the authority; and (d) when
d. Failure to immediately circumstances mentioned the offended party is
give medical treatment above be present. under 16 years of age
to an injured child b. By any person who, under any or is demented, even
resulting in serious of the circumstances mentioned though none of the
impairment of his in paragraph 1 hereof, shall circumstances
growth and commit an act of sexual assault mentioned above be
development or in his by inserting his penis into present; and
permanent incapacity another person's mouth or anal c. that the offended party
or death. orifice, or any instrument or is another person of
object, into the genital or anal either sex
orifice of another person.
(Sec. 5, RA7610; RA 11648; Art. 266-A, Art. 366 RPC)

102. What are the punishable acts of child prostitution and other sexual abuse?
When children, whether male or female, who for money, profit, other consideration or due to coercion by an adult, is made
to indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct.
It is punishable when:
1. Any adult who engages in, promotes, facilitates, or induces child prostitution by:
a) Acting as procurer;
b) Inducing a client;
c) Taking advantage or influence or relation to procure a child as prostitute;
d) Threatening or using violence to engage a child as a prostitute; and
e) Giving pecuniary benefit or goods to a child with intent to engage in prostitution;
2. Any adult who commits sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct with a child exploited; and
3. Any person who derives profit or advantage, such as the manager or owner of establishment. (Sec. 5, RA 7610)

103. What are the elements of libel?

a. Imputation of a discreditable act or condition to another;
b. Publication of the imputation;
c. Identity of the person defamed; and
d. Existence of malice. (Philippine Daily Inquirer vs. Juan Ponce Enrile, G.R. No. 229440, July 14, 2021)

18
104. What are the different cybercrimes punishable under RA 10175?
Offenses against the confidentiality, Computer-related Content-related Offenses:
integrity and availability of computer data Offenses:
and systems:
a. Illegal Access a. Computer-related a. Cybersex
b. Illegal Interception Forgery b. Child Pornography
c. Data Interference b. Computer-related Fraud c. Unsolicited Commercial
d. System Interference c. Computer-related Communications
e. Misuse of Devices Identity Theft d. Libel.
f. Cyber-squatting
(Sec. 4, RA 10175)

105. North Star, Inc., a prominent news organization, published an article in 2015 entitled “CJ suing SUVs of
controversial businessman” accusing a former Supreme Court Justice of accepting favors from a businessman.
AAA, the author of the said article and BBB, the Chief Executive Officer and Executive Editor of the Company
were charged with Cyberlibel. BBB argued that it cannot be held liable for the crime charged as he had no
knowledge and no participation in the publication of the libelous article. Is his defense tenable?
No. In ordinary libel, absence of participation is not a defense because the provision in the Revised Penal Code plainly
and specifically states the responsibility of those involved in publishing newspaper and other periodicals. Here, it is not a
matter of whether BBB was actually involved in preparing or editing the subject article, because the law simply states that
he, as editor and business manager, is liable “AS IF” he was the author, in accordance with Article 360 of the Revised
Penal Code, in relation to RA 10175. Here, BBB is identified as the Executive Editor of the new organization. Thus, a
claim of absence of participation will not shield him from liability under Article 360 of the RPC. (People vs. Santos and Ressa,
CA-G.R. No. 44991, July 7, 2022)

106. In 2015, AAA published a story in an online news site, called Reuta, where it was alleged that Mr. XXX, a
businessman, who had a link with illegal drugs, and human trafficking, lent a car to a former SC Justice. After
four months, RA No. 10175, which punishes cybercrimes including cyber libel, was enacted. However, there are
no evidences proving the illegal activities of Mr. Willy. In 2017, the story was republished on the said site. AAA
was charged of libel for the 2015 publication of defamatory story, and another cyber libel for the 2017
republication thereof. Is double jeopardy present?
No. It is settled that a single defamatory statement, if published several times, gives rise to as many offenses as there
are publications. Each and every publication of the same libel constitutes a distinct offense. This is the “multiple publication
rule” which is followed in our jurisdiction. Under this rule, AAA can be charged of libel for the 2015 publication, and cyber
libel for the 2017 republication thereof without violating the rule on double jeopardy. (Soriano v. Intermediate Appellate Court,
G.R. No. 72383, November 9, 1988; Brillante v. CA, G.R. Nos. 118757 and 121571, October 19, 2004)

107. Distinguish the penalty and period of prescription between Libel under the Revised Penal Code and Cyberlibel
under RA 10175, otherwise known as the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.
Libel Cyberlibel

Penalty Prision correccional in its Prison correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its
minimum and medium minimum period
periods

Period of Under Article 90 of the
prescription Revised Penal Code, the
crime of libel shall prescribe
in one year while crime
punishable by prision mayor
shall prescribe in 15 years.
(Sec. 4, RA 10175; Tolentino v. People, G.R. No. 240310, August 6, 2018)
The period for prescription for cyber libel is governed by Article 90
of the Revised Penal Code since RA No. 10175 does not provide
a penalty for cyber libel. Hence, in a cyber libel case, the accused
is actually being charged with libel under the Revised Penal Code
with the qualifying circumstance of using information or
communication technology under RA No. 10175. However, the
one-year rule is only applicable to libel and not to cyber libel.
Hence, the 15-year rule will apply since the highest component of
the penalty for cyber libel is prision mayor in its minimum period.

108. XXXX, a pharmacist, prepared the medicine on prescription by a doctor for AAA. XXX mistakenly used a highly
poisonous substance in the concoction of the medicine. When A drank the medicine, she nearly died. The
accused was charged with reckless imprudence resulting to frustrated homicide. Is the charge correct?
No. It is an error to convict the accused of reckless imprudence resulting to frustrated homicide. He is guilty of reckless
imprudence resulting to physical injuries. The element of intent to kill in frustrated homicide is incompatible with negligence
or imprudence. Intent in felonies by means of dolo is replaced with lack of foresight or skill in felonies by culpa. (People vs
Castillo, CA-No. 227, February 1, 1946)

109. May a person file a separate complaint for reckless imprudence resulting to physical injuries after a judgment
acquitting the accused of a previous charge of reckless imprudence resulting in damage to property?
No. The law penalizes the negligent or careless act, not the result thereof. As the careless act is single, whether the
injurious result would affect one person or several persons, the offense (criminal negligence) remains one and cannot be
split into different crimes and prosecutions. Filing a subsequent complaint based on the same negligent act after he was
previously acquitted would result in double jeopardy. (Buerano v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-30269, July 19, 1982).

SOAR HIGH, HERON!

19