Professional Documents
Culture Documents
05 Criminal Law Syllabus-Based eREVIEWER 2024 v1.1
05 Criminal Law Syllabus-Based eREVIEWER 2024 v1.1
Uploaded by
Mario Roldan Jr.Original Title
Copyright
Available Formats
Share this document
Did you find this document useful?
Is this content inappropriate?
Report this DocumentCopyright:
Available Formats
05 Criminal Law Syllabus-Based eREVIEWER 2024 v1.1
05 Criminal Law Syllabus-Based eREVIEWER 2024 v1.1
Uploaded by
Mario Roldan Jr.Copyright:
Available Formats
1
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Introduction Table of Contents
Classical Theory
The Syllabus-based eReviewersofeCodal+Proisnowonits Fundamental Principles of Criminal Law 2 Positivist Theory
4th edition. This passion project started in 2021whilethe
Eclectic or Mixed Theory
author,Atty. RGL, reviewed for the 2020_21 #BestBarEver. Revised Penal Code - Book One 10
Utilitarian Theory
e review materials are painstakingly curated to address
Th
thetopicsofthecurrentbarsyllabi.Knowthattheaimhere Revised Penal Code - Book Two 85 1 Classical Theory
istobeasconciseanddirectaspossible,whilemakingsure
alltopicsarecovered.Thematerialsarenotenvisionedtobe Special Penal Laws 186 ebasicprincipleinourcriminallawisthatapersonis
Th
a primary review material as we give deference to the criminally liable for a felony committed by him.
scholarlyworksoflegalluminaries.Itishighlyadvisedthat Practical Exercises 23 0 nderthe classicaltheory onwhichourpenalcodeis
U
thematerialsaretobetreatedassupplementstoreviewers mainly based, the basis of criminal liability is human
as prescribed by law school professors. free will. Man is essentially a moral creature with an
undamental Principles of
F
leasenoteaswellthattheauthorhasnocrystalballandis
P I absolutely free will to choose between good and evil.
not inthebusinessofpredictingwhattopicswillcomeout Criminal Law When he commits a felonious or criminal act (d elito
in the Bar. What the author would like to impart to the doloso), the act is presumed to have been done
Schools of Thoughts
reader is the sense of security and confidence that after voluntarily, i.e., with freedom, intelligence and intent.
finishing the materials,all topics have been covered. onstruction or Interpretation of Penal
C Man,therefore,shouldbeadjudgedorheldaccountable
Laws for wrongful acts so long as free will appears
astly, the author wishes to request the reader to be
L
unimpaired. (People v. Racal2017)
vanguards of the law. If you happen to grab acopyofthis Mala in se and mala prohibita
material without having subscribed to eCodal+Pro, please
rinciples of Generality, Territoriality
P 2 Positivist Theory
contact the author at fb.com/ecodalplus, or email him at
and Prospectivity
ecodalplus@gmail.com. e positivist theory of criminal law states that the
Th
onstitutional Limitations on the Power
C basis for criminal liability is the sumtotalofthesocial
ay you have the strength and peace of mind as you take
M
of Congress to Enact Penal Laws
onemorestepintobecomingmembersofthenoblestofall and economic phenomena to which the offense is
professions. expressed. The State is concerned not only in the
A Schools of Thoughts
imperative necessity of protecting the social
Padayon!
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproduced and/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page2of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
o rganization against the criminal acts of destructive
onstruction or Interpretation of
C Absolute Repeal
individuals but also in redeeming the individual for B
Penal Laws sarule,an absolute repealofapenallawhastheeffectof
A
economic usefulness and other social ends (P
eople v.
Ducosin). depriving a court of its authority to punish a person
ffects of Repeal/Amendments of Penal
E
charged with violation of the old law prior to its repeal.
e adoption of this theory is exemplified in the
Th Laws
(Benedicto v. CA) This is because an unqualified repeal ofa
Indeterminate Sentence law.
Retroactive Effect of Penal Laws penal law constitutes a legislative act of rendering legal
what had been previously declared as illegal,suchthatthe
3 Eclectic or Mixed Theory Pro reo Principle
offense no longer exists and it is as if the person who
I t is a combination of positivist and classical thinking uppletory Application of the Revised Penal
S committed it never did so.
wherein crimes that are economic and socialinnature Code to Special Penal Laws
There are, however,exceptionsto the rule.
should be dealt in a positive manner, thus, the law is
ffects of Repeal/Amendments of Penal
E 1. O
ne is the inclusion of a saving clause in the
more compassionate. 1
Laws repealing statute that provides that therepealshall
4 Utilitarian Theory Different effects of repeal of penal law.
have no effect on pending actions.
nder the utilitarian theory, the "p
U rotective theory" in 2. A
nother is where the repealing act reenacts the
1. I f the repeal makes the penalty lighter in the new
criminal law, affirms that the primary function of former statute and punishes the act previously
law, the new law shall be applied, except when the
punishment is the protection of society againstactual penalized under the old law. In such instance, the
offender is a habitual delinquent or when the new
and potential wrongdoers. act committed beforethereenactmentcontinuesto
law is made not applicable to pending action or
beanoffenseinthestatutebooksandpendingcases
I tisnotclearwhetherpetitionercouldbeconsideredas existing causes of action.
are not affected, regardless of whether the new
having actually committed the wrong sought to be 2. I fthenewlawimposesaheavierpenalty,thelawin penalty to be imposed is more favorable to the
punishedintheoffensecharged,butontheotherhand, force at the time of the commission of the offense accused.
itcanbesafelysaidthattheactuationsofMrs.Carolina shall be applied.
Teng amounts to that of potential wrongdoers whose erepealofapenallawdeprivesthecourtsofjurisdiction
Th
3. I fthenewlawtotallyrepealstheexistinglawsothat topunishpersonschargedwithaviolationoftheoldpenal
operationsshouldalsobeclippedatsomepointintime
the actwhichwaspenalizedundertheoldlawisno law prior to its repeal. (People v. Almuete)
inorderthattheunwarypublicwillnotbefallingpreyto
longerpunishable,thecrimeisobliterated.(I Reyes,
such a vicious transaction. (Magno v. CA and People)
The Revised Penal Code, 2021) 2 Retroactive Effect of Penal Laws
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page3of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
e general rule is that penal laws shall have a
Th Buenafe v. COMELEC2022En Banc I ndubioproreo.Whenindoubt,rulefortheaccused.This
retroactiveeffectinsofarastheyfavorthepersonguilty is in consonance with the constitutional guarantee that
nless explicitly provided for in the fallo, the penalty of
U
of a felonyexcept the accused shall be presumed innocent unless anduntil
disqualification from publicofficeunderSection286(c)is
his guilt is established beyond reasonable doubt. It is
a. If the offender is a habitual delinquent; not deemed automatically imposed on a publicofficeror
well-settled that the scope of a penal statute cannot be
b. Th
e new or amendatory law is not favorable to employeefoundtohaveviolatedtheprovisionsofthe1977
extended by good intention, implication, or even equity
him; or NIRC. This interpretation is more in keeping with the
consideration. Only those persons, offenses, and
intentionofthelegislators,aswellasbeingmorefavorable
c. R etrospective application is expressly penalties, clearly included, beyondanyreasonabledoubt,
to the accused.
proscribed. will be considered, within the statute's operation.
I n the instant case, to hold that a judicial declaration of
People v. Sarcia
Sps Dulay v. People2021 absolute nullity is a necessity before an accused in
ec68ofRA9344allowstheretroactiveapplicationofthe
S criminal prosecution for bigamy may invoke his void ab
ehaveappliedthedoctrineofproreoandthecorrelative
W
Act to those who have been convicted and are serving initiomarriageasavaliddefenseinterpretsArticle349too
ruleonlenitywhenthereisdoubtastotheapplicabilityof
sentenceatthetimeoftheeffectivityofthissaidAct,and liberally in favor of the State and too strictly against the
various penalties under different amended or repealed
who were below the age of 18 years at the time of the accused, in violation oftheruleoflenityandtheruleon
laws.
commission of the offense. strict construction of penal laws.
ere, there is no doubt as to the applicability of Article
H
315(2)(a) of the RPC: the constitutive offense of estafa by
3 Pro reoPrinciple deceit under Article 315(2)(a) was specifically charged in Sama and Masanglay v. People2021 En Banc
the Information, established and proven beyond
In dubio pro reo. When in doubt, rule for the accused. Concurring opinion of Leonen, J
reasonabledoubt,andaffirmedonappealbytheappellate
I ntimatelyrelatedtotheindubioproreoprincipleisthe court. We therefore find no need to apply lenity and the nder the presentlegalframework,theStatecommitsto
U
ruleoflenity.Theruleapplieswhenthecourtisfaced doctrineofproreo,andignorethespecificprovisionoflaw recognize and protect the rights of indigenous cultural
with two possible interpretations of a penal statute, and the penalty prescribed thereunder. communities to their ancestral lands. In this regard,
onethatisprejudicialtotheaccusedandanotherthat recent criminal and environmental legislations, such as
is favorable to him. The rule calls fortheadoptionof The Expanded National Integrated Protected Areas
an interpretation which is more lenient to the accused. Pulido v. People2021 En Banc SystemActof2018,haveacknowledgedtheexercisebythe
(Intestate Estate of Gonzales v. People2010) indigenous peoples of their cultural practices and
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page4of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t raditions to be an exception from the permit uppletory Application of the Revised
S
requirement. 4 Penal Code to Special Penal Laws
art. 10
C Mala in seandmala prohibita
urther, the continuing inclination towards considering
F
these cultural practices as an exception casts reasonable RT 10. Offenses not subject to the provisions ofthis
A rimes mala in se are inherently immoral and involve
C
doubtonwhetherornotpetitionersshouldbeheldguilty Code. — Offenses which are or in the futuremaybe intent to commit a crime. Good faith is a defense in
under PD No. 705. The preferential application of these punishable under special laws are not subjecttothe malainsecrimes,butisNOTadefenseinmalaprohibita
later laws is not only inaccordwiththeproreo principle, provisions of this Code. This Code shall be crimes, where what is required is merely the intent to
but also with the concept of social justice. perpetratetheact.Althoughmostcrimespunishedunder
supplementary tosuchlaws,unlessthelattershould
specialpenallawsaremalaprohibita,therearealsothose
specially provide the contrary.
that aremala in se.
People v. Pagal2020 En Banc DENR-PENRO v. Eastern Island Shipping2023
Cardona v. People2020
ere,thereisnothingintherecordsthatwouldshowthe
H .D. No. 705, being a special law, prevails over the
P
provisions of the RPC, a general law, with respect to nactprohibitedbyaspeciallawdoesNOTautomatically
A
guiltofaccused-appellant.Itisalsonotjusttoremandthe
violations of and prosecution of offenses under P.D. No. make it malum prohibitum. "When the actscomplainedof
casebecausethisisnotasituationwheretheprosecution
705. areinherentlyimmoral,theyaredeemedmalainse,even
was wholly deprived of the opportunity to perform its
if they are punished by a special law." Thebenchandbar
dutiesunderthe2000RevisedRules.Intruth,toremand ere is nothing in P.D. No. 705 that prohibits nor
Th must rid themselves of the common misconception that
the instant case in the face oftheprosecution'sfailureto providesagainstthesuppletoryapplicationoftheRPC.To
all mala in se crimes are found in the RPC,whileallmala
discharge its duty under Sec. 3, Rule 116 would be to be sure, the suppletory application of the RPC tospecial prohibita crimes are provided by special laws. The better
unduly favor the State and the victims' relatives to the laws, by virtue ofArticle10thereof,findsrelevancewhen approach to distinguish between mala in se and mala
detriment of the constitutional rights of the provisions of the special lawaresilentonaparticular
prohibita crimes is the determination of the inherent
accused-appellant. The duty of the prosecution to prove matter. Section 68 ofP.D.No.705issilentonthejudicial
immoralityor vileness of the penalized act.
theaccused'sguiltforthecapitaloffense,despitehisplea confiscation of "conveyances" used in breaches of said
ofguilt,whetherimprovidentlymadeornot,isnotnovel. Section. I saviolationofSection195oftheOECmalainsesuchthatgood
No special considerations should be allotted the faith and lack of criminal intent can be raised as validdefenses
us, judicial confiscation under Section 68 of P.D. No.
Th againstitsconviction?YES.TheapplicableportionofSection
prosecutionforitsfailure.Indubioproreo.Whenindoubt,
705,liketheconfiscationcontemplatedinArticle45ofthe
rule for the accused. 195forbidstheintentionaltearingordefacingoftheballot
RPC, is an additional penalty imposed in the event of
or the placement of a distinguishing mark.
conviction under P.D. No 705.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page5of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
I n Garcia v. CA this Court categorically held that an Garcia v. CA Generality
electoraloffenseunderSection27(b)ofR.A.6646ismalain e acts prohibited in Section 27(b) of the Omnibus
Th
Territoriality
sebecause"itcouldnot[havebeen]theintentofthelawto ElectionCodearemalainse.Giventhevolumeofvotesto
punish unintentional election canvass errors." The same be counted and canvassed within a limited amount of Prospectivity
should apply to unintentional marks made on a ballot. time, errors and miscalculations are bound to happen.
And it could not be the intent of the law to punish 1 Generality
unintentional election canvass errors. enal laws apply toALLPERSONSwhocommitcrimes
P
Matalam v. People2016 within the territory.
riminal intent is presumed to exist on the part of the
C
e general ruleisthatactspunishedunderaspeciallaw
Th person who executes an act which the law punishes, EXC
are malum prohibitum. "An act which is declared malum unless the contrary shall appear. Thus, whoever invokes
1. U
nder Vienna Convention on diplomatic
prohibitum, malice or criminal intent is completely good faith as a defense has the burden of proving its
relations;
immaterial." existence.
2. I n certain exempting circumstances under the
ence, "i ntent to commit the crime and intent to
H
RPC and special laws;
perpetratetheactmustbedistinguished.Apersonmaynot
People v. Comia 3. L
egal pluralism in certain areas/culture, i.e.the
haveconsciouslyintendedtocommitacrime;buthedidintendto
commit an act, and thatactis,bytheverynatureofthings,the e act of transporting a prohibited drug is a "m
Th alum Muslim Code and IPRA.
crimeitself."Whenanactisprohibitedbyaspeciallaw,itis prohibitum" because it is punished as an offense under a
considered injurious to public welfare, and the special law. It is a wrong because it is prohibitedbylaw. 2 Territoriality
performance of the prohibited act is the crime itself. Withoutthelawpunishingtheact,itcannotbeconsidered
enal laws apply to all offenses committed within the
P
awrong.Assuch,themerecommissionofsaidactiswhat
olition, or intent to commit the act, is different from
V PH territory.
criminal intent. Volition or voluntariness refers to constitutes the offense punished and suffices to validly
charge and convict an individual caught committing the EXC
knowledge of the act being done. On the other hand,
criminal intent refers to the state of mind beyond act so punished,regardless of criminal intent. 1. Extraterritoriality under the RPC and SPLs
voluntariness. It is this intent that is being punished by 2. T
ransnational crimes under UNTOC and
crimesmala in se. domestic law,
rinciples of Generality,
P
D 3. U
niversal jurisdiction in jus cogens crimes and
Territoriality and Prospectivity
under UNCLOS, and
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page6of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
4. E rga omnes crimes under international criminal XC if theprovisionsarefavorabletotheaccusedwho
E Fine
tribunal jurisdiction. is not a habitual offender
1 Equal Protection
XC to the EXC the law itself provides against such
E
People v. Tulin I t is an established principle of constitutional lawthatthe
retroactive effect.
reextraterritoriality and universal jurisdiction guaranteeoftheequalprotectionofthelawsisnotviolated
eattackonandseizureof"M/TTabangao''anditscargo
Th Hernan v. Sandiganbayan2017 En Banc y a legislation based on reasonable classification. And
b
werecommittedinPhilippinewaters,althoughthecaptive the classification, to be reasonable,
or aslongasthepenallawisfavorabletotheaccused,it
F
vesselwaslaterbroughtbythepiratestoSingaporewhere 1) must rest onsubstantialdistinctions;
shall find application regardless of whetheritseffectivity
its cargo was off-loaded, transferred,andsold.Andsuch
comes after the time when thejudgmentofconvictionis 2) must begermaneto the purposes of the law;
transferwasdoneunderaccused-appellantHiong'sdirect
rendered and even if service of sentence has already
supervision.AlthoughPDNo.532requiresthattheattack 3) mustnot be limitedto existing conditions only; and
begun. Theaccusedshallbeentitledtothebenefitsofthe
and seizure of the vessel and its cargo be committed in
new law warranting him to serve a lesser sentence,orto 4) mustapply equallyto all members of the same class.
Philippine waters, the disposition by the pirates of the
his release, if he has already begun serving his previous I n People v. Vera, the old Probation Law provided that the
vesselanditscargoisstilldeemedpartoftheactofpiracy,
sentence, and said service alreadyaccomplishestheterm probation system shall be applicable “only in those
hence, the same need not be committed in Philippine
of the modified sentence. provinces in which the respective provincial boards have
waters.
providedforthesalaryofaprobationofficer.”Onitsface,it
oreover, piracy fallsunderTitleOneofBookTwoofthe
M is a sound law. But when applied, it discriminates against
RevisedPenalCode.Assuch,itisanexceptiontotheruleon
onstitutional Limitations on the
C personsinoneprovincethatmaynotbeabletoprovidefor
territorialityincriminallaw. Itislikewise,well-settledthat
Power of Congress to Enact Penal
E the salary of a probation officer. Thus, they are denied
regardless of the law penalizing the same, piracy is a
Laws probation.
reprehensible crime against the whole world (P eople v.
Lol-lo). Equal Protection People v. Cayat
Due Process ct No. 1639 satisfies these requirements. The
A
classification rests on real or substantial, not merely
3 Prospectivity Bill of Attainder
imaginary or whimsical, distinctions. It is not based
Penal laws doNOThave retroactive effect. Ex post facto Law upon "accident of birth or parentage," as counsel for the
Cruel and Unusual Punishment; Excessive
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page7of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a ppellant asserts, but upon thedegreeofcivilizationand iasandprejudiceagainstwomenallmakeforreal
b ill take could be enough to enable the defendant to
w
culture. differences justifying the classification under the abscond or dispose of his property, in the same way,the
law. victim of VAWC may already have suffered harrowing
at it is germane to the purposes of law cannot be
Th
doubted; The prohibition "to buy, receive, have in his experiences in the hands of her tormentor, and possibly
2. Th
eclassificationisgermanetothepurposeofthelaw.
possession,ordrinkanyardentspirits,ale,beer,wine,or — The distinction between men and women is even death, if notice and hearing were required before
intoxicating liquors of any kind, other thantheso-called germane to the purpose of R.A. 9262, which isto such acts could be prevented.
native wines and liquors which the members of such address violence committed against women and I t is a constitutional commonplace that the ordinary
tribes have beenaccustomedthemselvestomakepriorto children. requirementsofproceduraldueprocessmustyieldtothe
the passage of this Act," is unquestionably designed to 3. Th necessities of protecting vital public interests, among
e classification is not limitedtoexistingconditions
insure peace and order in and among the non-Christian only, and apply equally to all members. which isprotectionofwomenandchildrenfromviolence
tribes. It has been the sad experience of the past, as the and threats to their personal safety and security.
observations of thelowercourtdisclose,thatthefreeuse
of highly intoxicating liquors by thenon-Christiantribes
2 Due Process
have often resulted in lawlessness and crimes, thereby outhern Hemisphere Engagement Network v. Anti-Terrorism
S
hampering the efforts of the government to raise their Council2010 En Banc
standard of life and civilization. Garcia v. Drilon2013 En Banc statute or act suffers from the defect of vagueness
A
eessenceofdueprocessistobefoundinthereasonable
Th when it lacks comprehensible standards. Itisrepugnant
opportunitytobeheardandsubmitanyevidenceonemay to the Constitution in two respects:
Garcia v. Drilon2013 En Banc
have in support of one's defense. "T
o be heard" does not 1) itviolates due process; and
.A. 9262 is based on a valid classification and, as such,
R only mean verbal arguments in court; one may be heard
did not violate the equal protection clause by favoring 2) i t leaves law enforcers unbridled discretion in
also through pleadings. Where opportunity to be heard,
women over men as victims of violence and abuse to carrying out its provisions and becomes an
either through oral arguments or pleadings, isaccorded,
whom the State extends its protection. arbitrary flexingof the Government muscle.
there is no denial of procedural due process.
1. I t rests on substantial distinctions. — The unequal evaguenessdoctrine,asgroundforafacialchallenge,is
Th
e grant of a TPO ex parte cannot, therefore, be
Th
power relationship between women and men;the not applicable to penal laws. The allowance of a facial
challengedasviolativeoftherighttodueprocess.Justlike
fact that women are more likely than men to be challenge in free speech cases is justified by the aim to
a writofpreliminaryattachmentwhichisissuedwithout
victims of violence; and the widespread gender avert the "c hillingeffect"onprotectedspeech,theexercise
noticeandhearingbecausethetimeinwhichthehearing
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page8of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
o fwhichshouldnotatalltimesbeabridged.Thisrationale ontrarytopetitioner'sassertion,theAnti-HazingLawis
C 2) a ggravatesacrime,ormakesitgreaterthanitwas,
is inapplicable to plain penal statutes that generallybear not a bill of attainder. when committed;
an "i n terrorem effect" in deterring socially harmful
ere,themerefilingofanInformationagainstpetitioner
H 3) c hanges the punishment and inflicts a greater
conduct.
and her fellow sorority members is notafindingoftheir punishment than the law annexed to the crime
I n this jurisdiction, the void-for-vagueness doctrine guilt of the crime charged. Contrary to her claim, when committed;
assertedunderthedueprocessclausehasbeenutilizedin petitioner is not being charged merely because she is a
4) a lters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes
examining the constitutionality ofcriminal statutes. member of the Tau Gamma Sigma Sorority, but because
convictionuponlessordifferenttestimonythanthe
she is allegedly a principal by direct participation in the
law required at the time of the commission of the
hazing that led to Abracia's death. As stated, these are
offense;
3 Bill of Attainder matters for the trial court to decide.
5) a ssumingtoregulatecivilrightsandremediesonly,
bill of attainder is generallyunderstoodasalegislative
A in effect imposes penalty or deprivation of a right
actwhichinflictspunishmentonindividualsormembersof Misolas v. Panga for something which when done was lawful, and
a particular group without a judicial trial. 6) d
ssentialtoabillofattainderareaspecificationofcertain
E eprivesapersonaccusedofacrimeofsomelawful
or a law to be considered a bill of attainder, it must be
F individuals or a group ofindividuals,theimpositionofa
protectiontowhichhehasbecomeentitled,suchas
shown to contain all of the following: punishment, penal or otherwise, and the lack of judicial theprotectionofaformerconvictionoracquittal,or
a proclamation of amnesty.
1. a specification ofcertainindividualsoragroupof trial.Thislastelement,thetotallackofcourtintervention
individuals, inthefindingofguiltandthedeterminationoftheactual
Sps Dulay v. People2021
penaltytobeimposed,isthemostessential.P.D.No.1866
2. t he imposition of a punishment, penal or
does not possess the elements of a bill of attainder. e petitioners rely onRepublicv.Eugenio,Jr.,whereinthe
Th
otherwise, and
Court declared that the proscription against ex post facto
3. thelack of judicial trial. lawsshouldbeappliedtotheinterpretationoftheoriginal
e most essential of these elements is the complete
Th 4 Ex post factoLaw text of Section 11 ofR.A.No.9160becausethepassageof
exclusionofthecourtsfromthedeterminationofguiltand said law "stripped another layer off the rule on absolute
Anex post facto lawis one which:
imposable penalty. confidentiality that provided a measure of lawful
1) m
akes criminal an act done before the passage of protection to the account holder." Accordingly, the
Fuertes v. Senate of the Philippines 2020 En Banc the law and which was innocent when done, and application for the bank inquiry order as the means of
punishes such an act;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page9of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
i nquiring into records of transactions entered into prior egulations of Republic Act No. 10592 is DECLARED
R t his Court, it also constitutes "cruel, degrading, and
to the passage of R.A.No.9160wouldbeconstitutionally invalid insofar as it provides for the prospective inhuman" punishment for the accused. The aim is to
infirm,offensiveasitwastotheexpostfacto clauseofthe application of the grant of good conducttimeallowance, rehabilitate, not punish, those drug offenders.
Constitution. time allowance for study, teaching and mentoring, and
special time allowance for loyalty.
epetitioners'relianceonsaidcaseismisplaced. Unlike
Th
thepassageofR.A.No.9160inordertoallowanexception II Revised Penal Code - Book One
to the general rule on bank secrecy, the amendment
introducedbyR.A.No.10167doesawaywiththenoticeto ruel and Unusual Punishment;
C Felonies
5
the account holder at the time when the bank inquiry Excessive Fine
Circumstances Affecting Criminal Liability
orderisappliedfor.Indeed,R.A.No.10167,inrecognition 19. Excessive finesshallnotbeimposed,norcruel,
§
of the ex post facto clause of the Constitution, explicitly ersons Criminally Liable and Degree of
P
degradingorinhumanpunishmentinflicted.Neither
provides that "the penalprovisionsshallnotapplytoacts Participation
shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for
done prior to the effectivity of the AMLA on October 17, compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Plurality of Crimes
2001." Congresshereafterprovidesforit.Anydeathpenalty
Penalties
already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion
perpetua. Extinction of Criminal Liability
Inmates of the New Bilibid Prison v. De Lima2019En Banc
e employment of physical, psychological, or
Th Civil Liability Ex-Delicto
hile R.A. No. 10592 does not define a crime/offense or
W degrading punishment against any prisoner or
provide/prescribe/establish a penalty as it addresses the detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate A Felonies
rehabilitation component of our correctional system, its penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be Revised Penal Code, Art. 3
provisionshavethepurposeandeffectofdiminishingthe dealt with by law.
punishment attached to thecrime.Thefurtherreduction Criminal Liability
on the length of the penalty of imprisonment is, in the stipona, Jr. v. Lobrigo2017 En Banc
E Impossible Crime
ultimate analysis, beneficial to the detention and re Plea-bargaining
convicted prisoners alike; hence, calls for the application
Concurring opinion of Leonen, J. ravity of Felonies: Grave, Less Grave, and
G
Light
of Article 22 of the RPC. e prohibition found in Section 23 is unconstitutional
Th
Section 4, Rule 1 of the Implementing Rules and notonlybecauseitcontravenestherule-makingpowerof Stages of Execution
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page10of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
uty of the Courts in case of
D 4. Th
e law punishing them — Felonies, offenses and 2. Intelligence;
Non-Punishable Act and Excessive Penalty infractions.
3. Intent.
uppletory Application of the Revised Penal
S Criminal Liability or culpa, instead of intent, accused is imprudent,
F
Code 1
Revised Penal Code, Art. 4(1) negligent or lacks foresight or skillwhile doingthe act.
RT 3. Definitions. — Acts and omissions
A RT 4. Criminal liability. — Criminal liability shall
A Sevilla v. People2014
punishable by law arefelonies(delitos). be incurred:
uasi-offenses under Article 365 of the RPC are distinct
Q
elonies are committed not only by means ofdeceit
F 1. B
y any person committing a felony (delito)
and separate crimes and not a mere modality in the
(dolo) but also by means offault(c ulpa). although the wrongful act done be different commission of a crime. Thus, the proper designation of
from that which he intended.
ere is deceit when the act is performed with
Th the felony should be reckless imprudence resulting to
deliberateintentandthereisfaultwhenthewrongful Modes of committing crimes falsification of public documents and not falsification of
act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of public documents through reckless imprudence.
1. Dolo.
foresight, or lack of skill. eckless imprudence resulting to falsification of public
R
a. Deceit or criminal intent.
Elements of felonies documents is an offense that is necessarilyincludedinthe
b. Act performed with deliberate intent. willful act of falsification of public documents, the latter
1. There must be an act or omission; being thegreateroffense.Assuch,hecanbeconvictedof
c. Th
ere must be a confluence of both an evil act
2. Such must be punishable by the RPC; and andanevilintent.Actumnonfacitreum,nisimens reckless imprudence resulting to falsification of public
sit rea. documents notwithstanding that the Information only
3. S uch is performed or incurred by means of dolo or
charged the willful act of falsification of public
culpa. 2. Culpa.
documents.
According to a. Fault.
1. Gravity— grave, less grave, light; b. W
rongful acts result from imprudence,
negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill. People v. Pugay
2. Mode of commission— Intentional and culpable;
3. Their nature —Mala in seandmala prohibita; Requisites ofDolo e next question to be determined is the criminal
Th
responsibilityoftheaccusedPugay.Havingtakenthecan
1. Freedom;
from under the engine of the ferris wheel andholdingit
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page11of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
efore pouring its contents on the body of thedeceased,
b c. T
o determine the aggressor when self-defense is the creek.
this accused knew that the can contained gasoline. The invoked; nder these circumstances, we are convinced that the
U
stinging smell of this flammable liquid could not have petitioner, in stabbing, beating and stoning the victim,
d. T
o determine specific nature of the crime, i.e.
escaped his noticeevenbeforepouringthesame.Clearly,
murder in furtherance of rebellion. intended to killhim.
he failed to exercise all the diligence necessary to avoid
every undesirable consequence arising from any act that Serrano v. People 2010
may be committed by his companions who at the time
Rivera, et al v. People
were making fun of the deceased. Thus, the accused is I ntenttokillisastateofmindthatthecourtscandiscern
o nly guilty of homicide throughrecklessimprudence only through external manifestations, i.e., acts and I ntent to kill is a specific intent which the prosecution
defined in Article 365 of the RPC. (should have been conduct of the accused at the time of the assault and must prove by direct or circumstantial evidence, while
reckless imprudence resulting to homicide) immediately thereafter. generalcriminalintentispresumedfromthecommission
of a felony bydolo.
I n Rivera v. People, the Court considered the following
Kinds of criminal intent factors to determine the presence of an intent to kill: I n the present case, the prosecution mustered the
1. G eneral.Presumedfromthecommissionofafelony requisite quantum of evidence to prove the intent of
1) themeansused by the malefactors;
bydolo. petitioners to kill Ruben. Esmeraldo and Ismael
2) t he nature, location, and number of wounds pummeledthevictimwithfistblows.EvenasRubenfellto
2. S pecific.Mustbeprovenbydirectorcircumstantial sustained by the victim; the ground, unable to defendhimselfagainstthesudden
evidence.
3) t heconductofthemalefactorsbefore,atthetime, and sustained assault of petitioners, Edgardo hit him
otive is the reason or compelling force why the accused
M or immediately after the killing of the victim; and three times with a hollow block. Edgardo tried to hit
committed the acts complained of. Criminal intent is the Ruben on the head, missed, but still managed to hit the
4) t he circumstances under which the crime was
purpose of the accusedinadoptingtheparticularmeansto victim only in the parietal area, resulting in a lacerated
committed and themotivesof the accused.
achieve his objective. wound and cerebral contusions.
ere, the petitioner used a knife in his assault. The
H
However, motive may be inquired into in some instances: attheheadwoundssustainedbythevictimweremerely
Th
petitioner stabbed the victim in the abdomen while the
a. Where the identity of offender is in question; superficial and could not have produced his death does
latterwasheldbyGenerandOrieta.Immediatelyafterthe
not negate petitioners' criminal liability for attempted
b. T odeterminevoluntarinessoftheact,orwhetherit stabbing,thepetitioner,GenerandOrietabeatandstoned
murder.
was intentionally done; thevictimuntilhefellintoacreek.Areasonableinference
canbemadethatthevictimwasleftfordeadwhenhefellinto
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page12of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Mistake of fact People v. Gervero2018 oth must thus exist and be proven in court before a
B
There isNO liabilityfor mistake of fact. The requisitesare: s early as in the case of People v. Oanis and Galanta, the
A person may be convicted of violating Section 5(i) of R.A.
Courthasruledthatmistakeoffactappliesonlywhenthe 9262.
1. Th
e act done would have been lawful had the act
been as the accused believed them to be; mistake is committed without fault or carelessness. See alsoXXX256611 v. People2022
2. Th
e intention in performing the act should be a. A
ctus reusandmens rea;Objective and
lawful; and subjective elements Garma v. People2022
3. Th
emistakeoffactwasNOTduetonegligence,bad
Acharon v. People2021 En Banc ike any other crime defined by The RevisedPenalCode,
L
faithorunlawfulintentoftheaccused.Theaccused
grave threats must have anactus reusandmens rea.
must have no opportunity to verify his mistake. ctus reus pertains to the external or overt acts or
A
omissions included in a crime'sdefinitionwhilemensrea 1. Th
e actus reusistheactualspeakingorutteringof
Yapyuco v. Sandiganbayan2012 refers to the accused's guilty state of mind or criminal the threats of, say, death or serious bodily harm.
I n the context of criminal law, a “mistake of fact” is a intent accompanying theactus reus. 2. Th
e mens rea is that the accused intends that the
misapprehension of a fact which, if true, would have I t is not enough for the woman to experience mental or recipientoftheirwordstofeelintimidatedbytheir
justified the act or omission which is the subject of the emotional anguish, or for her partner to deny financial wordsorthattheaccusedintendedthewordstobe
prosecution. Generally, a reasonable mistake of fact is a support that is legally due her. In order for criminal taken seriously.
defense to a charge of crime where it negates the intent liabilitytoariseunderSection5(i)ofR.A.9262,insofaras etestofmensrea iswhetherareasonablepersonwould
Th
component of the crime. it deals with "denial of financial support," there must, consider the utterance as threats by regarding the
A proper invocation of this defense requires therefore,beevidenceonrecordthattheaccusedwillfully utterance objectively and reviewing it in light of the
or consciously withheldfinancialsupportlegallyduethe circumstances inwhichtheywereuttered,themannerin
a) that the mistake behonestandreasonable; woman for the purpose ofinflictingmentaloremotional which they were spoken, the person to whom they were
b) that it be a matter offact; and anguish upon her. In other words, addressed, the relationship between the accused andthe
c) t hat it negates the culpability required tocommit 1. t he actus reus of the offense under Section 5(i) is complainant, andtherecipient'sreactiontotheaccused's
the crime or the existence of the mental state the willful denial of financial support, while words.
which the statute prescribes with respect to an ut whether the recipient of a threat takes the threat
B
2. t he mens rea is the intention to inflict mental or
element of the offense. seriouslyisnot,inandofitself,anelementofthemensrea
emotional anguish upon the woman.
of the accused, though it is relevant to the extent thatit
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page13of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a ssists in understanding the accused's intention in intended.
Definition Effect as to penalty
speaking the words at issue.
s no sufficient evidence appears in the record
A
berratio
A istake in blow; A
M rt 48on complex crime establishinganyqualifyingcircumstances,Samsonisonly
b. Aberratio ictus, error in personae,and guilty of the crime of homicide definedandpenalizedin
ictus at least 2 victims may apply
praeter intentionem
Article 249 of the RPC.
Accused isstill liableunder the following circumstances: rt 49applies — if the
A
1. P raeter intentionem. —Injurycausedisgreaterthan penalty for the crime
what was intended; istake in
M intended be different eople v. Umawid
P
rror in
E re aberratio ictus
identity; only from that committed, the
ny person may be held liable for an intentional
A personae
one victim lesser penalty shall be aureen’s deathisacaseofaberratioictus,giventhatthe
M
felony although the wrong done is not intended by
imposed in its MAX fatalblowthereforwasonlydeliveredbymistakeasitwas
him, if:
period actually Vicente who was Umawid’s intended target. In
a. he has committed anintentional felony; thisregard,Umawid’ssingledeedactuallyresultedinthe:
b. t he wrong done or injury caused is the (a) Attempted Murder of Vicente; and (b) Consummated
direct,naturalorlogicalconsequenceofthe eople v. Pugay
P MurderofMaureen.Thismaybeclassifiedasaspeciesof
repraeter intentionem complex crime defined under Article 48 of the RPC,
felony committed;OR
s for Samson, there is adequate evidence showing that
A particularly, a delito compuesto, or a compound crime
i f the intentional felony committed is the
his act was merely a part of their fun-making that where a single act produces two (2)ormoregraveorless
proximate cause of the injury or damage
evening.Hisact,however,doesnotrelievehimofcriminal grave felonies.
incurred by the victim.
responsibility. Burning the clothes of the victim would
2. Aberratio ictus. —Miscarriage of the blow; causeattheveryleastsomekindofphysicalinjuriesonhis
3. Error in personae. —Mistake in identity. person, a felony defined in the RPC. If his act resulted People v. Adriano2015
into a graver offense, as what took place in the instant
ulanan,whowasmerelyabystander,waskilledbyastray
B
Definition Effect as to penalty case, he must be held responsible therefor.
bullet.
rticle4oftheRPCprovidesthatcriminalliabilityshallbe
A onetheless, Adriano is guilty of the death of Bulanan
N
ack of intent to
L
Praeter incurred by any personcommittingafelonyalthoughthe
commit so grave M itigating circumstance underArticle4oftheRevisedPenalCode,pursuanttothe
intentionem wrongful act done be different from that which he
a wrong doctrine of aberratio ictus, which imposes criminal
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page14of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
l iabilityfortheactscommittedinviolationoflawandfor Cruz y Basco v. People2020 t he original wrong and the injury. (N
acino v.
all the natural and logical consequences resulting Ombudsman2019 En Banc)
ruz committed an intentional felony when he fired
C
therefrom.
multiple shots at Bernardo. The death of Torralba, who People v. Lalap2021
lthoughBulanan'sdeathwasbynomeansdeliberate,we
A washitbyoneofthosebulletsintendedforBernardo,isa
shall adhere to the prevailing jurisprudence pronounced I n Quinto v. Andres, the Court discussed that a person
direct, natural, and logical consequence of said
inPeoplev.Flora,wheretheCourtruledthattreacherymay committing a felonyiscriminallyliableforallthenatural
intentional felony. The deathofTorralbaisanexampleof
andlogicalconsequencesresultingtherefromunlessthere
be appreciated inaberratio ictus. ab erratio ictus.
was an efficient intervening active force that intervened
between the felony committed and the resulting injury.
c. P
roximate Cause and Efficient Intervening
People v. Bendecio2020 Cause I fapersoninflictsawoundwithadeadlyweaponinsuch
a mannerastoputlifeinjeopardyanddeathfollowsasa
s for Jonabel's death, what happened to this seven
A atcause,which,innaturalandcontinuoussequence,
Th
consequence of their felonious act, it does not alter its
(7)-year-oldwasaclearcaseofaberratioictusormistakein unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces
nature or diminish its criminality to prove that other
the blow. theinjury,andwithoutwhichtheresultwouldnothave
causes cooperated in producing the factual result. The
occurred.
nder the doctrine of aberratio ictus, as embodied in
U offender is criminally liable for the death ofthevictimif
Article 4 of the RPC, criminal liability is imposedforthe e felony isNOTtheproximatecauseoftheresulting
Th his delictual act caused,acceleratedorcontributedtothe
acts committed in violation of law andforallthenatural injury when: death of the victim.
andlogicalconsequencesresultingtherefrom.Thus,while a. Th
ere is an active force that intervened between ere, while the immediate cause of the victim'sdeathas
H
it may not have been appellant's intention to shoot the felonyandtheinjury,andtheactiveforceis reflected in the Medical Certificate is cardiorespiratory
Jonabel, this fact alone will not exculpate him of his a distinctactorfactabsolutelyforeignfromthe arrest,thestabwoundthataccused-appellantinflictedon
criminal liability. act of the accused. the vital part of the victim'sbodyistheproximatecause
otably, the qualifying circumstance of treachery
N b. Th
e injury is due to the intentional act of the ofthevictim'sdeath.Thestabwoundisthecausewhichin
attended Jonabel's killing. Although appellant did not victim.Contributory negligence. the natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by an
intend to kill Jonabel, treachery may stillbeappreciated efficient intervening cause, produces the victim's death,
inaberratioictus,pursuanttotheCourt'srulinginPeoplev. n efficient intervening cause is the new and
A
and without which the result would not have occurred.
independent actwhichitselfisaproximatecauseofan
Flora. Logically,thereisarationalconnectionbetweentheactof
injury andwhichbreaksthecausalconnectionbetween
accused-appellant stabbing the victim and the resulting
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page15of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
eath.Withoutthestabwound,thevictimcouldnothave
d 2. Death may be expected from the injuries inflicted; s to the allegedmiscarriageorincompleteabortion,the
A
been hospitalized and later died therefrom. allegedly exculpatory testimony of Dr. Diaz, or even the
3. Death ensued within a reasonable time.
completedisregardofanyevidencesurroundingsuchfact
oreover, there is no evidence that an efficient
M
interveningactiveforce,notconnectedwithorabsolutely Ombudsman v. Gatchalian2021 doesnotleadtopetitionerDinamling'sacquittal.Thefact
foreigntothestabwound,intervenedduringthenine-day of AAA's miscarriage or incomplete abortion is not
eproximatecauseofthefirewhichresultedtothedeath
Th essentialtoprovingtheelementsofthecrime,unlessitis
period which could have caused the victim'sdeath.Thus, andinjuryofthevictimswasthestockpilingof400sacks
eveniftherewasanotherfactorbutsuchisnotanefficient allegedtohavecausedmentaloremotionalsuffering.Itis
or ten tons of Supercell Blowing Agent known as notamongthecrime'selements.Infact,itisnotabortion
intervening cause, accused-appellant is still criminally Azodicarbonamide, in an area not intended for such
liable for the death of the victim because his act of butthemerefactofpregnancyofthevictimatthetimeof
storage and adjacent to the welding activities near the commissionwhichisanaggravatingcircumstance,notan
stabbing the victim accelerated or contributed to the stockpile. The molten slags from the welding rod came element, of the offense.
victim's death. The Medical Certificate does not indicate into contact with one of the sacks. There is no direct
the occurrence of any efficient intervening cause which causal connection between the issuance of the business
broke the relation of the felony committed by
permitandthefirewhichresultedtothedeathandinjury
accused-appellant and the resulting death. Gelig v. People 2010
of the victims.
eprosecution'ssuccessinprovingthatLydiacommitted
Th
NOT efficient intervening causes n the other hand, there is no showing that Kentex was
O
thecrimeofdirectassaultdoesnotnecessarilymeanthat
given undue advantage, preference or any unwarranted
1. Weak or diseased physical condition of victim; the same physical force she employed on Gemma also
benefits. It is not shown that with respecttoKentex,the
2. Nervousness or temperament of victim; resulted in the crime of unintentional abortion.
LGU of Valenzuela deviated from the proceduresapplied
3. C ausesinherentinthevictim,i.e.victimnotknowing to other business establishments. I t is worth stressing that Gemma was admitted and
how to swim; confined in a hospital for incompleteabortiononAugust
I n relation to undue injury in Section 3 (e) of R.A. No.
28,1981,whichwas42daysaftertheJuly17,1981incident.
4. Neglect of victim or third person; 3019, there is no direct causalrelationbetweenthedeath
This interval of time is too lengthy to prove that the
andthephysicalinjuriessustainedbythevictimsandthe
5. Erroneous or unskillful treatment; discharge of the fetus from the womb of Gemma was a
alleged negligence committed by respondents in issuing
6. Delay in the medical treatment of victim. direct outcome of the assault.
the business permits.
eathofvictimispresumedtobethenaturalconsequence
D
of physical injuries inflicted
Novicio v. People
Dinamling v. People2015
1. The victim was in normal health;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page16of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
I f the victim dies as a result of a deliberate act of the 3. I ts accomplishment is inherently impossible, or is control prevent the consummation of the intended
h
malefactors, intent to kill is presumed. It is petitioner's that the means employed is either inadequate or crime. One example is the manwhoputshishandinthe
postulation that the lone gunshot wound of Mario does ineffectual; coat pocket of another with the intention to steal the
notestablishintenttokill.However,thenumberofwounds latter's wallet andfindsthepocketempty.Thecaseatbar
4. Th
e act performed shouldnotconstituteaviolation
inflicted is not the sole consideration in proving intent to kill. belongs to this category.
of another provision of the RPC.
is Court has repeatedly held thatifthevictim'swound
Th
NB: There isNO attempted or frustrated impossiblecrime.
would normally cause death, then the last act necessary
People v. Callao2018
t o produce homicide would have been performed and Intod v. CA and People
death would have resulted were it not for the timely esson argues that he should only be convicted of
H
There must be either
medical attention given to the victim. committing an impossible crime. Allegedly, hecannotbe
1) legal impossibility, or heldliableforMurderbecauseitwaslegallyimpossiblefor
2) p
hysical impossibility of accomplishing the him to kill Fernando as thelatterwasalreadydeadwhen
Hesson stabbed him.
Impossible Crime intended act in order to qualify the act as an
2
Revised Penal Code, Art. 4(2) impossible crime. owever, thevictim'sfactofdeathbeforehewasstabbed
H
egal impossibility would apply to those circumstances
L byHessonwasnotsufficientlyestablishedbythedefense.
RT 4. Criminal liability. — Criminal liability shall
A
where More importantly, evenassumingthatitwasJunellowho
be incurred: xxxx
killedFernandoandthatthelatterwasalreadydeadwhen
2. B yanypersonperforminganactwhichwould 1) t hemotive,desireandexpectationistoperforman hewasstabbedbyHesson,Hessonisstillliableformurder
be an offense against persons or property, act in violation of the law; because of the clear presence of conspiracy between
wereitnotfortheinherentimpossibilityofits 2) there is intention to perform the physical act; HessonandJunello.Hesson'sdefenseofimpossiblecrime
accomplishment or an account of the is thus completely unavailing.
3) t hereisaperformanceoftheintendedphysicalact;
employment of inadequate or ineffectual
and
means.
4) t he consequence resulting from the intended act
Requisites ravity of Felonies: Grave, Less Grave,
G
does not amount to a crime.
1. Th
e act performed would be an offense against 3 and Light
n the other hand, factual impossibility occurs when
O evisedPenalCode,Art.9,asamendedbyR.A.No.
R
persons or property; 10951
extraneouscircumstancesunknowntotheactororbeyond
2. Act done withevil intent;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page17of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
RT 9. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and light
A When light felonies are punishable e determination of whether a crime is frustrated or
Th
felonies.— consummatednecessitatesaninitialconcessionthatall
GR: ight felonies are punishable only when
L
of the acts of execution have been performed by the
1. G rave felonies are those to which the law consummated.
offender.
attaches the capital punishment orpenalties EXC: Th
ose committed against persons or property,
whichinanyoftheirperiodsareafflictive,in even if attempted or frustrated. e.g. Slight e critical distinction instead is whether the felony
Th
accordance with Article 25 of this Code. physical injuries and maltreatment (266); Art itself was actually produced by the acts of execution.
309, nos. 7 and8;Alterationofboundarymarks Thedeterminationofwhetherthefelonywas"p roduced"
2. L ess grave felonies are thosewhichthelaw
afteralltheactsofexecutionhadbeenperformedhinges
punishes with penalties which in their (313); Malicious mischief (328 and 329, no. 3).
on the particular statutory definition of the felony.
maximum period are correctional, in
a. Subjective Phase and Objective Phase
accordance with the abovementioned article How to determine the stage of the crime
Each felony under the RPC has
3. L ightfeloniesarethoseinfractionsoflawfor 1. Nature of the offense;
1. a "s ubjective phase," or that portion of the acts
the commission of which the penalty of 2. Elements constituting the felony;
constituting thecrimeincludedbetweentheact
arresto menor or a fine not exceeding Forty
which begins the commission of the crime and 3. Manner of committing same —
thousand pesos (P40,000)or both is provided.
the last act performed by the offender which, a. F
ormal Crimes — Consummated in one instant,
with prior acts, should result in the no attempt. e.g. slander, false testimony, sale of
Stages of Execution
consummated crime. prohibited drugs.
Subjective Phase and Objective Phase
2. A
fter that point has been breached, the b. C
rimes consummated by mere attempt orproposal
Preparatory and Overt Acts subjective phase ends and the objective phase orbyovertacte.g.Flighttoenemy’scountry(121),
4
begins. corruption of minors (340), Treason.
ttempted, Frustrated, and
A
Consummated Stages I t has been held that if the offender never passes the c. Felony by omissionno attempted stage
subjective phase of the offense, the crime is merely
Spontaneous Desistance d. C
rimesrequiringtheinterventionoftwoperson
attempted.
to commit them are consummated by mere
RT 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted
A
On the other hand, the subjective phase is completely agreement e.g. betting in sport contests (197),
felonies. — Consummated felonies as well as those
assed in case of frustrated crimes, for in such
p corruption of public officer (212)
which are frustrated and attempted, are punishable.
instances, "subjectively the crime is complete."
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page18of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
e. M aterial crimes. There are THREE stages of c onstitute the last proximate one for completion. It is the frustrated stage of rape can ever be committed.
execution. necessary, however, that the attempt must have a causal
s this Court explained in People v. Orita, rape is either
A
relationtotheintendedcrime.InthewordsofViada,the attempted or consummated. There can be no frustrated
When felonies do not have stages
overtactsmusthaveanimmediateandnecessaryrelation
rape.
1. If punished under SPL; to the offense.
2. By omission; pplyingtheforegoingtorapecases,theCourt,inPeoplev.
A
3. Formal crimes, e.g. physical injuries. Bonaagua, declared that the slightest penetration by the Baleros v. People
male organorevenitsslightestcontactwiththeouterlip
Felonies without frustrated stage e attempt which the Penal Codepunishesisthatwhich
Th
orthelabiamajoraofthevaginaalreadyconsummatesthe
1. Theft; has a logicalconnectiontoaparticular,concreteoffense;that
crime of rape. In People v. Arce, Jr., the Court found the
which is the beginning of the executionoftheoffenseby
2. Rape. accusedguiltyofattemptedrapeonly,owingtothefailure
overt acts of the perpetrator, leading directly to its
of the victim to declare a slightest penetration into her
b. Preparatory and Overt Acts realization and consummation.
vagina, which was necessary to consummate rape.
I t would be too strained to construe petitioner's act of
People v. Manuel2020
pressing a chemical-soaked cloth in the mouth of Malou
n overt or external act is defined as some physical
A Valenzuela v. People ⭐ andCanceran v. People2015 which would induce her to sleep as an overtactthatwill
activity or deed, indicating the intention to commit a logically and necessarily ripen into rape. As it were,
particular crime, more than a mere planning or Is there a frustrated stage in theft? petitionerdidnotcommenceatalltheperformanceofany
preparation, which if carried out to its complete O. Theft cannot have a frustrated stage. Theftcanonly
N act indicative of an intent or attempt to rape Malou.
termination following its natural course, without being be attempted or consummated.
frustrated by external obstacles nor by the spontaneous
desistanceoftheperpetrator,willlogicallyandnecessarily People v. Gonzalez
ripen into a concrete offense. People v. Aca-ac e (specific criminal intent) intent to kill determines
Th
I t is necessary that the overt act should have been the ecessarily,rapeisattemptedifthereisnopenetrationof
N whether the crime committed is physical injuries or
ultimatesteptowardstheconsummationofthedesign.It the female organ because not all acts of execution were homicide.Suchintentismademanifestbytheactsofthe
issufficientifitwasthe"firstorsomesubsequentstepin performed. Takingintoaccountthenature,elementsand accused which are undoubtedly intended to kill the victim.
adirectmovementtowardsthecommissionoftheoffense manner of execution of the crime of rape and Forevidentlackofcriminalintenttokillthecomplainant,
after the preparations are made." The act done need not jurisprudence on the matter, itishardlyconceivablehow
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page19of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t he information for attempted homicide must fail. etitioner already commenced his attackwithamanifest
P 1. Th
e offender commences the commission of
Considering the nature and locationoftheirinjuriesand intenttokillbyshootingprivatecomplainantseventimes, the felony directly by overt acts;
the number of days requiredfortheirtreatment,wefind butfailedtoperformalltheactsofexecutionbyreasonof
a. That there beexternal acts;
thatthecrimecommittedfortheinjuriessustainedbythe causes independent of his will, that is,pooraimandthe
children are two counts of slight physical injuries under swiftness of the latter. Private complainant sustained a b. S
uch external acts have direct
Art. 266. wound on the left arm that is not sufficient to cause his connectionwiththecrimeintendedto
death. The settled rule is that wherethewoundinflicted be committed.
on the victim is not sufficient to cause his death, the 2. H
e does NOT perform all the acts of
People v. Labiaga2013 crimeisonlyattemptedmurder,sincetheaccuseddidnot executionwhich should produce the felony;
performalltheactsofexecutionthatwouldhavebrought
ppellant should be convicted of attempted murder, and
A 3. Th
eoffender'sactbeNOTstoppedbyhisown
about death.
not frustrated murder. spontaneous desistance;
I nfrustratedmurder,theremustbeevidenceshowingthat c. A
ttempted, Frustrated, and Consummated 4. Th
e non-performance of all acts ofexecution
the wound would have been fatal were it not for timely Stages was due to cause or accident other than his
medicalintervention.Iftheevidencefailstoconvincethe spontaneous desistance.
felony is consummated when all the elements
A
court that the wound sustained would have caused the necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
victim’s death without timely medical attention, the Frustrated Attempted
present;
accusedshouldbeconvictedofattemptedmurderandnot as performed all the
h
It isfrustratedwhen
frustrated murder. acts of execution ✘
I n the instant case, it does not appear that the wound 1. t he offender performs all the acts of
execution
which should ✔ erely
m
sustained by Gregorio Conde was mortal. produce the felony as commences
2. w
hich would produce the felony as a a consequence
consequence
c ause or
Velasco v. People s ome cause
3. but which, nevertheless,do not produceit accident other
aving commenced the criminal act by overt acts but
H reason for independent of
4. b
yreasonofcausesindependentofthewillof than the
failing to perform all acts of execution as to producethe non-accomplishment the will of the
the perpetrator. offender's own
felony by reason of some cause other than his own perpetrator
spontaneous
desistance, petitioner committed an attempted felony. There is anattemptwhen
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page20of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Frustrated Attempted a ndincasesofexcessivepenalties.—Wheneveracourt
ere,Gutierrezwashitbyasamuraiandthengangedup
H
has knowledge of any actwhichitmaydeemproper
desistance on by the rest of his aggressors, including petitioner. torepressandwhichisnotpunishablebylaw,itshall
Although petitioner and his fellow malefactors were able render the proper decision, and shall report to the
to hit Gutierrez on the different parts of his body, they Chief Executive, through the Department ofJustice,
suddenlystoppedandfled.Thus,thecrimecommittedby the reasons which induce the court to believe that
petitioner cannot be attempted murder, for he and his
said act should be made the subject of legislation.
fellow malefactors spontaneously desisted from
performing further acts that would result in Gutierrez's I n the same way, the courtshallsubmittotheChief
death. Executive, through the Department of Justice, such
us, the Court holds that the elements of attempted
Th statement as may be deemed proper, without
felonywerenotpresentinthiscasebecausepetitionerand suspending the execution of the sentence, when a
his fellow malefactors voluntarily and spontaneously strict enforcement of the provisions of this Code
stoppedordesisted—anelementthatremovedthecrime would result in the impositionofaclearlyexcessive
from the contemplation of attempted felony. penalty, taking into consideration the degree of
Nevertheless,petitionerremainsliableforseriousphysical malice and the injury caused by the offense.
injuries. The spontaneous desistance of malefactors
d. Spontaneous Desistance Nieto and Vicente v. People2021
exempts them from criminal liability for the intended
Peñaranda v. People2021 crime, but it does not exempt them from the crime e Court affirmed the conviction of petitioners for
Th
committed by them before their desistance. violating Section 68 (now Section 77) of PD No. 705, as
I fthemalefactorsdonotperformalltheactsofexecution amended, otherwise known as Revised Forestry Code.
by reason of their spontaneous desistance, they are not eCourtsympathizedwiththeplightofpetitionerswho
Th
guilty of an attempted felony. uty of the Courts in case of
D were merely following orders and were consequently
e desistance may be through fear or remorse. Itisnot
Th Non-Punishable Act and Excessive caught inpossessionofthelumber,butthelawmuststill
5
necessary that it be actuated by a good motive. The RPC Penalty beapplied.Duralexsedlex.However,consideringthefacts
requires only that thediscontinuanceofthecrimecomes Revised Penal Code, Art. 5 surrounding petitioners' participation in the crime and
fromthepersonswhohavebegunit,andthattheystopof RT 5.Dutyofthecourtinconnectionwithactswhich
A guided by jurisprudence on instances when the facts of
their own free will. shouldberepressedbutwhicharenotcoveredbythelaw, thecrimeelicitedtheCourt'scompassionfortheaccused,
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page21of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t he Court recommendedexecutiveclemencypursuantto t he aforestated incongruence of penalties, all with the
ird. Lackofsufficientprovocationonthepartofthe
Th
Article 5 of the RPC. hope of arriving at the proper solution to this
person defending himself.
predicament.
1) Th
ere is unlawful aggression when the periltoone’s
Cahulogan v. People2018 life, limb or right is eitheractual or imminent.
hile PD 1612 penalizes those who acquire properties
W ircumstances Affecting Criminal
C 2) A slap on the face is unlawful aggression.
B
which are proceeds of Robbery or Theft, its prescribed Liability
3) A
strong retaliation for an injury or threat may
penalties are similar to the latter crime in that they are
Justifying Circumstances amount to an unlawful aggression.
largely dependent on the value of the said properties.
4) Th
e killing of the deceased by the defendant be
owever, with the recent enactment of Republic Act No.
H Exempting Circumstances
simultaneous with the attackmadebytheformer,or
10951, which adjusted the values of the property and Mitigating Circumstances at least both acts succeeded each other without
damage on which various penalties are based, the appreciable intervaloftime.Theaccusedmusthaveno
graduation of values in Article 309 was substantially Aggravating Circumstances
time nor occasion for deliberation and cool thinking.
amended, without any concomitant adjustment for PD Alternative Circumstances
1612. This development would then result in instances 5) A
publicofficerexceedinghisauthoritymaybecome
whereaFence,whichistheoreticallyamereaccessoryto Absolutory causes an unlawful aggressor.
the crime of Robbery/Theft, will be punished more 6) W
hen the aggressor flees, unlawful aggression no
Justifying Circumstances
severely than the principal of such latter crimes. This 1 longer exists. However, ifthepurposeoftheretreat
Revised Penal Code, Art. 11
incongruenceinpenaltiestherefore,impelsanadjustment was for the aggressor to take a more advantageous
of penalties. Self-defense positiontoinsurethesuccessoftheattackalreadybegunby
s the Court remains mindful of the fact that the
A nyone who acts in defense of his person or rights,
A him, the unlawful aggression is considered still
determinationofpenaltiesisapolicymatterthatbelongs provided that the following circumstances concur; continuing,andtheonemakingadefensehasaright
to pursue him in his retreat and to disable him.
to the legislative branch of the government, it finds it
prudent to instead, furnish both Houses of Congress, as
First.Unlawful aggression. ⭐ 7) N
ounlawfulaggressionwhenthereisagreementto
well as the President of the Republic of the Philippines, econd. Reasonablenecessityofthemeansemployed
S fight. The challenge to fight must be accepted.
through the Department of Justice, pursuant to Article5 to prevent or repel it. However, if the aggression occurred ahead of the
oftheRPC,copiesofthisrulinginordertoalertthemon agreed time and place of the fight, it isunlawful.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page22of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
8) A mere threatening or intimidating attitude, not ho was at that time very drunk tried to hit him but
w s elf-defense.Itisanoftrepeatedrulethatthepresenceof
preceded by an outward and material aggression, is missed and fell on the ground. At that point, unlawful a large number of wounds, their location and their
notunlawfulaggression,becauseitisrequiredthat aggressionceasedanditwasnolongernecessaryforhim seriousness would negate self-defense. Instead, they
the act be offensive and positively strong, showing the to stabthedeceased.Itwasaccused-appellant,therefore, indicate a determined effort to kill.
wrongful intent of the aggressor to cause injury. whobecametheaggressorwhenhe,despitethecondition
of the deceased, proceeded to stab thelatterattheback.
9) Th
epersondefendinghimselfcannotbeexpectedto
His act can no longer be interpreted as an act of People v. Pereira 2021
think clearlyso asto control his blow.
self-preservation but a perverse desire to kill. Hence, he
10) The measure of rational necessity is tobefoundin The elements of the justifying circumstance of
cannot successfully claim the benefit of self-defense.
thesituationasitappearedtothepersondefending self-defense were NOT present. Here, Perreira utterly
at the time when the blow was struck. f ailed to discharge the burden of proving unlawful
aggression.
11) W hether the means employed is reasonable, will People v. Rubiso
depend upon elf-defense cannot be justifiably appreciated when
S
Unlawful aggression is a condition sine qua non for the
uncorroborated by independent and competent evidence
a) Th
enatureandqualityoftheweaponusedbythe j ustifying circumstance of self-defense. It contemplates
or when it is extremely doubtful by itself. The burden of
aggressor; What the law requires is rational an actual, sudden and unexpected attack, or imminent evidence is shifted andtheaccusedclaimingself-defense
equivalence. danger thereof, and not merely a threatening or
must rely onthestrengthofhisownevidenceandnoton
b) H isphysicalcondition,character,sizeandother intimidatingattitude.Thepersondefendinghimselfmust
the weakness of the prosecution.
circumstances, and those of the person have been attacked with actual physical force or with
defending himself; actual use of weapon. Defense of relatives
c) And also the place and occasion of the assault. I tisaxiomaticthatthemerethrustingofone’shandintohis nyonewhoactsindefenseofthepersonorrightsofhis
A
pocket as if for the purpose of drawing a weapon is NOT spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural
12) If the provocation by the person defendinghimself
unlawful aggression. Even the cocking of a rifle without or adopted brothersorsisters,orhisrelativesbyaffinity
is not proximate and immediate to theaggression,
aiming the firearm at any particular target is NOT in the samedegreesandthoseconsanguinitywithinthe
there is self-defense.
sufficient to conclude that one’s life was in imminent fourth civil degree, provided that the first and second
danger. r equisitesprescribedinthenextprecedingcircumstance
People v. Antonio
elocationandpresenceofgunshotwoundsonthebody
Th are present, and the further requisite, in case the
As testified by accused-appellant himself, the deceased
of the victim eloquently refute appellant’s allegation of
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page23of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
r evocationwasgivenbythepersonattacked,thattheone t he means employed to repel the aggressionandthatthe Requisites:
making defense had no part therein. person making the defense had no part in the provocation.
1. Unlawful aggression;
Requisites: 2. R
easonable necessity of the means employed to
1. Unlawful aggression; Carungcong v. People 2010 prevent or repel it;
2. R easonable necessity of the means employed to 3. A
ccused must not be induced by revenge,
rticle332providesforanabsolutorycauseinthecrimes
A
prevent or repel it; resentment or other evil motive.
of theft, estafa and malicious mischief. It limits the
3. I n case theprovocationwasgivenbytheperson responsibility of the offender to civil liability and frees 1) A
ny person not included in the enumeration of relatives
attacked, the one making the defense had no himfromcriminalliabilitybyvirtueofhisrelationshipto that can be defendedis considered astranger.
part therein. the offended party.
Fulfillment of duty
1) Relatives that can be defended:(SADS4C) econtinuingaffinityviewmaintainsthattherelationship
Th nypersonwhoactsinthefulfillmentofadutyorinthe
A
by affinity between the survivingspouseandthekindred lawful exercise of a right or office.
a) Spouse;
o fthedeceasedspouse continues evenafterthedeathof
b) Ascendants; the deceased spouse, regardless of whether themarriage Requisites:
c) Descendants; producedchildrenornot.Thisismoreconsistentwiththe 1. Th
e accused actedintheperformanceofaduty
language and spirit of Article 332(1) of the RPC. The OR in thelawful exercise of a right or office;
d) L egitimate, natural or adopted Siblings, or
fundamental principle in applying and in interpreting
relatives byaffinityin the same degrees; 2. The injury caused or the offense committed be
criminal laws is to resolve all doubts in favor of the
e) R elatives by Consanguinity within the 4th civil t he necessary consequence of the due
accused. In dubio pro reo. When in doubt, rule for the
degree.(4C) performance of duty or the lawful exercise of
accused.
such right or office.
2) Th
e factthattherelativedefendedgaveprovocation
isimmaterial. Defense of strangers
Cabanlig v. Sandiganbayan
nyone who acts in defense of the person or rights ofa
A
People v. Lansang stranger, provided that the first and second requisites elf-defense and fulfillment of duty operate on different
S
principles. Self-defense is based on the principle of
e justifying circumstance of defense of a relative can
Th mentioned in the first circumstance of this Article are
self-preservation from mortal harm,whilefulfillmentof
only be raised where there is a concurrence of the present and that the person defending be not induced by
revenge, resentment, or other evil motive. duty is premised on the due performance of duty.
requisites ofunlawfulaggression,reasonablenecessityof
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page24of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
policeman in the performance of duty is justified in
A Avoidance of a greater evil 3) Th
e subordinate is not liable for carrying out an
usingsuchforceasisreasonablynecessarytosecureand illegal order of his superior, if he is not aware of the
ny person who, in ordertoavoidanevilorinjury,does
A
detaintheoffender,overcomehisresistance,preventhis illegalityof the orderandhe isnot negligent.
anactwhichcausesdamagetoanother,providedthatthe
escape, recapture him if he escapes,andprotecthimself following requisites are present;
Balunueco v. CA
from bodily harm.Unlikeinself-defensewhereunlawful
First. That the evil sought to be avoidedactuallyexists;
aggression is an element, in performance of duty, I n the case at bar, Ricardo utterly failed to adduce
unlawful aggression from the victim is NOT a requisite. econd. That the injury feared begreaterthanthatdone
S sufficient proof of the existence ofapositivelystrongact
to avoid it; of real aggression on the part of the deceased Senando.
Fulfillment of Duty was Complete, Killing was Justified
ird. That there be no other practicalandlessharmful
Th irst, the fact that three (3) of the assailants suffered
F
I n this case, Valino was committing an offense in the
meansof preventing it. non-fatal injuries bolsters the fact that Senando tried
presence of the policemen when Valino grabbed the M16
Armalite from Mercado and jumped from the jeep to vainly to ward off the assaults of his assailants. Second,
1) Th
e greater evil should notbebroughtaboutbythe
Ricardo failed to present himself to the authorities. The
escape. The policemen would have been justified in negligence or imprudence of the actor; nor mustit
shooting Valino if the use of force was absolutely natural impulse of anypersonwhohaskilledsomeonein
result from a violation of law.
defenseofhispersonorrelativeistobringhimselftothe
necessary to prevent his escape. The policemen had the
2) Only criminal liability is excused,not civil liability. authoritiesandtrytodispelanysuspicionofguiltthatthe
duty not only to recapture Valino but also to recover the
authorities might haveagainsthim.Third,petitionerhad
loose firearm. Obedience to a lawful order
a rather erratic recollection of people and events.
e duty to issueawarningisnotabsolutelymandatedatall
Th nypersonwhoactsinobediencetoanorderissuedbya
A
times and at all cost, to the detriment of the life of law superior for some lawful purpose.
enforcers. The directive toissueawarningcontemplates Manaban v. CA
Requisites:
asituationwhereseveraloptionsarestillavailabletothe
law enforcers. In exceptional circumstances such as this 1. That anorder has been issuedby a superior; I nthiscase,therewasnounlawfulaggressiononthepart
case, where the threat to the life of a law enforcer is of the victim. First, Bautista was shot at the back as
2. Such order must befor some lawful purpose;
alreadyimminent,andthereisnootheroptionbuttouse evidencedbythepointofentryofthebullet.Second,when
3. Th
e means usedbythesubordinatetocarryout Bautistawasshot,hisgunwasstillinsidealockedholster
force tosubduetheoffender,thelawenforcer'sfailureto
said order islawful. andtuckedinhisrightwaist.Third,whenBautistaturned
issue a warning is excusable.
his back at Manaban, Manaban was already pointing his
service firearm at Bautista.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page25of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
4. Anypersonwho,whileperformingalawfulactwith c omplete deprivation of intelligence in committing the
ggression presupposes that the person attacked must
A
uecare,causesaninjurybymereaccidentwithout
d act, that is,
face a real threat to his life and the peril sought to be
avoided is imminent and actual,not imaginary. fault or intention of causing it. 1. that the accused be deprived of reason;
5. Any person who act under the compulsion of 2. that there be no responsibility for his own acts;
irresistible force.
Masipequiña v. CA 3. that he acts without the least discernment;
6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an
4. t hat there be a complete absence of the power to
e rule is that the reasonable necessity of the means
Th uncontrollable fearof an equal or greater injury.
discern, or that there be a total deprivation of
employedtorepelorpreventtheattackdependsuponthe
7. Any person who fails to performanactrequiredby freedom of the will.
imminent danger of injury, NOT on the harm actually
law, when prevented by some lawful insuperable heretheaccusedfailedtoshowcompleteimpairmentor
W
done to the accused.
cause. loss of intelligence, the Court has recognized at most a
us, that Masipequiñaescapedseriousinjuriesdoesnot
Th
mitigating,notanexempting,circumstanceinaccordwith
necessarily imply that the means he used to repel the Imbecility or Insanity
Article 13(9) of the RPC.
attack were unreasonable and excessive. n imbecile isonewho,whileadvancedinage,has
1) A
a mental development comparable to that of I n previous caseswhereschizophreniawasinterposedas
anexemptingcircumstance,ithasmostlybeenrejectedby
children 2-7 years of age.
Exempting Circumstances the Court. In each of thesecases,theevidencepresented
2 o constitute insanity, there must be complete
2) T tendedtoshowthatiftherewasimpairmentofthemental
Revised Penal Code, Art. 12
deprivation of intelligence or that there be total faculties, such impairment was not so complete as to
the following areexemptfrom criminal liability: deprivation of the freedom of the will. Duringthe deprivetheaccusedofintelligenceortheconsciousnessof
lucid interval, the insane acts with intelligence. his acts. Accordingly, wemustrejecttheinsanitydefense
1. A n imbecileoraninsane person,unlessthelatter
has acted during a lucid interval. 3) Th
us, epilepsy, somnambulism, and malignant of Rafanan.
malaria are valid defenses. Feeblemindedness and
2. A personunder 15 yearsof age. Minority
pedophilia, on the other hand, are NOT.
3. A person over15yearsofageandunder18,unless RA 9344 as amended by RA 10360
he has acted with discernment, in which case, such People v. Rafananon insanity
1) A
child above 15, but below 18, must have acted
minorshallbeproceededagainstinaccordancewith I n order that the exempting circumstance of INSANITY without discernmentto be exempt.
the provisions of Art. 80 of this Code. may be taken into account,itisnecessarythattherebea
2) Periods ofcriminal responsibility
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page26of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
rivileged communication, the priest can not be
p
a) Absolute irresponsibility15 years and below; b) that the injury is causedby mere accident; and
compelled to report such information.
b) C onditional responsibility 15 years and 1 day - 18 c) t hat there was no fault or intent on his part to
years; cause the injury. a) The act of reporting is required under law;
c) Full responsibility18 years - 70 years; b) The priest fails to do so;
Irresistible force
d) M c) H
is failure wasduetoalawfulcause,privileged
itigated responsibility 15 years and 1 day to 18 9) Th
eforcemustbeirresistibletoreducetheactortoa
communication between him and a penitent.
years, with discernment; over 70 years orsenility. mereinstrumentwhoactsnotonlywithoutwillbut
3) A childinconflictwiththelaw(CCL)isonewhoatthe against his will. Resume of Justifying and Exempting
time of the commission of the offense is below 18 Circumstances
Uncontrollable fear
years old but not less than 15 years and 1 day old. M=Mitigating
10) This presupposes that a person is compelled to
4) D iscernment means the capacity of the child at the commitacrimebyanother,butthecompulsionisby Civil If not
Requisites
timeofthecommissionoftheoffensetounderstand means of intimidation or threat, not force or iability
L c
omplete
the differences between right and wrong and the violence. If force or violence is employed, the
Justifying
consequences of the wrongful act. applicable defense isirresistible force.
5) I ntent refers to the desired act of the person while 11) D
uress as a valid defense should be based on real, Self-defense
discernment relates to the moral significance that a imminent, or reasonable fearforone’slifeorlimband
1 . U nlawful aggression;
person ascribes to the said act. should NOT bespeculative, fanciful,orremote fear. 2. Reasonable necessity of the means
Accident 12) The compulsion must be of such a character as to ✘ M employed to prevent or repel it;
6) A n accident is something that happens outside the leave no opportunity to the accused for escape or 3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the
sway of our will, and although it comes about self-defensein equal combat. part of the person defending himself;
throughsomeactofourwill,liesbeyondthebounds
Insuperable cause Defense of relatives
of humanly foreseeable consequences.
13) Confessant reveals to a priest of his plan to rebel 1 . U nlawful aggression;
7) It isintrinsically contradictoryto negligence. againstthegovernment.UnderArt116,itisrequired 2. Reasonable necessity of the means
8) The followingrequisitesmust concur: that anyone who knows of such conspiracy must ✘ M
employed to prevent or repel it;
report the same. However, due to penitent-priest 3. In case the provocation was given by
a) t hat the accused was performing a lawful act
with due care;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page27of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Civil If not Civil If not Civil If not
c
omplete
Requisites c
omplete
Requisites c
omplete
Requisites
iability
L iability
L iability
L
t he person attacked, theone making a o f duty or lawful exercise of such Accident
defense had no part therein. right or office.
1 . A person is performing alawful act;
Defense of strangers Obedience to a lawful order 2. With due care;
3. He causes an accident to another by
1 . U nlawful aggression; 1. A n order has been issued by a ✘ M
mere accident;
2. Reasonable necessity of the means superior;
4. Without fault or intention of causing
employed to prevent or repel it; 2. Such order must be for alawful
✘ M ✘ M it.
3. The person defending benot induced purpose;
by revenge, resentment or other evil 3. The means used by the subordinate to Compulsion of an irresistible force
motive. carry out said order islawful.
1. Th e compulsion is bymeans of physical
Avoidance of greater evilor State of necessity Exempting force;
✔ ✘ 2. Such force must beirresistible;
1. Th e evil sought to be avoidedactually
Imbecility or insanity 3. Such forcemust come from a third
exists;
person.
2. The injury feared be greater than that 1 . I mbecile isexempt inALLcases;
✔ M
done to avoid it; ✔ M 2. Insaneis only exemptif he acted not Impulse of an uncontrollable fear
3. There be no other practical and less during a lucid interval.
1. Th
ethreat which causes the fear isof an
harmful means of preventing it.
Minority evilgreater thanorat least equal to, that
Fulfillment of duty which he is required to commit;
1 . I f 15 and below,absolutely exempt;
a) existence of an uncontrollable
1. Th e accused acted in the performance 2. If above 15 but below 18,conditionally
✔ M fear;
of a duty or in the lawful exercise of exempt.
✔ M b) the fear must be real and
such right or office; 3. Exemption applies only if it can be
✘ M imminent;
2. The injury caused or the offense shown that the minor acted without
c) the fear of an injury is greater
committed be the necessary discernment.
than or at least equal to that done.
consequence of thedueperformance
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page28of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Civil If not etach himself from the conspiracy tocommitthefelony
d 7. V
oluntary surrender. That the offender had
c
omplete
Requisites
iability
L
and prevent the commission thereof. voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in
2. Th
at it promises anevilof suchgravity authority or his agents, or
andimminencethat the ordinary man
Plea ofguilty. Thathehadvoluntarilyconfessedhis
would have succumbed to it. Mitigating Circumstances
3 uiltbeforethecourtpriortothepresentationofthe
g
Revised Penal Code, Art. 13
Insuperable cause evidence for the prosecution.
1. I ncomplete Defense. Those mentioned in the
1 . A n act is required by law to be done; precedingchapter,whenalltherequisitesnecessary 8. D
eafandDumb,Blind.Thattheoffenderisdeafand
2. A person fails to perform such act; to justify ortoexemptfromcriminalliabilityinthe dumb, blind or otherwise suffering some physical
✘ ✘ 3. His failure to perform such act was respective cases are not attendant. defect which thus restricts his means of action,
due to some lawful or insuperable defense, or communications with his fellow beings.
2. M
itigatingresponsibility.Thattheoffenderisunder
cause. 9. I llness. Such illness of the offender as would
eighteen year of age or over seventy years.
diminish the exercise of the will-power of the
3. P
raeter intentionem. Th
at the o ffender h ad no
offender without however depriving him of the
People v. Labuguen2020 intention to commit so grave a wrong as that
consciousness of his acts.
committed.
ON the CA erred in not considering in favor of Zuñiga the
W 10. Analogous. And,finally,anyothercircumstancesof
exempting circumstance of "irresistible force and/or 4. P
rovocation.Thatsufficientprovocationorthreaton
a similar nature and analogous to those above
uncontrollable fearof an equal or greater injury." thepartoftheoffendedpartyimmediatelypreceded
mentioned.
the act.
NO. The exempting circumstance is not availing. Privileged and ordinary
5. I mmediate vindication of a grave offense. That the
ere, the malefactors hadawell-hatchedplantocommit
H 1) O
rdinaryorGenericmitigating arethoseenumerated
act was committed intheimmediatevindicationof
the crime of robbery with homicideandthatZuñigawas in Art 13. For incomplete defense however, in
agraveoffensetotheonecommittingthefelony,his
not only well-aware of every detail thereof but likewise Subsection 1, it becomes privilegedwhenmajorityof
spouse, ascendants, or relatives by affinity within
actively participated in its commission. the requisites are present.(Art 69)
the same degrees.
uñiga had every opportunity to escape while they were
Z a) I t is susceptible to being offset by any
6. P
assion or obfuscation. That of having acted upon
passingthroughthecornfieldsontheirwaytothePadre's aggravating circumstance.
an impulse so powerful as naturally to have
house. He did not perform any overt act to dissociate or
produced passion or obfuscation.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page29of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
hereasasamitigatingcircumstance,itpertainsto
w
b) I fnotoffset,producesonlytheeffectofapplying 4) Th
e only instance it becomes privileged mitigating
itspresenceon the part of the offended party.
the penalty provided by law in its minimum is when a majorityoftherequisitesinself-defense,
period,in case of divisible penalty. defense of relatives or strangers is present. 9) I t must be immediate to the commission of the
crime such that the accused had no time to regain
2) P rivileged mitigating are those thatcannotbeoffset Praeter intentionem
byanyaggravatingcircumstance.Ithastheeffectof his reason and to exercise self-control.
5) I t is the intention of the offender at the moment
imposingupontheoffenderthepenaltylowerbyone 10) Itshouldnotbeoffensiveandpositivelystrongasit
when he is committing the crime which is
or two degreesthan that provided by law. may then be considered as an unlawful aggression
considered.
a) A that may give rise to self-defense.
rt 68. When the offender is a minor and his
case falls under the JJWA, particularly those People v. Enriquez Immediate vindication of a grave offense
above 15 but below 18, and acts WITH
e trial court gave all of the accused the benefit of the
Th 11) A
lapseoftimeisallowedbetweenthegraveoffense
discernment.
mitigating circumstance that the offenders had no and the vindication.
b) A rt69.Notall,butamajorityoftherequisitesof intentiontocommitsograveawrong.Theestimationofthis
12) Whether the personal offense is grave must be
justifying or exempting circumstances are circumstance was proper, and its allowance was not
decidedconsideringthesocialstandingoftheperson,
present. inconsistent with the finding that the crime was murder.
theplace, thetimewhen the insult was made.
c) A rt 64(5). When there are 2 or more mitigating
Provocation 13) It is incompatible with passion or obfuscation. They
circumstances and no aggravating.
cannot co-exist, except when there are other facts,
6) A
ny unjust or improper conduct or act by the
d) A rt 268(3). Voluntary release of person illegally although closely connected. In other words, the
offended party, capable of exciting, inciting, or
detained within 3 days; cause for each arose from different sets of facts.
irritating anyone.
e) A rt333(3).Abandonmentwithoutjustificationof
7) A
s to whether a provocation is sufficient depends Provocation Vindication
the spouse who committed adultery.
upontheactconstitutingtheprovocation,thesocial
lso against
A
Incomplete defense standingofthepersonprovoked,theplaceandtime Made towards offender
offender’s relatives
3) W henalltherequisitesnecessarytojustifytheactor when the provocation is made.
to exempt from criminal liability are not attendant. 8) A
s an element of self-defense, it pertains to its ffender must A
O n offense need
A grave offense
absenceonthepartofthepersondefendinghimself; have done not be grave
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page30of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Provocation Vindication 21) INCOMPATIBLEwith the following: v iew,sufficientprovocationtoenrageanyman,orstirhis
rageandobfuscatehisthinking,moresowhenthelivesof
I mmediately a. Praeter intentionem;
Time lapse Proximate hiswifeandchildrenareindanger.Petitionerstabbedthe
preceded the act b. Treachery; victim as a result of those provocations, and while
c. Evident premeditation; petitioner was stillinafitofrage.Inourview,therewas
Passion or obfuscation
sufficientprovocationandthecircumstanceofpassionor
14) Mitigating only when the same arose from lawful Provocation Passion or Obfuscation obfuscation attended the commission of the offense.
sentiments, and NOT in a spirit of lawlessness or
revenge. Source Offended party Caused by provocation ut, we must stress that provocation and passion or
B
obfuscation are not two separate mitigating
15) The crime committed by the accused must be ime
T I mmediately
Need not be immediate circumstances. Well-settled is the rule that if these two
provoked by prior unjust or improper acts of the lapse preceded the act circumstancesarebasedonthesamefacts,theyshouldbe
injured party. treated together as onemitigating circumstance.
Effect Loss of reason and self-control of offender
16) Exercise of a right or fulfillment of duty is NOT a
onetheless, since the mitigating circumstance of
N
proper source of passion or obfuscation. voluntary surrender is also present, Article 64 (5) of the
17) It must be proven that the act which produced Irresistible Force Passion or Obfuscation RPC should be applied. The penalty for frustrated
passion or obfuscation took place at a time not far homicide,pursuanttoArticle50oftheRPC,isthepenalty
Kind Exempting Mitigating
removedfrom the commission of the crime. ext lower in degree than that prescribed by law for
n
18) Thecrimecommittedmustbetheresultofasudden Force Physical Not physical consummated homicide.
impulseof natural and uncontrollable fury.
Source 3rd person Offender himself Voluntary Surrender
19) It may be builtupandstrengthenovertimeuntilit
rise from lawful
A 22)The following elements must be present for
can no longer be repressed and will ultimately Lawful? NO
sentiments voluntary surrender to be appreciated:
motivate the commission of the crime. (People v.
Oloverio2015) a) the offender has not been actually arrested;
20)Considered as ONE mitigating circumstance with b) t heoffendersurrenderedhimselftoaperson
Romera v. People
provocation if both arose from one and the same in authority, and,
cause. rusting his bolo at petitioner, threatening to kill him,
Th
and hacking the bamboo walls of his house are, in our
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page31of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c) t he surrender must be voluntary, n obfuscation, we find that the factsofthecasedonot
O
spontaneous. People v. Pereira2021 entitle Manaban to such mitigating circumstance.
Manaban admitted shooting Bautista because Bautista
Lumauig v. People2014 Perreiraisalsonotentitledtothemitigatingcircumstance
turnedaroundandwasallegedlyabouttodrawhisgunto
o f voluntary surrender. Here, the barangayauthorities
In sentencing petitioner, the Sandiganbayan correctly shoot Manaban. The act of Bautista in turning around is not
hadtosearchforPerreiraandgototheplacewherehefled
considered the mitigating circumstance of voluntary unlawfulandsufficientcauseforManabantolosehisreason
to.
surrender. However, it failed to considerthemitigating and shoot Bautista. The defense failed to establish by
c ircumstanceofreturnorfullrestitutionofthefundsthat clear and convincing evidence the cause that allegedly
were previously unliquidated. produced obfuscation.
Talabis v. People2020
etitionerisnotentitledtothemitigatingcircumstanceof
P Plea of guilty
People v. Basite voluntary surrender. But for equitable andhumanitarian 23) Not mitigating if made on appeal.
considerations, hisold ageis considered.
surrender to be voluntary must be spontaneous,
A 24) Plea of guilty to lesser offense than that chargedis
wing to petitioner's advanced age, the penalty shall be
O not mitigating. However, if the information is
showing the intent of the accused to submit himself
imposed in its minimum periodpursuanttoArticle64(2) amended to change the charge to a lesser offense
unconditionallyto the authorities, either because
of the RPC. and the accused pleads guilty thereto, it is
1. he acknowledges his guilt, or
mitigating.
2. h e wishes to save them the trouble and expense
25) The plea of guilty must be unconditional.
necessarily incurred in his search and capture. Manaban v. CA
26)NOT mitigating in culpable felonies and in crimes
I f none of these two (2) reasons impelled the accused to Voluntary Surrender and Obfuscation
under SPLs.
surrender,becausehissurrenderwasobviouslymotivated
anabancalledthepolicetoreporttheshootingincident.
M
morebyanintentiontoinsurehissafety,hisarrestbeing Whenthepolicearrived,Manabansurrenderedhisservice Analogous circumstances
inevitable, the surrender is not spontaneous. Here, a. O
ver 60 years with failing sight, similar to
firearm and voluntarily wentwiththepolicetothepolice
accused-appellant willingly went tothepoliceauthorities stationforinvestigation.Thus,Manabanisentitledtothe senility;
with Gilbert Sacla only to escape the wrath of private
benefit of the mitigating circumstance of voluntary b. O
utraged feeling of owner of animal taken for
complainant's relatives who were pursuing him andwho
surrender. ransom similar tovindication;
appeared to be thirsting for his blood.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page32of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c. E sprit de corps or mass psychology is similar to 3) From any other personal cause, Requisites
passion or obfuscation; intentionem b
etween the means employed to execute the
hallonlyservetomitigatetheliabilityoftheprincipals,
S
d. V oluntary restitution of property similar to accomplices, and accessories to whom such criminal act and its consequences.
voluntary surrender; circumstances are attendant. (Art 62[3])
1 . M ust besufficient;
e. E xtreme poverty similar to incomplete ircumstances which are neither exempting nor
C 2. Mustoriginate from offended party;and
justification based on state of necessity; mitigating Provocation 3. Must beimmediateto the act, i.e., to the
f. T estifying for the prosecution similar to plea of 1. Aberratio ictus; commission of the crime by the person
guilty; who is provoked.
2. Mistake in the identity;
3. Entrapment; 1. Th ere be agrave offensedone to the one
committing the felony, his spouse,
People v. Tampus and Montesclaros 4. Age of criminal responsibility; ascendants, descendants, legitimate,
e agree with boththetrialandappellatecourtsintheir
W 5. Performance of righteous action. I mmediate natural or adopted brothers or sisters,
appreciation of the mitigating circumstance of illness as vindication or relatives by affinity within the same
would diminish the exercise of willpower of Ida without
Review of Mitigating Circumstances of a grave degrees;
deprivingheroftheconsciousnessofheracts,pursuantto Requisites offense 2. The felony is committed in vindication
Article 13(9). of such grave offense. Alapse of timeis
ot all requisites necessary to justify the act
N allowedbetween the vindication and
Dr. Costas testified that Ida wasprovisionallytreatedfor or to exempt from criminal liability are
I ncomplete doing of the grave offense.
schizophrenia afewmonthsbeforetheincident.Idawas attendant.
ot totally deprived of intelligence at the time of the
n defense
If majority of the requisites are present, 1. Th ere be an act, bothunlawful and
incident; but, she may havepoor judgment. privileged, otherwise,ordinary. sufficient, to produce such a condition of
mind; and
Mitigating circumstances which are personal to offenders inor
M
Above 15 but below 18 years old. Passion or 2. Said act which produced the obfuscation
Mitigating circumstances which arise (Privileged) obfuscation was not far removed from the
1) From the moral attributes of the offender; or Senility Offender is over 70 years old commission of the crimeby a
considerable length of time, during
2) F rom his private relations with the offended Praeter There is a notable and evident disproportion which the perpetrator might recover his
party; or
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page33of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Requisites Aggravating Circumstances henever morethanthreearmedmalefactorsshall
W
4
normal equanimity. Revised Penal Code, Art. 14 haveactedtogetherinthecommissionofanoffense,
it shall be deemed to have been committed by a
1 . O ffender hadnot been actually arrested. 1. Th
atadvantagebetakenbytheoffenderofhispublic band.(Band)
oluntary
V 2. He surrendered himself to aperson in position.(Abuse of public position)
7. Th
at the crime be committed on the occasion of a
surrender authority or to the latter's agent; 2. Th
at the crime be committed in contempt or with conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or
3. The surrender was voluntary. insulttothepublicauthorities.(C
ontemptoforinsult
other calamity or misfortune.(Calamity)
to public authorities)
1 . O ffenderspontaneously confessed his guilt; 8. Th
at the crimebecommittedwiththeaidofarmed
2. Such was madein open court, before the 3. Th
attheactbecommittedwithinsultorindisregard
lea of
P menorpersonswhoinsureoraffordimpunity.(A id
competent courtthat is to try the case; and of the respect duetheoffendedpartyonaccountof of armed men)
guilty
3. Such was madepriorto the presentation his rank, age, or sex,(Insult to offended party)
9. That the accused is a recidivist.(Recidivist)
of evidence for the prosecution. o rthatiscommittedinthedwellingoftheoffended
party, if the latter has not given provocation. recidivistisonewho,atthetimeofhistrialforone
A
1. Th e offender is deaf and dumb, blind or
(Dwelling) crime, shall have been previously convictedbyfinal
otherwise suffering some physical
eaf and
D judgment of another crime embraced in the same
defect 4. Th
attheactbecommittedwithabuseofconfidence
Dumb, title of this Code.
2. Which thus restricts his means of or obvious ungratefulness. (A
buse of confidence or
Blind 10. That the offender has been previously punished by
action, defense, or communications obvious ungratefulness)
with his fellow beings. an offense to which the law attaches an equal or
5. Th
at the crime be committed in the palace of the greaterpenaltyorfortwoormorecrimestowhichit
1. Th e illness of offender must diminish Chief Executive or in his presence, orwherepublic
attaches a lighter penalty.(Reiteracion)
the exercise of his will-power; authorities are engaged in the discharge of their
Illness 11. Th
at the crime be committed in consideration of a
2. Such illness should not deprive the duties, or in aplacededicatedtoreligiousworship.
(Palace of Chief Executive) price, reward, or promise.(Price, reward, or promise)
offender of consciousness of his acts.
6. Th
atthecrimebecommittedinthenighttime,orin 12. That the crime be committed by means of
imilar to any
S of the mitigating
Analogous an uninhabited place, or by a band,wheneversuch inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a
circumstances. vessel or international damage thereto, derailment
circumstances may facilitatethecommissionofthe
offense.(N
ighttime, Uninhabited place,) of a locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page34of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
i nvolving great waste and ruin. (G
reat waste and
20.Thatthecrimebecommittedwiththeaidofpersons
ruin) astly, disregard of old age should not be taken into
L
under fifteen years of age or by means of motor
accountfor,asstatedinthecaseofPeoplev.Pagal,itisnot
13. That the act be committed with evident vehicles, motorized watercraft, airships, or other
proper to consider this aggravating circumstance in crimes
premeditation.(E
vident premeditation) similar means.(aabRA5438).(Aidofpersonunder15,
against property. Robbery with homicide is primarily a
14. Thatthecraft,fraudordisguisebeemployed.(C Motor vehicle)
raft, crime against property and not against persons.
fraud, or disguise) 21. Thatthewrongdoneinthecommissionofthecrime
15. That advantage be taken of superior strength, or
be deliberatelyaugmentedbycausingotherwrongs Recidivismvs. Reiteracion
meansbeemployedtoweakenthedefense.(A buseof not necessary for its commission.(C
ruelty)
Recidivism Reiteracion
superior strength) Kinds
s to 1st offense,
A een adjudged
B erved out the
S
16. That the act be committed with treachery.(A
levosia) 1. Generic—Those that can be applied to all crimes.
offender shall have with finality sentence
ereistreacherywhentheoffendercommitsanyof
Th 2. Specific—Applies only to particular crimes.
the crimes against the person, employing means, revious and
P ust NOT be
M
3. Qualifying—Changes the nature of the crime. I ncluded in
methods, or forms in the execution thereof which subsequent embraced in same
SAME title
tend directly and specially to insure its execution, 4. I nherent— Mustaccompanythecommissionofthe offenses title
without risk to himself arising from the defense crime.
lways
A
which the offended party might make. ✔ ✘
aggravating
People v. Nabaluna
17. That means be employed or circumstances brought
about which add ignominy to the naturaleffectsof e element of treachery cannotsimplybepresumed.It
Th Treachery oralevosia
the act.(Ignominy) must be clearly proven as the crime itself. 1) Th
esettledruleisthattreacherycanexistevenifthe
18. That the crime be committed after an unlawful The mere fact that two of the accused, with one ofthem attackisfrontal,aslongastheattackissuddenand
entry.(Unlawful entry) being armed with a bolo, does not necessarily constitute unexpected, giving the victim no opportunity to
abuse of superior strength on their part. To take repel it or to defend himself.
ere is an unlawful entry when an entrance is
Th
effected by a way not intended for the purpose. a dvantage ofsuperiorstrength,itisimperativethatthere 2) W
hat is decisive is thattheexecutionoftheattack,
beashowingofpurposelyusingexcessiveforcewhichisoutof without the slightestprovocationfromanunarmed
19. Thatasameanstothecommissionofacrimeawall,
proportion to the means of defense available to the person victim, made it impossible for thevictimtodefend
roof, floor, door, or window be broken. (B
reaking
attacked. himself or to retaliate.
wall, roof, floor, door, or window)
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page35of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
3) Th
ereistreacherywhentheoffendercommitsanyof c o-accused consciously adopted the means of attack reachery may still be appreciated even when the victim
T
the crimes against persons, employing means, because, as noted by the CA, they were already armed was forewarned of the danger to his person. What is
methods or forms in the execution thereof, which whentheyproceededtothecrimescene.Inaddition,itis decisive is that the execution of the attack made it
tend directly and specially to ensure its execution noteworthy that Rommel suddenly, without warning or impossible for the victim to defend himself or to retaliate.
withoutrisktohimselfarisingfromthedefensethat provocation, attacked Gilbertofrom behind.
the offended party might make.
People v. Alegre2022
4) Th
ere are two (2) conditions that must concur for
treachery to exist, to wit: People v. Bagabay2018
J urisprudence dictates that for treachery to be
a) t he employment of meansofexecutiongave I t is not enough that the attack was "sudden," appreciated, it must be sufficiently pleaded in the
the person attacked no opportunity to "unexpected," and "without any warning or provocation." Information in order not to violate the accused's
defendhimself or to retaliate; and Theremustalsobeashowingthattheoffenderconsciously constitutionalrighttobeproperlyinformedofthenature
and deliberately adopted the particular means, methods and cause of the charge against him.
b) t he means or method of execution was
and forms in the execution of the crime which tended ere, the Information against Alegre is defective insofar
H
deliberately and consciously adopted.
directly to insure such execution, without risk to himself. asitmerelyaverredtheexistenceofthequalifyingoffense
5) Th
e essence of treachery is that the attack is of treachery without specifying the particular acts and
deliberateandwithoutwarning,doneinaswiftand
circumstances that would constitute such.
unexpectedmanner,affordingthehapless,unarmed People v. Jaurigue2019
and unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or owever, Alegre is deemed to have waived this defect,
H
ere can be no treachery when the victim was
Th considering his failure to avail of the proper procedural
escape.
"forewarned of the danger he was in," "put on guard," or remedies.
People v. Bermudo2018 otherwise"couldanticipateaggressionfromtheassailant"
I thasbeenrepeatedlyheldthattherecanbenotreachery
as when "the assault is preceded by a heated exchange of
ilberto was completely defenseless at the time of the
G whentheattackisprecededbyaheatedexchangeofwords
words between the accused and the victim; or when the
betweentheaccusedandthevictim,orwhenthevictimis
attackbecausehewassurprisedbyRommelwithablowto victimisawareofthehostilityoftheassailanttowardsthe
the head causing him to fall to the ground.Rommeland aware ofthehostilityoftheassailanttowardstheformer.
former."
co-accusedcontinuedtoattackhimcausinghimmultiple Here, Alegre had a heated altercation withPascuabefore
injuries, including the fatal ones. Gilbertowasneverina he finally lost his patience and shot him.
position to defend himself. Further, Rommel and his People v. Angeles2019 Alegre'sactsweremoreofaresultofasuddenimpulseor
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page36of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a spurofthemomentdecisionduetohispreviousheated sas was abletoestablishtheoriginoftherecordingand
A
altercation with the victim, rather than a planned and People v. Pereira2021 explain how it was transferred to the compact disc and
deliberateaction.Thereisnoshowingthatheconsciously subsequently presented to the trial court.
employedaparticularmodeofattackinordertofacilitate ar 16, Art 14 of the RPC defines treachery asthedirect
P
the killing without any risk to himself. employment of means, methods, or forms in the Evident premeditation
executionofthecrimeagainstpersonswhichtenddirectly o prove this aggravating circumstance, the prosecution
T
and specially to insure its execution, without risk to the must show the following:
People v. Panis2021 offender arising from the defense which the offended
1) t he time when the offender determined tocommit
party might make. Here,atthetimeoftheattack,Bagan
J honny's straightforward testimony positively and the crime;
was not in a position to defend himself from the
categorically identified Santiago as having shot Artemio,
suddenness and swiftness thereof. 2) a n actmanifestlyindicatingthattheoffenderclung
Sr. suddenly and without any provocation at all, hitting
to his determination; and
the victim at the back.
3) a lapse of time, between the determination to
e fact that Santiago was positioned at a particular
Th People v. Manansala2020 commit the crime and the execution thereof,
locationandparticulartimewhileholdingarifle,showed
Here, the elements oftreacherywere present sufficient to allow the offender to reflect upon the
thatheconsciouslyanddeliberatelyadoptedthemeansto
consequences of his act.
commit the crime. Thus, Santiago's sudden attack on 1. M anansala stealthily entered the house of the
Artemio, Sr. constitutes treachery thereby qualifying the victim and shot him while he was going upstairs.
Mari v. CA
killing to the crime of Murder. 2. The fatal wound was inflicted from behind since
the entry point was located at the back lumbar e mere fact that thevictimisawomanisnotpersean
Th
eoplev.Sibbuheldthatforthedefenseofalibitoprosper,
P
region. aggravating circumstance. There wasnofindingthatthe
theaccusedmustprovenotonlythathewasatsomeother
3. The victim was going upstairs with his back evidence proved that the accused in fact deliberately
placewhenthecrimewascommitted,butalsothatitwas
towards the assailant when he was shot. intended to offend or insult the sex of the victim, or
physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the
showed manifest disrespect to the offended woman or
crime or its immediate vicinity through clear and s correctly held by the CA, the Rules on Electronic
A
displayed some specific insult or disrespect to her
convincing evidence. Here, thefactthatSantiagoresided Evidenceprovidesthatpersonsauthorizedtoauthenticate
womanhood. There was no proof of specific fact or
inBrgy.Capuserandidnotprecludethepossibilitythathe the video or CCTV recording is not limited solely to the
circumstance,otherthanthevictimisawoman,showing
was at thesceneofthecrimewhentheshootingincident person who made the recording but also by another
insult or disregard of sex in order that it may be
happened. competent witness who can testify to its accuracy. Here,
considered as aggravating circumstance.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page37of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t o the aggressor's and purposely selected or taken s trength. Conspiracy among the accused-appellants was
People v. Manansala2020 advantage of to facilitate the commission of the crime.” likewise alleged to have attended in the manner of the
killing of the victim.
vident premeditationwasnotsatisfactorilyestablished.
E
econductoftheaccused-appellantsbefore,duringand
Th
Here, the only basis in finding evident premeditation as People v. Pagapulaan2019 after the commission of the crime, together with that of
attendanttothecrimewastheconfrontationbetweenthe
o take advantage of superior strength means to
T Antonio's, showed conspiracyontheirpart,andthatthey
victim and Manansala one day before the killing.
purposely use excessive force out of proportion to the all had an equal hand in the killing of Rhandy.
Nighttime or nocturnidad means of defense available to the person attacked. a. A
ccused-appellants, Antonio and the victim,
a) p articularly sought or darkness is taken nlike in treachery, where the victim was not given the
U without any animosity, all left together from the
advantage to commit the offense, or opportunity to defend himself or repel the aggression, inuman;
takingadvantageofsuperiorstrengthdoesnotmeanthat b. All boarded Antonio's tricycle;
b) facilitated the commission of the crime.
the victim was completely defenseless.
ighttime cannot be considered if it is shownthatthe
N c. N
o one protested when they were traversing the
place wasadequately lighted. routegoingtoBagulininsteadofheadinghometo
Mamat-ing Norte;
People v. Enojo2019
Abuse of superior strength
d. All were in the crime scene;
I t has been consistently held that an attack made by a
People v. Maron2019 man with a deadly weapon upon an unarmed and e. A
ll got involved in a fight with the victim with
defenselesswomanconstitutesthecircumstanceofabuse Danilo boxing the victim, and Antonio stabbing
mployment of means to weaken the defense is, at the
E
of that superiority which his sexandtheweaponusedin the deceased, and Orlando remaining on standby;
very least, subsumed under the qualifying circumstance
of abuse of superior strength. the act afforded him, and from which the woman was f. A
ntonio admitted to having participated with
unable to defend herself. Orlando in disposing the body of the victim into
I n determining whether the qualifying circumstance of
the ravine;
employing means to weaken the defense is present, the
Court shall be guided by the same standard in g. A
ccused-appellants and Antonio all left together
People v. Padilla 2022
determining the presence of abuse of superior strength, boarding Antonio's tricycle when the killing was
i.e., "n
otorious inequality of forces between the victim and ere, the qualifying circumstance alleged to have
H finished with nobody protesting or reporting the
theaggressor/sthatisplainlyandobviouslyadvantageous attended the killing of the victim was abuse of superior incident to the authorities; and
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page38of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
h. t he findings of the medico-legal indicate that the ground. ere, the followingcircumstancesindicatedthepresence
H
injuries sustained by the victim were done by epito was unarmed and looking out the window to
P ofevident premeditation:
several persons. ascertain the noiseoutsidewhenEdimarshothimonhis a. t he meeting of all the accusedat3PMtoplanthe
head which consequently knocked him on the floor.
e determination of whether or not the aggravating
Th killing of Pepito;
circumstanceofabuseofsuperiorstrengthwasattendant Appellantsconsciouslyanddeliberatelyadoptedthemode
of attack. They lurked outside Pepito's residence and b. t heactofbuyinganddrinkingalcoholandarming
requires the arduous review of the actsoftheaccusedin themselves with four homemade guns known as
contrastwiththediminishedstrengthofthevictim.There waited for him to appear.
paleontods, an improvised pistol and bolos; and
must be a showing of gross disproportionality between e attack was done suddenly and unexpectedly, leaving
Th
each of them. Mere numerical superiority on the part of Pepito without any means of defense. The subsequent c. a sufficient lapse of time, that is, six hours from
the accused does not automatically equate to superior hacking of Pepito when he lay lifeless on the floor the time of their meeting until thetimeofkilling
strength.Thedeterminationmusttakeintoaccountallthe indicated treachery since he was already wounded and of Pepito at 9 PM.
tools,skillsandcapabilitiesavailabletotheaccusedandto unable to put up a defense. eanwhile, the generic aggravating circumstances of
M
the victim to justify a finding of disproportionality. cruelty, dwelling and intoxication cannot be considered
incetreacheryqualifiedthecrimetomurder,thegeneric
S
ere, the victim was unarmed when he was attacked by
H aggravatingcircumstancesofabuseofsuperiorstrength, in this case. People v. Legaspi heldthatforbothqualifying
accused-appellants, who were not only superior in in aid of armed men and nighttimeareabsorbedbyand and aggravating circumstances to be considered in the
number but had access to, and in factused,aweaponin necessarily included in the former. case, they must be specificallyallegedintheInformation
form of a knife. It was also established that when the orComplaint,asprovidedintheamendedSections8and
owever, evident premeditation as a qualifying
H 9,Rule110.Otherwise,theywillnotbeappreciatedevenif
victim was already defenseless and weak from the stab
circumstancecannotbeappreciatedinthiscaseforfailure
wound and the mauling, he was unnecessarily hitwitha duly proved during the trial.
oftheprosecutiontospecificallyallegeintheInformation
big stone that ensured his death. the acts constituting it. Section 9, Rule 110 requires that ince evident premeditation can be considered as an
S
the acts or omissions complained of as constituting the ordinary aggravating circumstance, treachery, by itself,
offense must be stated in ordinary and conciselanguage being sufficient to qualify the killing, the proper
People v. Natindim2020 without repetition, not necessarily in the terms of the imposable penalty - the higher sanction - is death.
statute defining the offense. Nevertheless, it can still be However,inviewofRA9346prohibitingtheimpositionof
ontrary to appellants' contention, the Information
C
considered agenericaggravatingcircumstance,asinthis the death penalty, the penalty for the killing of Pepito is
alleged thatwithtreachery,theappellantsshotPepitoon
case. reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole.
the head with the use of afirearmandthereafterhacked
him even though he was dying and helpless on the
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page39of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
eople v. Arizobal
P eople v. Nasayao
P
re Dwelling, Treachery, Band, Nighttime re Treachery
People v. Matibag2015
e trial court is correct in appreciating dwelling as an
Th e victim, while squatting on top ofabenchandeating
Th
his meal with a plate in one hand, was certainly in no The special aggravating circumstance of use of
aggravating circumstance. Generally, dwelling is
considered inherent in the crimes which can only be position to defend himself or to retaliate. Accused may unlicensed firearm, which was duly alleged in the
committed intheabodeofthevictim,suchastrespassto have forewarned Joves about what he was abouttodoby I nformation, should be appreciated in the imposition of
dwelling and robbery in an inhabited place. However, in telling him to finish his meal. Nevertheless, accused did penalty.WhenMatibagkilledDuhanwithhisfirearm,the
robbery with homicide the authors thereof can commit not wait for Joves to finish. He did not give Joves the use thereof was unauthorized under the purview of RA
the heinous crime without transgressing the sanctity of opportunity to stand up. Joves not only failed to reply to 8294 and is equally appreciated as a special aggravating
the victim's domicile. accused’s order for him tofinishhismeal,butalsofailed circumstance.Asaresult,theimpositionofthemaximum
to make any instinctive reaction to the perceived threat penalty of death, which is reduced to reclusion perpetua
ut treachery was incorrectly considered by the trial
B inlightofRA9346,standsproper.Tothis,theCourtadds
posed by the accused who was holding twoknives.From
court. The accused stand charged with, tried and that Matibag isnot eligible for parole.
all indications, the attack on Joves was sudden and
convicted of robbery with homicide which is primarily
unexpected.
classified as a crime against property. As such,treachery
cannot be validly appreciated as an aggravating circumstance. eople v. Perreras
P
hileitappearsthatatleastfive(5)malefactorstookpart
W re Dwelling
eople v. de la Torre
P
in the commission of the crime, the evidence on record re Dwelling Dwelling aggravates a felony where the crime was
does not disclose that "more than three" persons were c ommitted in the dwelling of the offended party if the
I n Peoplev.Parazo,the“dwelling”contemplatedinArticle
a rmed, and robbery in "b
and" means "more than three 14(3) of the RPC does not necessarily mean that the victim latterhasnotgivenprovocationorifthevictimwaskilled
armed malefactorsunited in the commission of robbery." owns the place where he lives or dwells. Be he a lessee, a inside his house. Although accused was outside of the
Nighttime did not attend the commission of the crime. boarder, or a bedspacer, the place is his home, the housewhenhefired,thevictimwasinsidehishouse.For
e fact that the offense was committed at 9:30 in the
Th sanctity of which the law seeks to protect. The fact the circumstance of dwelling to be considered, it is not
eveningdoesnotsufficetosustainnocturnidad.Itmustbe t hat the crime was consummated in the nearby house is necessary that the accused should have actually entered
shownthatnocturnidadwasdeliberatelyandintentionally also immaterial. Marita was forcibly taken by appellant the dwelling of the victim to commit the offense; it is
sought. from her dwelling house (kitchen) and then raped her. enough that the victim was attacked inside his own
Dwelling is aggravating ifthevictimwastakenfromhis house.
house although the offense was not completed therein.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page40of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
have previously been convicted of robbery in band. Requisites Notes
People v. Taño Welikewiseupholdthetrialcourt'sfindingthatthecrime 3 ; Crimes by public
as aggravated because it was committed bya band.All
w officers (204-245)
eCourtfindsthatdwellingcannotbeappreciatedasan
Th
aggravating circumstance. The building where the two the six appellants were armed when they boarded the
Contempt or insult to the public authorities
offenses were committed was not entirely for dwelling vessel and perpetrated their dastardly acts. There is also
purposes. The evidence shows that it consisted of two abuse of superior strength, since most of the victims a) p
ublic authority is engaged in
floors: the ground floor, which was being operated as a were women and children ranging from 2 to 9 years old. the exercise of his functions;
videorentalshop,andtheupperfloor,whichwasusedas However, the aggravating circumstances of nocturnity b) a uthority is not the person
aresidence.Itwasinthevideorentalshopwheretherape a nd craft should not have been considered by the lower against whom the crime is ecomesDirect
B
was committed. True, the victim was dragged to the court.Therewasnoshowingthattheappellantspurposely
committed; Assaultif done
kitchenandtoiletbutthesetwosectionswereadjacentto soughtthecoverofnightwhentheycommittedthespecial c) o ffender knows him to be a against authority
and formed parts of the store. Being a commercialshop complex crimeofrobberywithhomicide.Neitherdidthe public authority;
that caterstothepublic,thevideorentaloutletwasopen
appellants employ craft, since they had already boarded
to the public. As such, it is notattributedthesanctityof d) p
resence has not prevented the
the vessel when they pretended to buy Tanduay Rum in
privacythat jurisprudence accords to residentialabodes. commission of the crime.
exchange for the dried fish and chicken they were
carrying. Even without such pretense, they could Insult or disregard of offended party
nonetheless have carried out their unlawful scheme.
People v. Aspili a) D
eliberate intent to offend or
Review of Aggravating Circumstances insult (sine qua non)
We find no merit in the appellants' contention that the
l ower court erred in considering recidivism as an Requisites Notes ank: there should be a difference D
R isregard of sex
aggravating circumstance. All the appellants are in the social condition of the absorbedin
Abuse of public position offender and offended;
recidivists.Theywereservingsentencebyvirtueofafinal treachery;
judgment of conviction when they committed the I nherentin Age: there is a considerable gap;
offenses. Aspili, Magbanua, Mendoza and Rebutido have a) Done by a public officer; Malversation (217);
Sex: Female.
previously been convicted of the crimes of frustrated Falsification of
b) Took advantage of position document by public Dwelling
homicide,seriousphysicalinjuries,theft,andmurderand
trespass to dwelling, respectively.BothSalesandAguirre officers(171); Art 19 par
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page41of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Requisites Notes Requisites Notes Requisites Notes
i t is enough that the duties; inducement.
a) o ffended party must not give c) a ll shall have acted together,
victim was attacked takingdirectpart in the
provocation (sine qua non) Nocturnidad orNighttime
inside his own house
execution of the act;
wo alternative tests
T
Abuse of confidence a) c rime occurred in that period
for nocturnity: COMMON ELEMENTS FOR PAR 6
of darkness beginning at end
➔ B etrayal of a) O
bjective:
of dusk and ending at dawn; a) facilitated the commission of the crime; OR
confidence NOT facilitates
a) offended party had trusted the b) place must not be illuminated; b) e specially sought by the offender to insure the
aggravating crime;
offender; commission of the crime or for the purpose of
➔ Confidence must c) c rime must begin and be
) offender abused such trust by
b b) S
ubjective: impunity; OR
be immediate and accomplished in the
committing a crime against purposely
personal nighttime; c) o ffender took advantage for the purpose of
the offended party; sought
impunity;
➔ Stealing the
c) abuse of confidence facilitated In an uninhabited place
property of host is
the commission of the crime Calamity or misfortune
with abuse of a) Th
e place provides no
confidence reasonable possibility of the " For the purpose of
impunity" means to alamityincludes
C
victim receiving some help; a) Offender must take advantage conflagration,
Obvious ungratefulness prevent offender's
) accused sought the solitude for recognition, or secure
b of calamity; shipwreck,
an easy and uninterrupted himself from earthquake, epidemic
ungratefulness must be obvious, i.e. manifest and clear.
accomplishment of the crime, detection and
Aid of armed men
and to insure concealment of punishment.
Palace of the Chief Executive
offense; a) a rmed persons took part in the N ot considered when
a) P
ublic authority must be in hief Executive: Need
C
By a band commission of the crime both parties are
their office while performing not be in the palace;
either directly or indirectly; EQUALLY armed;
his duty; His mere presence a) at leastfour; ne of the four should
O
aggravates; He need b) a ccused availed himself of ot considered if
N
b) He may be the offended party b) all four arearmed; not be a principal by
not perform his their aid, or relied upon them conspiracy is present
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page42of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Requisites Notes Requisites Notes Requisites Notes
uring the commission of the
d offense; Evident Premeditation
➔ R
eiteracion NOT
crime c) b
e convicted of the new ALWAYS a) t ime when offender
Recidivist offense. aggravating determined to commit crime;
a) Offender is on trial for an offense; Considerationof price, reward or promise b) a ct indicating culprit clung to
fter offender had
A
this determination;
b) p
reviously convicted by final judgment of another a) t here must be at least two (2) I f not alleged to determined to
crime; principals, one by inducement qualify the crime to c) s ufficient lapse of time commit the crime,
and the other/s by direct murder,GENERIC between determination and 2nd req. exists.
c) both offenses embraced in same title of Code;
participation; only execution, allowing
d) offender be convicted of new offense REFLECTION and COOL
Great waste and ruin THOUGHT
➔ A
lso applies if both offenses violate the same
Ordinance/SPL hen the crime committed is
W Craft
➔ C
ontrolling is time of TRIAL, not the commission parricide, there is only GENERIC
aggravating Act done in order not
of crime; i nvolves intellectual trickery and
t o arouse suspicion of
➔ Th
e commission of crime and rendering of Explosion cunning
the victim;
judgment must be successive: e.g.
I f there is intent to kill, using Fraud
Crime 1→Judgment 1→Crime 2→Judgment 2 explosion, crime is MURDER eans are purposely
M
used to accomplish a i nvolves insidious words or
Reiteracion orhabituality Derailment of Locomotive iffers from Craft in
D
criminal purpose. machinations used to induce the
that Fraud involves
a) Accused on trial for an offense; ➔ I f offender has not I f person dies as a result without victim in a manner which would
direct inducement by
enable the offender to carry out
b) previouslyserved sentencefor been previously intent, COMPLEX CRIME of insidious words
punished or damage to means of his criminal design.
another offense of an equal or
greater penalty, or for two or served sentence, communication with homicide Disguise
more crimes of a lighter reiteracionis NOT (Arts330and249inreltoArt4and
attendant; 48); involves resorting to any device to conceal identity
penalty than that for the new
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page43of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Requisites Notes Requisites Notes a ccording to the nature andeffectsofthecrimeand
the other conditionsattendingitscommission.They
Abuse of superior strength ere is an unlawful entry when
Th
are the relationship, intoxication and the degree of
an entrance is effected by a way NOT for escape
a) Th ere should be notorious instruction and education of the offender.
not intended for the purpose.
inequality of forces between I ncompatible with ealternativecircumstanceofrelationshipshallbe
Th
the two parties; Passion or Breakingwall, roof, floor, door, or window taken into consideration when the offendedpartyis
b) Offender takes advantage of obfuscation ffender need not enter the building for FORCIBLE
O the spouse, ascendant, descendant, legitimate,
this inequality. ENTRY to be aggravating. natural, or adopted brother or sister, or relative by
affinity in the same degrees of the offender.
Alevosia orTreachery Aid of person under 15andMeans of motor vehicle
e intoxication of the offender shallbetakeninto
Th
a) A t the time of the attack, 1. T
wo different aggravating: aid of minors under 15, consideration as a mitigating circumstances when
victim was not in a position to a ) pplies to crimes
A means of motor vehicle; the offender has committed a felony in a state of
defend himself or retaliate; against persons; intoxication, if the same is not habitual or
2. Estafa cannot be committed by means of motor vehicle
AND b) ode of attack
m subsequent to the plan to commit said felony but
b) offender consciously adopted consciously Cruelty when the intoxication is habitual or intentional, it
the particular means, adopted. shall be considered as anaggravatingcircumstance.
a) I njury caused bedeliberately
methods, or forms.
increasedby causingother e culprit enjoys and
Th eople v. Orilla
P
Ignominy wrong; delights in making his re relationship
) Other wrong isunnecessaryin victim suffer.
b eAmendedInformationdidnotallegeRemilyn’sminor
Th
circumstance
A
accomplishing the crime; age. The prosecution’s failure to allege specifically
pertaining to the
must tend to make the effects of moral order, which Remilyn’s minor age prevents the transformationofthe
the crime more humiliating, adds disgrace and crime to its qualified form.
Alternative Circumstances
putting the victim to shame; obloquy to the 5 asedonastrictinterpretation,alternativecircumstances
B
Revised Penal Code, Art. 15
material injury caused are thus not aggravating circumstances per se.
by the crime. Alternative circumstances are those which must be Jurisprudence considers relationship as an aggravating
takenintoconsiderationasaggravatingormitigating circumstanceincrimesagainstchastity.However,rapeis
Unlawful Entry
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page44of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
o longer a crimeagainstchastityforitisnowclassified
n erebeingnoindicationthattheaccusedwasahabitual
Th 5) P
ersonsnotcriminallyliablefortheft,estafaor
as acrime against persons. drunkard or that his alcoholic intake was intended to maliciousmischiefbyreasonofrelationshipto
fortify his resolve to committhecrime,thecircumstance the offended party. (Art. 332)
of intoxication should be credited in his favor.
People v. Bondoc Entrapment Instigation
l ack of instruction generally mitigating except in
Crimes against property and chastity l aw officers employ ruses
6 Absolutory causes
and schemes to ensure the
Acloseexaminationoftherecordisindicativeofthelack t he accused is induced to
Are those where the act committed is a crime but for apprehension of the
of instruction of the offender. There is more than commit the crime.
reasons of public policy and sentiment, there is no criminal while in the actual
s ufficient justification for the finding of the mitigating commission of the crime.
penalty imposed.
circumstanceoftheabovecharacterthatwouldlessenthe
rigor of the Anti-Subversion law. circumstance which is present prior to or
A t he lawofficerconceivesthe
simultaneously with theoffensebyreasonofwhichthe commission of the crime
themensreaoriginatesfrom
accused who acts with criminal intent, freedom and and suggests totheaccused
the mind of the criminal
eople v. Fontillas2010
P intelligencedoesnotincuracriminalliabilityforanact who adopts the idea and
re intoxication which constitutes a crime. carries it into execution
e Court of A
Th ppeals correctly rejected the 1) S
pontaneous desistance in attempted felonies
oes NOT exemptthe
d c onsidered anabsolutory
accused-appellant's a ssertion that h is extreme (Art. 6);
criminal from liability. cause.
intoxication fromalcoholonthenightoftherapeshould 2) Accessories in light felonies (Art. 16);
eappreciatedasamitigatingcircumstance.Accuseddid
b
3) A
ccessories exempt from criminal liability by
not present any evidence that his intoxication was not People v. Casio 2014
reason of relationship (Art. 20);
habitual or subsequent to the plan to commit the rape.
4) A
legal spouse or parent who inflicts slight or ccused was predisposed to commit the offense because
A
less serious physical injuriesunderexceptional she initiated the transaction. As testified by PO1 Veloso
circumstances; (Art. 247. If death or serious and PO1 Luardo, accused called out their attention by
People v. Dawaton
injuries result, there is mitigated liability, as saying “Chicks mo dong?”
The trial court erred in not appreciating the alternative
“e xtenuating circumstance”) With regard to the lack of prior surveillance, prior
circumstance of intoxication in favor of the accused.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page45of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
s urveillance is not a condition for an entrapment “ psychological paralysis” she suffered diminished her will Liability for Multiple Commission of Crimes
operation’s validity. As held in People v. Padua, a prior power,therebyentitlinghertothemitigatingfactorunder
s urveillance is not a prerequisite for the validity of an paragraphs 9 and 10 of Article 13. In addition, appellant rincipals, Accomplices, and
P
entrapment or buy-bust operation, theconductofwhich shouldalsobecreditedwiththeextenuatingcircumstance 1 Accessories
has no rigid or textbook method. of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as to have Revised Penal Code, Arts. 16- 20
naturally producedpassion and obfuscation.
Principals
I n order to beclassifiedasabatteredwoman,thecouple
People v. Doria By direct participation
must go throughthebatteringcycleatleastTWICE.The
battered woman syndrome is characterized by the a) Participated in the criminalresolution; and
ntrapment in the Philippines is not a defenseavailable
E
to the accused. It is instigation that is a defense and is so-called “cycle of violence,” which has three phases: b) C
arried out their plan and personallytookpartin
considered anabsolutorycause. 1) the tension-building phase; itsexecutionbyactswhichdirectlytendedtothe
same end.
I n the case at bar, the evidence shows that it was the 2) the acute battering incident; and
confidential informant who initially contacted Doria. At EXC w
here there was conspiracy to kidnap and
3) the tranquil, loving (or, at least, nonviolent) phase. kill and only one of the conspirators
the pre-arranged meeting, the informant was
accompaniedbyPO3Manlangitwhoposedasthebuyerof e Court failed to find ample evidence that would
Th kidnapped the victim.
marijuana. PO3 Manlangit handed the marked moneyto confirm the presence of the essential characteristics of
1) I f the 2nd requisite is absent, there is only
Doria as advance payment for one (1) kilo of marijuana. BWS. The defense fellshortofprovingallthreephasesof conspiracy, which may not be punishable in and of
Doria was apprehended when he later returned and the “cycle of violence” supposedly characterizing the
itself.
handed the brick of marijuana to PO3 Manlangit. relationship of Ben and Marivic Genosa.
By induction
Battered Woman Syndrome 2) T
wo ways of becoming principal by induction, by
ersons Criminally Liable and
P directly
eople v. Genosa
P C
Degree of Participation a. Forcing
in rel. to Sec. 26, RA 9262
i. By usingirresistible force;
e severe beatings repeatedly inflicted on appellant
Th Principals, Accomplices, and Accessories
constituted a form of cumulative provocation that broke ii. By causinguncontrollable fear;OR
Conspiracy and Proposal
down her psychological resistance and self-control. This b. Inducing
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page46of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
i. By giving price, or offeringrewardorpromise; d. Th
e words must be uttered prior to the Collective Criminal Responsibility (CCR)
ii. By usingwords of command. commission of the crime; and 10) Whentheoffendersarecriminallyliableinthesame
e. Th
e material executor of the crime has no manner and to the same extent. The penalty to be
another to commit a crime.
personal reasonto commit the crime. imposed must be the same for all.
3) B ecomes liable only when the principal by direct
7) O
ne cannot be held guilty of having instigated the 11) P
rincipals by direct participation have CCR;
participation committed the act.
commission of a crime without first being shown Principal by induction, except that who directly
4) Theinducement that the crime has been actually committed by forced another to commitacrime,andprincipalby
a. m ust be made directly with the intention of another. direct participation have CCR; Principal by
procuring the commission of the crime; and indispensable cooperation has CCR with the
8) B
ut if the one charged as principal by direct
principal by direct participation.
b. t hat such must be the determining cause of the participation is acquitted because heactedwithout
crime. criminal intent, his acquittal is NOT a ground for the Accomplices
acquittal of the principal by inducement. ccomplices are persons who, not being included in
A
5) Th
e inducement must precede the act induced and
mustbesoinfluentialinproducingthecriminalact By indispensable cooperation Article 17 of the RPC, cooperate intheexecutionofthe
that without it, the act would not have been a) Th
ere is either anterior conspiracy or unity of offense by previous or simultaneous acts.
performed. criminal purpose and intention immediately e following requisitesmustbeprovedinorderthata
Th
6) R equisites for a person using wordsofcommand before the commission of the crime charged; and person can be considered an accomplice:
to be liable as principalby induction: b) C
ooperationinthecommissionoftheoffenseby a) c ommunity of design, i.e., knowing that
a. Th
eonecommandingmusthavetheintentionof performing another act, without which it would criminal design of the principal by direct
procuring the commission of the crime; not have been accomplished. participation, he concurs with the latter in his
9) O
ne who, by acts of negligence, cooperates in the purpose;
b. H e must have anascendancyorinfluenceoverthe
person who acted; commission of the crime may be liable as b) h
ecooperatesintheexecutionoftheoffenseby
co-principal.Butheisheldguiltyofthesamecrime previousorsimultaneousacts; and,
c. Th
e words used must be so direct, efficacious, through reckless imprudence.
powerful as to amount to physical or moral c) t here must be a relation betweentheactsdone
coercion; by the principal and those attributed to the
person charged as accomplice.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page47of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
articipated therein, either as principals or
p
Gurro v. People2019 14) Anaccomplicedoesnothavepreviousagreementor
accomplices,takepartsubsequenttoitscommissionin
understanding or is not in conspiracy with the
eprosecutionfailedtoprove,muchlessallege,anyovert
Th any of the following manners:
principal by direct participation.
act on Excel'spartshowinghisdirectparticipationinthe
15) What differentiates an accomplice from a y profiting themselves or assisting the
a) B
kidnapping itself. It mustberememberedthatforoneto
conspirator is that the former only concurs with the offender to profit by the effects of the crime.
be regarded as an accomplice, it must be shown that
criminal design, and notthecriminalintention.The y concealing or destroying the body of the
b) B
1. h e knew the criminal design of the principal by
conspiratorshavealreadydecideduponsuchcourse crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in
direct participation,andconcurredwiththelatter
of action. Accomplices come to know aboutitafter order to prevent its discovery.
in his purpose;
the principals have reached the decision.
2. h e cooperated in the execution by previous or y harboring, concealing,orassisting inthe
c) B
16) In other words escape of the principals of the crime, provided
simultaneousacts,withtheintentionofsupplying
materialormoralaidintheexecutionofthecrime a. Conspiratorsare theAUTHORSof a crime; the accessory acts with abuse of his public
in an efficacious way; and functionsorwhenevertheauthorofthecrimeis
b. A
ccomplices are mere INSTRUMENTS who
guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or an
3. h isactsboreadirectrelationwiththeactsdoneby performactsnotessentialtotheperpetrationof
attempttotakethelifeoftheChiefExecutive,or
the principal. the offense.
is known to be habitually guilty of some other
tbest,Excel'sparticipationintheincidentwaslimitedto
A 17) The acts of the accomplice are necessary, but not crime.
acts committed after the abduction was already indispensable to the commission of the crime. He
20)The liability of an accessory is subordinate and
consummated. Particularly, Excel retrieved the ransom merely suppliestheprincipalwithmaterialormoral
subsequent to that of the principal.
money from Metrobank. aidwithout conspiracy with the latter.
21) Thus, when the principal is acquitted, no legal
18) The moral aid may be through advice,
12) Where there is doubt whether accused acted as groundsexistforconvictingaccusedasanaccessory.
encouragement or agreement.
principal or accomplice, he should be liable onlyas Exception to this rule is when the principal is
an accomplice. 19) An accomplice may be liable for a crime different acquitted due to an exempting circumstance such
from that which the principal committed. as minority or insanity.
13) When the participation of an accused is not
disclosed, only an accomplice. Accessories 22)Apprehension and convictionoftheprincipalisnot
ccessories are those who, having knowledge of the
A necessary for the accessory to be held criminally
commission of the crime, and without having liable.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page48of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Exempted accessories er words, "Kill him and we will bury him" amount to
H re at the victims to make Annie a principal by
fi
GR: When the principal is his imprudent utterances,andnot,rather,inthenatureofa inducement. There is no proof thatthoseincitingwords
command that had to be obeyed. hadgreatdominanceandinfluenceoverMadali.Thefact
1. Spouse,
that Annie dealt a blow on Agustin while he was being
nly Romeo, Delfin, and Fortunato should be held as
O
2. Ascendant, dragged by Madali to their yard does not make her a
principals in the crime ofmurder.Romeoisguilty,ashe
3. Descendant, or admitted in open court, by direct participation, while principal by direct participation. Annie's act, being
Delfin and Fortunato are liable as principals by previous toMadali'sactofshootingAgustin,wasactually
4. L egitimate,naturaloradoptedbrother,sisteror
cooperation. In holding the victim by his arms, both not indispensable to the crime committed against
relative by affinity within the same degree.
allowed Romeo to inflict upon him a stab wound. Agustin.
EXC if such accessory
lex,Dante,andCirilo,ontheotherhand,shouldbeheld
A
1. Profitedby the effects of the crime, or
as simple accomplices for theiractsofpeltingthevictim People v. Balderama
2. A ssisted the offender to profit by the effects of with rocks. Sincethedeceasedhadalreadysustainedtwo
the crime. stab wounds, the act of hurling rocks at him was not alderrama had great moral ascendancy and influence
B
indispensable to justify holding them legally liable as overtheaccusedOscar.WeareconvincedthatOscar,who
Time of Participation
principals. was not shown to have any rancor against Nestor,would
nothavegiventhefatalthrusthaditnotbeenforErnesto's
Previous Simultaneous After
shout of "Birahin mo na" or "birahin mo."
Principal ✔ ✔ ✔ People v. Madali
nnie's participation in the shooting of the victims
A
Accomplice ✔ ✔ People v. Tampus and Montesclaros
consisted of beaming her flashlightatthemandwarning
her husband of the presence of other persons in the efindingofguiltofIdaasanaccompliceintherapeof
Th
Accessory ✔
vicinity. However, such assistance merely facilitated the ABC is dependent on proving the guilt of the principal
commission of the felonious acts of shooting. Ricarte accused. All the requisites concur in order to find Ida
Madalicouldhaveneverthelessaccomplishedhiscriminalacts guilty as an accomplice to Tampus in the rape of ABC.
People v. Agapinay
without Annie's cooperation and assistance. TherewascommunityofdesignbetweenIdaandTampus
sregardsJuliaRapada,itistheopinionofthisCourtthat
A to commit the rape of ABC. Ida had knowledge of and
shecannotbeheldliable(asaprincipalbyinducement). either may Annie's shouts of "here comes, here comes
N
assented to Tampus' intention to havesexualintercourse
another,shoot''beconsideredashavingincitedRicarteto
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page49of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
ith her daughter. She forced ABC to drink beer, and
w t ransform to a conspiracy becausetherewouldthenbe
ereis proposal whenthepersonwhohasdecided
Th
when ABC was already drunk, she left ABC alone with an agreement and a decision to commit a felony.
to commit a felony proposes its execution to some
Tampus, with the knowledge and even with her express other person or persons. onspiracy as a crime and as a mode of
C
consent to Tampus' plan to have sexual intercourse with incurring criminal liability
her daughter. GR onspiracyandproposaltocommitafelonyare
C
NOT punishable. 1. C
onspiracy exists when two ormorepersonscome
I t is settled jurisprudence that the previous acts of to an agreement concerning the commission of a
cooperation by the accomplice should not be EXC W
hen the law specially provides a penalty
crime anddecidetocommitit.Conspiracy,likethe
indispensable tothecommissionofthecrime;otherwise, therefor.
crime itself, must be proven beyond reasonable
she would be liable as a principal by indispensable a. Conspiracy to commit treason (115); doubt.
cooperation. The evidence shows that the acts of
b. C
onspiracy to commit coup d’etat, rebellion or 2. M
ere presence, knowledge, acquiescence to or
cooperation by Ida are not indispensable to the
insurrection (136); agreementtocooperate,isnotenoughtoconstitute
commissionofrapebyTampus.First,becauseitwasboth
c. Conspiracy to commit sedition (141). one as a party to a conspiracy, absent any active
IdaandTampuswhoforcedABCtodrinkbeer,andsecond
participation in the commission of the crime, with a
because Tampus already had theintentiontohavesexual
Requisites of proposal view to the furtheranceofthecommondesignand
intercoursewithABCandhecouldhaveconsummatedthe
1. A personhas decided to commit a felony; and purpose.
act even without Ida's consent.
2. Th
atheproposesitsexecutiontosomeotherpersonor 3. W
hen conspiracy relates to a crime actually
persons. committed, it is not a felony but only a manner of
Conspiracy and Proposal incurring criminal liability. Thus, an act of one is
2 There is no criminal proposal when —
Revised Penal Code, Art. 8 theactofall.Itisthennotpunishableasaseparate
a. Th
e person who proposes is not determined to offense.
RT 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. —
A commit the felony.
4. I n a conspiracy, it is not necessary to show thatall
Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony are b. Th
ere is no decided, concrete and formal the conspirators actually hit and killed the victim.
punishable only in the cases in which the law proposal. What is important is that all participants
specially provides a penalty therefor.
c. I t is not the execution of the felony that is performed specific acts with such closeness and
conspiracy existswhentwoormorepersonscome
A proposed. c oordinationastounmistakablyindicateacommon
to an agreement concerning the commission of a purpose or design to bring about the death of the
eproposalneednotbeaccepted fortheproponenttobe
Th
felony and decide to commit it. victim.
criminally liable. If the proposal is accepted, it may
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page50of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Requisites of conspiracy Extent of liability of conspirators Liability for prior acts
1. Th
at two or more persons came to an 1. A
ll are liable for the felony agreed upon under the e liability of a conspirator for acts performed by his
Th
agreement; conspiracy theory. co-conspiratorsbeforehejoinedtheconspiracydepends
on the nature of those acts:
2. Th
e agreement concerned the commission of a 2. L
iable only for such other crimes which could be
felony; and foreseen and which are the natural and logical a. I f the prior acts were the beginning of a felony
consequences of the conspiracy, or foreseeable which was consummated after he joined, he is
3. That the execution of the felony bedecidedupon.
offenses. liablefor prior acts;
inds of conspiracy, their differences and
K us, when the agreement was to commitrobbery,
Th b. I ftheywereseparatefeloniesunrelatedtothose
similarities committed after he joined,NOT liable.
homicide is foreseeable, whereas rape is NOT.
I n Fernan, Jr v. People, a prosecution of 36 accused for
3. A
memberofabandinarobberyencuadrillaisliable eople v. Bangcado
P
estafa on 119 counts through falsification of public
for all assaults, inclusive of homicide and rape, re Doctrine of Limited Liability
documents in order to commit a series of highway
wherehewaspresentwhentheseothercrimeswere
scams through multipleconspiraciesamongthem,the I n the absence of any previous plan or agreement to
being committed but hedidnotattempttoprevent
SC categorized the structure of such multiple commitacrime,thecriminalresponsibilityarisingfrom
thesame(Art296par2),regardlessifsuchadditional
conspiracies thereof as a guide for prosecution. differentactsdirectedagainstoneandthesamepersonis
offenses were foreseeable or not.
I t adverted to Estrada v. Sandiganbayan wherein such individual and not collective, and that each of the
4. If both conspiracy to rob andcuadrillaare present: participantsisliableonlyforhisownacts.Consequently,
structures were named as:
a. I fahomicideiscommitted,thelookoutisliable Banisa must be absolved from criminalresponsibilityfor
a) W heel or circle conspiracy, in which there is a
under theconspiracy theory; the assault on the victims. It is clear that neither the
single person, or hub, dealingindividuallywith
victims nor Banisa couldhaveanticipatedBangcado'sact
2 or more persons or groups, thespokes; and b. I f a rape was committed inhispresenceandhe
of shooting the victims since the attack was sudden and
did not attempt to prevent, he will be liable
b) C hain conspiracy, usually involving the without anyreasonorpurpose.Thus,thecriminaldesign
under thecuadrillarule;
distribution of narcotics and contraband, in of Bangcado had not yet been revealed prior to the
which there is successive communication and c. I f the lookout was not present when homicide killings.
cooperation. and rape were committed, he willonlybeliable
for thehomicide under the conspiracy theory.
People v. Bagano
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page51of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
or conspiracy to exist, it issufficientthatatthetimeof
F t he commission of the crime of robbery, they would be
either is the fact that the two others allegedly in
N
the commission of the offense the accused hadthesame both equally culpable for the rape committed by one of conspiracy with the petitioner were not named with
purpose and were united in its execution. Proof of an them on the occasion of the robbery, unless any of them particularity,nortriedandconvicted,ofanymoment.An
actual planning of the perpetuation ofthecrimeisnota proves that he endeavored to prevent the other from information alleging conspiracy can stand even if only
condition precedent. committing the rape. one person is charged except that the court cannot pass
rom the mode and manner in which the offense was
F verdict on the co-conspirators who were not charged in
perpetrated, and as can be inferred from their acts, it is the information.
evident that Bagano and Cañete were one in their People v. Compo
owever, the mere fact that the petitioner had prior
H
intention to kill Montecino. The fact that it was Bagano e mere presence of Lemuel, who was not shown to be
Th knowledge of the criminal design of the principal
who delivered the fatal blow on Montecino and Cañete's armed, at the scene of the crime does not connote perpetrator and aided the latter in consummating the
participation was limited to a mere embrace is conspiracy. Singularity of purpose and unity in the crime does notautomaticallymakehimaco-conspirator.
immaterial.Conspiracybestowsuponthemequalliability; execution of the unlawful objective are essential to Both knowledge of and participation in the criminal act
hence, they shall suffer the same fate for their acts. establish conspiracy. are also inherent elements of an accomplice. In cases of
ere knowledge, acquiescence, or agreement to cooperate, is
M doubt as to whether persons acted as principals or
notenoughtoconstituteoneasapartytoaconspiracy,absent accomplices, the doubt must be resolved in their favor
People v. Verceles and they should be held guilty asaccomplices.
anyactiveparticipationinthecommissionofthecrime,witha
onspiracy has been sufficiently proved by the
C view to the furtherance of the common design and purpose.
prosecution. Accused-appellants were oneindesignwith Conspiracy transcends companionship. Thepresenceand
accused Mamerto Soriano in taking personal properties companyofLemuelwerenotnecessaryoressentialtothe People v. Canturia
belonging to others without the latter’s consent by perpetration of the murder. nly Canturia should be held responsible for the crime
O
breaking one of the windows to beusedastheiringress. because he alone perpetrated the detestable crime of
In the course of the robbery, one of them, particularly
rape. The others could not be held liable therefor. For
MamertoSoriano,succumbedtolustfuldesiresandraped Garcia v. CA while the evidence does show a conspiracy among the
Maribeth Bolito while accused-appellants just stood accused, it also suggests that the agreement was to
onspiracywasallegedintheinformation.Thus,itisnot
C
outside the door and did nothing to prevent Mamerto
necessarytoallegewithexactitudethespecificactofthe commit robbery only; and there is no evidence that the
Soriano. other members of the band of robbers were aware of
accused,asitisawell-settleddoctrinethatinconspiracy
Once conspiracy is established between two accused in the act of one is the act of all. Canturia'slustfulintentandhisconsummationthereofso
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page52of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
that they could have attempted to prevent the same. People v. Rafael ccused-appellants' collective and individual acts
A
aidothermembersofCanturia'sbandmayandshouldbe
S ppellant's participationinthecommissionofthecrimes
A demonstrating the existence of a common design is
heldguiltyofthecrimeofrobberybyabandunderArticle consisted of his presence at the locus criminis, and his evidentfromtheunrebuttedtestimonyofEugeniothathe
294, No. 5, in relation to Article 296. shouting"P atayin,patayiniranamen!"(Killthemall!)during heardoneoftheaccused-appellantsorderhiscompanions
the later stage of the fatal incident. The prosecution to retreat, which they all did, upon the arrival of police
witnesses did not see him bearing any weapon or using reinforcement.
im v. CA
S one to inflict any injury on the victims. He did not run
re Implied Conspiracy awaywiththetwootheraccusedstillatlarge.Thus,weare
onspiracy is deemed implied when the malefactors
C far from convinced that conspiracy existed between People v. Natindim2020
haveacommonpurposeandwereunitedinitsexecution. appellant and any of his sons. Relationship or nderArticle8oftheRPC,aconspiracyexistswhentwo
U
Spontaneous agreement or active cooperation by all association alone is NOT a badge of conspiracy. or more persons come to an agreement concerning the
perpetrators at the moment of the commission of the is acts, however,demonstratedhisconcurrenceintheir
H commission of a felony and decide to commit it. Here,
crime is sufficient to create joint criminal responsibility. aggressive design and lent support to their nefarious appellantsactedinconcertinkillingPepitoandtakinghis
otwithstandingthefactthatitwasonlyElisonwhodealt
N intent and afforded moral and material support to their properties, with their individual acts manifesting a
with or personally transacted with private complainant attack against the victims. Hence, we are convinced he community of purpose and design to achieve their evil
until the time the sale was consummated, by his own ust be held liable as accomplice in the commissionof
m purpose.
testimony petitioner admitted all the acts by which he the crimes. onspiracy having been established as earlier discussed,
C
actively cooperated and not merely acquiesced in theappellantsareguiltyofRobberyunderArticle294(5)of
perpetrating the fraud upon private complainant. That the RPC.
petitioner is a conspirator having joint criminal design People v. Camarino2020
withElisonisevidentfromthefactthatasbetweenthem,
onspiracy exists when two or more personscometoan
C
both knew that petitioner was the person selling the iability for Multiple Commission of
L
agreement concerning the commission of a felony and 3
vehicle under the false pretense that a certain Henry Crimes
decide to commit it. The agreement to commit a crime
Austria was the registered owner. Petitioner, together
may be deduced from the mode and manner of the
with Elison, clearly deceived private complainant in The four forms of REPETITION
commissionoftheoffenseorinferredfromactsthatpoint
order to defraud him. 1. Recidivism
to a joint purpose and design, concerted action, and
community of intent. 2. Reiteracionor habituality
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page53of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
3. M ulti-recidivism or habitual delinquency Art 62[5] Habitual delinquent Recidivist Quasi Habitual
Recidivism Reiteracion
(Extraordinary aggravating) — ifwithinaperiodof Recidivism Delinquency
fter
A
ten years from the date of his release or last ucceeding
S RPC.
fterconvictionfor
A commissionof
conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious offense
physicalinjuries,robo,hurto,estafaorfalsification,he preceding offense preceding revious
P revious
P revious
P
committed
is found guilty ofanyofsaidcrimesathirdtimeor offense conviction ervice of
S conviction conviction
oftener. I mposition of additional ggravates
A by final sentence is by final by final
Results in judgment is required. judgment is judgment is
4. Q uasi-recidivism Art 160 (Special aggravating) — penalty crime
enough. enough. enough.
commits a felony after having been convicted by
final judgment, before beginning to serve such Within 10
sentence, or while serving the same, shall be uasi
Q abitual
H o period
N o period
N o period
N
Recidivism Reiteracion y ears from
punished by the maximum period of the penalty ecidivism
R Delinquency between between between
release or last
prescribed by law for the new felony. convictions. convictions. convictions.
erving
S conviction
ffense
O sentence for
Habitual delinquent Recidivist eed not be
N eneric
G eneric
G pecial
S xtraordinary
E
which the an offense
embraced Aggravating Aggravating Aggravating Aggravating
onviction a 3rd time or
C accused was punished
Requires 2nd conviction under the
oftener previously under the an be
C an be
C an not be
C an not be
C
same Title obbery,
R
convicted of RPC or SPL, offset offset offset offset
of the RPC; theft,
s erious or less serious and of while the
BOTH serious or
physical injuries, robo, which he is offense that s erves to s erves to s erves to
Crimes Same title offenses less serious
hurto, estafa or convicted he commits increase increase increase dditional
A
however PI, estafa or
falsification anew must while penalty to penalty to penalty to penalty is
must be falsification
be embraced serving maximum maximum maximum imposed.
Within 10 years from his punished
I ntervening under the sentence period. period. period.
l ast release or conviction immaterial under the
period same Title must be
for any of specified crimes RPC. dditional
A
of the RPC. punished lways
A ot always
N lways
A
penalty
under the aggravating aggravating aggravating
always
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page54of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Quasi Habitual Complex Crime Proper Plurality of crimes
Recidivism Reiteracion
Recidivism Delinquency
Special Complex Crime 1. C
onsists in the successive execution by the same
imposed individual of different criminal actsuponanyofwhich
Continuous/Continued Crime no conviction has yet been declared.
Requisites of Habitual Delinquency
Continuing Crime 2. I f therehasbeenaconvictionforoneorsomeofthem,
1. A t least threeofthespecifiedcrimesbepresent,on
the rules on recidivism, quasi-recidivism, reiteracion,
the preceding 2 of which the accused has been 1 Absorption System or habitual delinquencymay instead be applied.
convicted by final judgment;
I foneoftheoffenseisanelementofanother,theformer 3. There aretwo kinds
2. I nterval between first conviction or release andthe
is deemed absorbed by the latter and there isonlyone
2nd conviction must not exceed 10 years. Such a. F
ormal or ideal — Multiple crimescommittedfrom
crime.
interval must be maintained for the succeeding the same criminal intent are punished with ONE
offenses; 2 Single Impulse Rule penalty:
3. Th
e 2nd felony must have been committed after 1. Complex crime;
I f the act or acts complained of resulted from a single
conviction or release in the firstfelony,andthe3rd i. Delito compuesto;
criminal impulse, it constitutes a single offense.
felonymusthavebeencommittedafterconvictionor
ii. Delito complejo.
release in the 2nd felony. ART 48.Penalty for complex crimes.—
2. Special complex crimes;
➔ O ffensescommittedandconvictionsatoraboutthe 1. ( Compound crime or delito compuesto) When
same time shall be considered as only ONE in a single act constitutes two or moregraveor 3. Continued, continuous or continuing crimes.
reckoning the required 3 convictions. less grave felonies, or b. R
eal ormaterial —Therearedifferentcrimesinlaw
2. ( Complex crime proper or delito complejo) aswellasintheconscienceoftheoffender.Theyarethus
Plurality of Crimes when an offense is a necessary means for SEPARATELYpunished.
D
Real and Ideal committing the other,
Special from ordinary
the penalty for the most serious crime shall be
Absorption System 4. S
pecialcomplexcrimesarethosespecificallydesignated
i mposed, the same to be applied in its maximum
bylawtobepenalizedasonefelony,althoughcomposed
Single Impulse Rule period.
of many crimes.
Compound Complex Crime
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page55of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
5. M ay consist of crimes punished under SPLs, whereas rias should be convicted of three (3) counts of murder and
O i ndividual acts which cannot give rise to a
the complex crime in Art 48 contemplates of felonies NOT of the complex crimeof multiple murder complex crime.
punished under the RPC. ethree(3)crimesofmurderdidnotresultfromasingle
Th I n People v. Lawas, the Court was "f orced" to find all the
Kinds of ordinary complex crimes act but from several individual and distinct acts. Deeply accused guilty of only one offense of multiple homicide.
rootedisthedoctrinethatwhenvariousvictimsexpirefrom However, as this Court held in People v. Remollino, the
Compound Complex Crime separate shots, such acts constitute separate and distinct awasdoctrineismoreofan exceptionthanthegeneral
L
3
Revised Penal Code, Art. 48 crimes. rule.
Compound crime.Requisites: I ntheinstant,theactsofOriasandElarcosademonstrate ere, conspiracy is very much evident from the
H
the existence of conspiracy, thereby imputing collective actuations of the appellants and their co-accused.
a. Only asingle actis performed;
criminalresponsibilityuponthem,astheactofoneisthe Collectiveresponsibilityreplacedindividualresponsibility.
b. It produces act of all. The Lawas doctrine, premised on the impossibility of
i. 2 or more grave felonies, or determining who killed whom,cannotbe applied.
ii. o neormoregraveandoneormorelessgrave e current rule is where several killings on the same
Th
felonies, or People v. Nelmida2012 En Banc occasionwereperpetrated,butnotinvolvingprisoners,a
ppellants and their co-accused simultaneous act of
A different rule may be applied, that is to say, the killings
iii. 2 or more less grave felonies.
riddling the vehicle boarded by Mayor Tawan-tawan and would be treated as separate offenses.
Complex Crime Proper his group with bullets discharged from their firearms us,appellantsareliablefortheseparatecrimesoftwo
Th
4 when the said vehicle passed by, resulted in thedeathof
Revised Penal Code, Art. 48 (2) counts of murder and seven (7) counts of attempted
two security escorts of Mayor Tawan-tawan. murder.
Complex crime proper.Requisites:
vidently, there is in this case nocomplexcrimeproper.
E As to penalty
a. At least 2 offenses are committed;
And the circumstances present in this case do not fit
b. O neorsomeoftheoffensesmustbenecessaryto exactly the description of a compound crime. pplying the Indeterminate Sentence Law in the caseof
A
attempted murder,
commit the other;
⭐
As held in People v. Valdez, each act by each
1. t he maximum shall be taken from the medium
c. A ll of the offenses must be punished underthe gunman pulling the trigger of their respective
same statute. periodofprisionmayor,whichis8yearsand1day
firearms, aiming each particular moment at
different persons constitute distinct and to 10 years,
People v. Orias2010
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page56of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a verthattheoffenseswerecommittedonthesameperiod
2. w hile the minimum shall be taken from the 2) w
hen the woman is deprived of reason or
penalty next lower in degree, i.e., prision otherwise unconscious; and of time. The strong probability even exists that the
correccional, in any of its periods, the range of approval of theapplicationforthelegalizationofthestay
3) w
henthewomanisundertwelveyearsofageoris of the 32alienswasdonebyasinglestrokeofthepen,as
which is 6 months and 1 day to 6 years.
demented. when the approval was embodied in the same document.
arciaisguiltyofthecomplexcrimeofforcibleabduction
G
withrape.Heshouldalsobeheldliablefortheotherthree Political Offense Doctrine
Napolis v. CAcited inFransdilla v. People2015
counts of rape committed by his three co-accused, a. C
ommoncrimes,perpetratedinfurtheranceofa
e complex crime of robbery in an inhabited house by
Th considering the clear conspiracy among them. political offense, are divested of their character
armed persons and robbery with violence against or as “common” offenses and assume the political
However, as correctly held by the trial court, there can
intimidation of persons was committed when the complexionofthemaincrimeofwhichtheyare
nly be ONE complex crime of forcible abduction with
o
accused,whoheldfirearms,enteredtheresidentialhouse mere ingredients, and, consequently, cannotbe
rape. The crime of forcible abductionwasonlynecessary
ofthevictimsandinflictedinjuryuponthevictimsinthe punished separately from the principal offense,
forthefirstrape.Thus,thesubsequentactsofrapecanno
process of committing the robbery. Hence,thepenaltyis or complexed with the same, to justify the
longer be considered as separate complex crimes of
that imposed for the robbery in an inhabited house, the imposition of a graver penalty.
forcible abduction with rape. They should be detached
moreseriouscrime.CitingNapolisv.CA,theCAcorrectly
from and considered independently of the forcible b. W
hen a killing is committed in furtherance of
ruledthatalltheaccused,includingFransdilla,wereguilty
abduction. Therefore, Garcia should be convicted of one rebellion,thekillingisnothomicideormurder.
of committing the complex crime of robbery in an
complexcrimeofforcibleabductionwithrapeandthree Rather, the killing assumes the political
inhabited house under Article 299, and robbery with
separateacts of rape. complexion of rebellion.
intimidation or violence under Article 294.
c. W
henthepoliticaloffensedoctrineisassertedas
adefenseinthetrialcourt,itbecomescrucialfor
Santiago v. Garchitorena
People v. Garcia the court to determine whether the act of killing
e 32 Amended Informations reproduced verbatim the
Th was done in furtherance of a politicalend, andfor
e crime of forcible abduction with rape is a complex
Th
allegationoftheoriginalinformation,exceptthatinstead the political motive of the acttobeconclusively
crimethatoccurswhenthereiscarnalknowledgewiththe
of the word "aliens" in the original information each demonstrated.
abducted woman under the following circumstances:
amended information states the name of the individual
1) by using force or intimidation; whose stay was legalized. The 32 Amended Informations Ocampo v. Abando2014 En Banc
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page57of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
hether the murder charges against petitioners should be
W a re now uniformly pegged at P75K. The award of
c. A
rt 294 Robbery with homicide or rape or
dismissed under the political offense doctrine. temperate damagesis also increased to P50K. intentional mutilation or arson;
O. The political offense doctrine is not a ground to
N Inapplicability of Art 48 d. A
rt 297 Attempted or frustrated robbery
dismiss the charge against petitioners prior to a 1. When the crime subject of the case are covered by with homicide;
determination by the trial court that the murders were thedoctrine of common elements; e. Art 320Destructive arson.
committed in furtherance of rebellion.
a. Th
ere can be no complexing wherein two 5. W
hen the crimes involved cannot be legally
s held in the case of Prosecutor of Zamboanga v. CA, if
A felonies have a common element and such complexed:
during trial, petitioners are able to showthatthealleged element is used to complete the
murders were indeed committed in furtherance of a. A
rt 129 Search warrants maliciously
requirements for integrating one crime,the
rebellion,thetrialcourtshalldismissthemurdercharges obtained and abuse in the service of those
other crime would be incomplete in that
uponthefilingoftheInformationforsimplerebellion,as legally obtainedwith perjury;
element and consequently, non-existent.
long as petitioners would not be placed in double b. A
rt210Briberywithinfidelityinthecustody
b. Th
us, there can be NO complex crime of
jeopardy. of prisoners;
estafa through falsification of a private
documentasbothcrimesrequiredamageas c. A
rt 235 Maltreatment of prisoners with
anelementwhichisusedforonerendersthe serious physical injuries;
5 Special Complex Crime
other incomplete. d. A
rt312Usurpationofrealrightswithserious
1. C omponent crimes in aspecialcomplexcrimehave 2. When the crimes involved are subjecttotheruleof physical injuries;
no attempted or frustrated stages because the absorptionof one crime by the other; e. A
rt 275 Abandonment of persons indanger
intentionoftheoffendersistocommittheprincipal
3. W
here the two offenses resulting from a single act and Art 276-278crimesagainstminorswith
crime which is to rob but in the process of
are specifically punished as a single crime (Art 265 any other felony.
committing the said crime, another crime is
par 2). NB: omplexing is ‘legally impossible’ because
C
committed.
4. Special complex crimes; the provisions expressly state that the
2. A
s held in People v. Jugueta, in special complex
penalty for such felonies is in addition to
crimeslikerobberywithhomicidewherethepenalty a. Art 266-BRape with homicide;
those imposed on the other felonies
imposed is reclusion perpetua, the awards for civil
b. A
rt 267 Kidnapping with homicide and/or committed.
indemnity,moraldamages,andexemplarydamages
rape;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page58of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Rules on Robbery and Homicide either in law nor in jurisprudence is there an
N
emuststatethatregardlessofthenumberofhomicides
W
aggravating circumstance as robbery in band. More committed on the occasionofarobbery,thecrimeisstill
1. I f homicide was consummated, the case will be a
importantly,theevidenceshowsthatwhatwascommitted robberywithhomicide.Inthisspecialcomplexcrime,the
special complex crime of either Art 294, wherein
i s the special complex crime ofrobberywithhomicide number of persons killed is immaterial and does not
robbery was consummated, or Art 297, wherein it
aggravated by rape. increase the penalty prescribed in Art. 294. There is NO
was merely attempted or frustrated.
e original design of the malefactorswastocommitrobberyin
Th crime of robbery with multiple homicide. Moreover,
2. I f the homicide was not consummated, but was a
ordertofacilitatetheirescapefromthepenalcolony.Their whenever the special complex crime of robbery with
necessary means to commit any stage of the
original intent did not comprehend the commission of homicideisproventohavebeencommitted,allthosewho
robbery,Art 48 applies.
rape. Hence, the rape is deemed to aggravate the crime took part in the robbery are liable as principals therein
3. I f the homicide was neither consummated nor but damages or indemnification for the victim may be although they did not actually take part in the homicide.
necessary torobbery,thesefeloniesareseparateand awarded. Instead of ignominy, it is the rape itself that
distinct offenses. aggravates the crime.
6 Continuous/Continued Crime
ithrespecttothedeathsofDaisyGonzalesandYolanda
W
People v. Dillatan2018
Argue, the appellants are clearly liable therefor since, as 1. F
or delito continuado to exist there should be a
e component crimes in a special complex crime have
Th held by this Court in People v. Mangulabnan, it is plurality of actsperformedduringaperiodoftime;
no attempted or frustrated stages. immaterial that the death of a person supervened by unity of penal provision violated; and unity of
us, as in the presentcasewhere,asidefromthekilling
Th mereaccident,providedthatthehomicideisproducedby criminalintentorpurpose,whichmeansthattwoor
of Homer, theSpousesAcob,ontheoccasionofthesame reason or on occasion of the robbery. more violations of the same penal provisions are
robbery,alsosustainedinjuries,regardlessoftheseverity, united in one and the same intent or resolution
thecrimecommittedisstillrobberywithhomicideasthe leading to the perpetration of the same criminal
injuries sustained by the Spouses Acob are subsumed People v. Pulusan purpose or aim.
under the generic term "homicide" and, thus, become convictionfor highwayrobberyrequiresproofthatthe
A 2. A
ccording to Guevarra, in appearance, a delito
artandparcelofthe specialcomplexcrimeofrobbery
p accused were organized for the purpose of committing continuado consists of several crimes but in reality
with homicide. robbery indiscriminately. There is no such proof in this there is only one crime in the mind of the
case. The trial court thus correctly found Pulusan and perpetrator.
Rodriguezguiltyofthecrimeof robberywithhomicide
People v. Aspili
aggravatedby rapeunder Article 294(1).
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page59of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
3. P adillaviewssuchoffenseasconsistingofaseriesof 4. R
ebellion. — a rebel may be arrested at any time Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege
acts arising from one criminal intent or resolution. without need of a warrant asheisdeemedtobein 1
art. 21
the act of committing the offense at any time.
Delito continuado Continuing crime RT 21.Penalties that may be imposed. — No felony
A
single crime produced by
A E Penalties shall be punishable by anypenaltynotprescribedby
ne which isconsummated
O law prior to its commission.
several acts performed
inoneplacebutbyreasonof Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege
separately during a period Notes
the nature of the offense,
of time under a single Philosophical Theories
the violation of the law is 1) Th
e law must exist prior to the commission of the
criminal intent in violation
deemed continuing. Classification of Penalties crime.
of a single penal provision.
Duration and Effects of Penalties 2) R
egardless of the number of aggravating
o determine the proper
T circumstances, the penalty cannot go higher than
Its purpose is to treat venue, validityofarrestand Application and Graduation of Penalties that prescribed by law, unless the nature of the
several acts as one crime the commencement of the Accessory Penalties crime has changed.
running of prescription.
Preventive Imprisonment 3) Th
e penalty for habitual delinquents may be higher
than that prescribed by the law definingthecrime,
Subsidiary Penalty as there is another provision of law providing such.
7 Continuing Crime
Community Service 4) Th
e general rule is that penal laws shall have a
Examples and Effects of Continuing crimes retroactive effect insofar as they favor the person
Release on Recognizance
1. Kidnapping with homicide; guilty of a felonyexcept
Successive Service of Sentence
2. Th
etermofprescriptioncommencestorunfromthe a) If the offender is a habitual delinquent;
date the crime ended; Three-Fold Rule
b) Th
e new or amendatory law is not favorable to
3. B P22.—Thus,venuemaybehadeitherattheplace Indeterminate Sentence Law him; or
where the check was issued, drawn, or dishonored. c) R
etrospective application is expressly
Anti-Death Penalty Law
proscribed.
Pecuniary Liabilities
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page60of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
5) Th
e favorable effect of a new law may find the c rimeasnolaw-definesandpunishessuchanact.Nullum unishable by statute as a crime. Hence, the owner,
p
defendant in one of these situations: crimennullapoenasinelege.Thereisnocrimewherethere manager or operator of the security agency that obtains
is no law punishingit.Hence,thiscrimedoesnotsatisfy unlicensed firearms and issues the same to security
a) Prosecution begins;
the double criminality requirement in extradition guards in its employ is undeniably criminally liable.
b) S entence has been passed but service has not proceedings. Moreover, the law on illegal possession of firearms has
begun; been amended to specifically penalize the owner,
c) Sentence is being carried out. president, manager, director, or otherresponsibleofficer
Villareal v. People 2012 of any public or private firm or entity who knowingly
6) A personshallbedeemedtobeahabitualdelinquent,
allows the use of unlicensed firearms by his personnel.
if within a period of ten years from the dateofhis lthough courts must not remain indifferent to public
A
releaseorlastconvictionofthecrimesofseriousor sentiments, in this case the general condemnation of a nder Section 261 (s) of the Omnibus Election Code, the
U
less serious physical injuries, robo, hurto, estafaor hazing-related death, they are still bound to observe a punishable act is the bearing of arms outside the
falsification,heisfoundguiltyofanyofsaidcrimes fundamental principle in our criminal justice immediate vicinity of one's place of work during the
a third time or oftener. (Art 62[5]) system—Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege. election period and not the failure of the head or
responsible officer of the security agency to obtain prior
7) Criminal liability under arepealed lawsubsists: ven ifanactisviewedbyalargesectionofthepopulace
E
written COMELEC approval.
a) W hen the provisions of the former law are as immoral orinjurious,itcannotbeconsideredacrime,
absent any law prohibiting its commission. As I n any event, there is likewise nothing in R.A. 7166 that
reenacted;
interpretersofthelaw,judgesarecalledupontosetaside expressly penalizes the mere failure to secure written
b) When repeal is byimplication; OR authority from the COMELEC as required in Section 32
emotion, to resist being swayed by strong public
c) When there is asaving clause. sentiments, and to rule strictly based on theelementsof thereof.Suchfailuretosecureanauthorizationmuststill
the offense and the facts allowed in evidence. be accompanied by other operative acts, such as the
Government of HKSAR v. Muñoz 2016 En Banc bearing, carrying or transporting of firearms in public
places during the election period.
e crime of accepting an advantage as an agent in
Th
Section 9 of HKSAR's POB penalizes the unauthorized Rimando v. COMELECEn Banc ll told, petitioner should be absolved of any criminal
A
givingandreceivingofbribesorotherbenefitsasaresult hether the headoftheagencywhofailedtosecureapermitfor
W liability, consistent with the doctrine of nullum crimen,
of acting on behalf of one's principal. exemptionfromtheCommissionisguiltyofanelectionoffenseor nulla poena sine lege—there is no crime when there isno
not. law punishing it.
I n our jurisdiction, when such happens in the private
sector as is alleged in the instant case, the same isnota NO. Mere possession of unlicensed firearms is already
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page61of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
2 Philosophical Theories As to Gravity Penalty NB: A 9346abolisheddeathpenalty;convertsdeath
R
penalty to RP or Life Imprisonment (Pp v. Bon)
1) prevention of crime; Destierro
2) self-defense for the protection of society; Arresto menor 4 Duration and Effects of Penalties
Light
3) reformation of the criminal; Public censure Timeincluded in its
4) e xemplarity to deter others from committing Afflictive Fine> 1.2M Penalties
crimes; and entirety min med max
Correctional Fineof 40K to 1.2M
5) justice. 14Y 8M 17Y 4M
Light Fine< 40K 12Y 1D 12Y 1D
eclusion
R 1D 1D
to to
3 Classification of Penalties Bond to keep the peace temporal to to
20Y 14Y 8M
17Y 4M 20Y
As to Gravity Penalty erpetual or temporary absolute
P
disqualification rision mayor,
P
Capital Death 6Y 1D 6Y 1D 8Y 1D 10Y 1D
erpetual or temporary special
P absolute DQ
to to to to
Reclusion perpetua disqualification and special
12Y 8Y 10Y 12Y
temporary DQ
Reclusion temporal uspensionfrom public office the right to
S
erpetual or temporary absolute
P /A vote and be voted for the profession or
N risión
P
6M 1D 6M 1D 2Y 4M 4Y 2M
fflictive disqualification
A calling correccional,
to to 1D to 1D to
Civil interdiction suspension
erpetual or temporary special
P 6Y 2Y 4M 4Y 2M 6Y
and destierro
disqualification Indemnification
Prision mayor 1M 1D 1 M 2M 1D 4M 1D
orfeitureor confiscation of instruments
F
Arresto mayor to to to to
Prisión correccional and proceeds of the offense
6M 2M 4M 6M
Correctional Arresto mayor Payment of costs
Arresto menor 1 - 30D 1 - 10D 11 - 20D 21 - 30D
Suspension
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page62of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c ase exceed six months, if he shall have been
Effects of Penalties a. D
eprivation of the right to vote and be voted
upon; prosecuted for a grave or lessgravefelony,and
PTAD =Perpetual or TemporaryAbsoluteDQ; shall not exceedthirty days, if for a light felony.
b. Cannot hold any public office.
PTSD =Perpetual or TemporarySpecialDQ.
What are not penalties
4. S
uspensionfrompublicoffice,professionorcalling,
1. PTADfor public office 1. Th
e arrest and temporary detention of accused
or the right of suffrage
a. Deprivation of persons, as well as their detention by reason of
a. D
Q from holding such office or exercisingsuch
insanity or imbecility, or illness requiring their
i. ublic office and employments, even if by
P profession or calling, or right of suffrage;
confinement in a hospital.
election;
b. I f suspended from public office, cannot hold
2. Th
e commitment of a minor to any o f the
ii. Right to vote or to be voted upon. another office having similar functions.
institutions mentioned in Article 80 and for the
b. D Qfortheofficesorpublicemploymentsandfor 5. Civil interdiction purposes specified therein.
the exercise of any of the rights mentioned;
a. Deprivation of 3. S
uspension from the employment of public office
c. Loss of right to retirement pay or pension during the trial or in order to institute proceedings.
i. Rights of parental authority or guardianship;
NB: erpetual DQs last during lifetime of
P 4. F
ines and other corrective measures which, in the
ii. Marital authority;
convict, while temporary DQs last during exercise of their administrative disciplinary powers,
term of the sentence, iii. ight to manage his property and of the
R
superior officials may impose upon their
right to dispose of such propertyinter vivos.
EXC subordinates.
NB:But can dispose by will or donationmortis causa.
a. Public office or employment; 5. D
eprivationofrightsandthereparationswhichthe
6. Bonds to keep the peace civil laws may establish in penal form. (Art 24)
b. L oss of all rights to retirement pay or other
pension. a. p
resent two sufficient sureties who shall
undertake that suchpersonwillnotcommitthe pplication and Graduation of
A
2. PTSDfor public office, profession or calling 5 Penalties
offense sought to be prevented;
Revised Penal Code, Arts. 46, 50-57, 61-65 and 76-77
a. D eprivation of the office, employment,
b. d
epositsuchamountintheofficeoftheclerkof
profession or calling;
the court to guarantee said undertaking;
b. DQ for holding similar offices or employments. People v. Zacarias
c. I f offender fails to give the bondasrequiredhe
3. PTSDfor the exercise of right of suffrage shall be detained for a period which shall inno
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page63of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
I nthescalesofpenaltiesundertheRPC,reclusionperpetua t heabsenceofaggravatingandmitigatingcircumstances, By degree By period Always MAX
is the penalty immediatelyhigherthanreclusiontemporal is reclusion perpetua, with its accessory penalties.
whichhasadurationoftwelveyearsandonedaytotwenty Further, accused-appellant is liable for two counts of rdinary
O
Participation Delito complejo
years. The minimum range of reclusion perpetua should slight physical injuries and must be sentenced to twenty mitigating
then,bynecessaryimplication,startat20yearsand1day (20)daysofarrestomenor,each,likewisewithitsaccessory
rivileged
P
while the maximum thereunder could be co-extensive penalties. mitigating
withtherestofthenaturallifeoftheoffender.Article70,
however, provides that the maximumperiodinregardto Factors to consider to graduate by degree
the service of sentence shall not exceed 40 years. Reclusion perpetua Life Imprisonment
1. Nature ofparticipationof accused;
eclusion perpetuaremainstobean indivisible penalty
R
f or serious offenses 2. Stageof execution of the felony (Arts 50-57);
and,whenitistheprescribedpenalty,shouldbeimposed prescribed under the RPC
penalized by special laws
in its entirety,i.e.,reclusionperpetuasansafixedperiod 3. Privileged mitigatingcircumstances (Arts 68-69);
for its duration, regardless of any mitigating or oes not carry with it any
d
has accessory penalties 4. P
resence of 2 or more mitigating with no
aggravating circumstance that may have attended the accessory penalty aggravating(Art 64[5]).
commission of the crime. In prescribing the penalty of
reclusionperpetua,itsdurationinyears,infine,neednot e ntails imprisonment for at Effect of special aggravating circumstance
be specified. least thirty (30) years after
enalty to be imposed shall be in its MAXIMUM
P
which the convict becomes
oes not appear to have any
d regardlessof mitigating circumstances.
eligible for pardon,
definite extent or duration 1. Advantage of public position;
People v. Latupan although the maximum
period thereof shall in no 2. By an organized/syndicated crime group;
e proper imposable penalty is reclusion perpetua, not
Th
case exceed forty (40) years
life imprisonment. Obviously, the trial court intended to n organized/syndicated crime group means a
A
impose reclusion perpetua. However, the penalty of life group of two or more persons collaborating,
By degree By period Always MAX confederating or mutually helping one another
imprisonment is not the same as reclusion perpetua.
They are distinct in nature, in duration and in accessory for purposes of gain in the commission of any
tage of
S rdinary
O pecial
S
penalties. commission aggravating aggravating crime.
Hence, the proper penalty for each murder, considering 3. Quasi-recidivism;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page64of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
4. Ordinary complex crimes. Accessory Penalties Confiscation and forfeiture
6
⭐ Thus,themaximumperiodoftheprescribedpenalty
Revised Penal Code, Art. 25
of the proceeds or instruments of the crime.
becomestheDEGREE.Togettheproperperiod,divide
Accessory penalties inherent in principal 1. E
very penalty imposed for the commission of a
this maximum period into 3 equal periods. penalties felony shall carry with it the forfeiture of the
Inapplicability of graduation by period 1. Death, when not executed proceeds of the crime and the instrumentsortools
1. Only indivisible penalties are involved (Art 63); a. Perpetual absolute DQ; and with which it was committed.
2. Penalty consists only of a fine (Art 66); b. C 2. S
uch proceeds and instruments or tools shall be
ivil interdiction for 30Y, if not expressly
remitted in the pardon. confiscated and forfeited in favor of the
3. O ffenses penalizedbySPL,unlessdivisiblepenalties Government, unless they be property of a third
in the RPC were adopted by the SPL to punish 2. Reclusion perpetuaandtemporal person not liable for the offense, but those articles
violations thereof; and which are not subject of lawful commerce shall be
a. C
ivil interdictionforlifeorduringsentence;
4. Felonies committed throughnegligence(Art 365). and destroyed.
Graduation of Fine b. Perpetual absolute DQ.
Preventive Imprisonment
By degree 3. Prision mayor 7 R
evisedPenalCode,Art.29,asamendedbyR.A.No.
10592
ART75.Take ¼ ofthemaximumamounttogetthe a. Temporary absolute DQ; and
next degree lower, and so on b. Perpetual special DQ from suffrage. 1) W
hen the offense charged is nonbailable, or he
cannot furnish the required bail.
By period 4. Prisión correccional
ART 66. The fine cannot go outside the limits 2) Shall be credited in the service of their sentence
a. S
uspension frompublicoffice,professionor
provided by law. consisting of deprivation of liberty, with the full
calling; and
time during whichtheyhaveundergonepreventive
a. m aximum should not exceed the fine
b. P
erpetual s pecial DQ from suffrage, if the imprisonment if the detention prisoner
prescribed by law
duration o f imprisonment exceeds 18
a) agrees voluntarily in writing
b. m inimum should not be lower than that months.
provided by law. b) a fter being informed of the effects thereof
5. A
rresto — suspension of the righttoholdofficeand
and
the right of suffrage during the term of sentence.
c) with the assistance of counsel
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page65of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
d) t o abide by the same disciplinary rules 1) If the convict has no property with which to meet d) I f the principal penalty imposed is not to be
imposed upon convicted prisoners, t he FINE mentioned in paragraph 3 of the next executed by confinement inapenalinstitution,
EXCin the following cases: precedingarticle,heshallbesubjecttoasubsidiary butsuchpenaltyisoffixedduration,theconvict,
personal liability at the rate of one day for each during the period of time established in the
a. W hen they are recidivists, or have been precedingrulesshallcontinuetosufferthesame
a mount equivalent to the highest minimum wage rate
convicted previously twiceormoretimesofany deprivations as those of which the principal
prevailinginthePhilippinesatthetimeoftherendition
crime; and penalty consists.
ofjudgmentofconvictionbythetrialcourt,subjectto
b. W hen upon being summoned for theexecution the following rules: e) Th
e subsidiary personal liability which the
of their sentence they have failed to surrender convict may have suffered by reason of his
a) I f the principal penalty imposed be prision
voluntarily. insolvency shall notrelievehimfromthefinein
correccional or arresto and fine, he shall remain
3) O therwise, he shall only be credited to four-fifths under confinement until hisfinereferredinthe case his financial circumstances should
of his time under preventive imprisonment. preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his improve.
4) C redit for the penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be subsidiary imprisonment shall NOT exceed 2) The subsidiary penalty of imprisonment in case of
deducted from30 years. one-third ofthetermofthesentence,andinno non-payment ofthepenaltyoffine mustbestated
caseshallitcontinueformorethanoneyear,andno in the Judgment, otherwise it cannot be imposed
5) These offenders areNOTentitled to such credit: fractionorpartofadayshallbecountedagainst
despite non-payment of the fine.(Pp v. Alapan2018)
a) Recidivists; the prisoner.
3) NO subsidiary penaltyin the following cases
b) Th
ose who failed to voluntarily surrender upon b) W
hen the principal penalty imposed be only a
being summoned for the execution of their fine, the subsidiary imprisonment shall NOT a) W
hen penalty imposed is HIGHER than prision
sentence; exceed six months if theculpritshallhavebeen correccional;
prosecuted for a grave or less gravefelony,and b) F
or failure topayreparationofdamagecaused,
c) Habitual delinquents;
shall NOT exceed fifteen days, if for a light indemnification ofconsequentialdamages,and
d) Escapees; felony. costof proceedings;
e) Those charged withheinous crimes. c) W
hentheprincipalpenaltyimposedisHIGHER c) W
hen penalty imposedisfineandapenaltynot
than prision correccional, NO subsidiary to be executed by confinement in a penal
Subsidiary Penalty imprisonment shall be imposed upon the institution and which has no fixed duration.
8 R
evisedPenalCode,Art.39,asamendedbyR.A.No.
culprit.
10159, Sec. 1
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page66of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
r easonable probability that the person sentenced s erved under "home care/house arrest" as prayed for by
4) U nless the SPL provides that subsidiary
shall not violate the law while rendering the service. petitioner in her Motion and in this Petition. Instead, it
imprisonment shall notbeimposed,thenitmaybe
imposed. IOW, if the SPL is silent, subsidiary 4) Community service shall consist of merely provides that the penalties of arresto menor and
imprisonment is allowed. arresto mayor may be served by rendering community
a) any actual physical activity
service at the discretion of the court.
Community Service b) which inculcates civic consciousness, and
ere,thedurationofthepenaltymetedtopetitioner,i.e.,
H
9 Revised Penal Code, Art. 88a, as inserted by R.A. c) i s intended towards the improvement of a 6 years and one month up to 10 years, is within the
No. 11362, Sec. 3;A.M. No. 20-06-14-SC
public work or promotion of a public service. duration of prision mayor. Verily,theSandiganbayanhas
1) The court in its discretion may,inlieuofservicein 5) I f the defendant violates the terms of the nodiscretiontoallowpetitionertoservehersentenceby
jail, requirethatthepenaltiesof arrestomenor and community service, rendering community service, more so, under "home
arresto mayorbe served by the defendant by care/house arrest."
a) the court shall order his/her re-arrest and
a) r endering community service in the place
b) t hedefendantshallservethefulltermofthe
where the crime was committed,
penalty, as the case may be, Release on Recognizance
b) u nder such terms as the court shall 10
i) in jail, or R.A. No. 10389
determine,
ii) i n the house of the defendant as 3.RecognizanceDefined.—Recognizanceisamode
§
c) t aking into consideration the gravity of the
provided under Article 88. of securing the release of any person in custody or
offense and the circumstances of the case,
detention for the commission of an offense who is
6) H
owever, if the defendant has fully complied with
d) w hich shall be under the supervision of a unable to post bail due to abject poverty. The
the terms of the communityservice,thecourtshall
probation officer. c ourt where the case of such person has been filed
orderthereleaseofthedefendantunlessdetainedfor
2) Thedefendantshalllikewiseberequiredtoundergo some other offense. shallallowthereleaseoftheaccusedonrecognizance
rehabilitativecounseling underthesocialwelfare as provided herein, to the custody of a qualified
7) Theprivilegeofrenderingcommunityserviceinlieu
a nd development officer of the city ormunicipality member of the barangay, cityormunicipalitywhere
of service in jailshall be availed of only once. the accused resides.
concerned with the assistance of the DSWD.
3) I n requiring community service, the court shall Moreno v. Sandiganbayan2022 People v. Revilla, Jr.2021Lopez, M., J.
consider the welfare of the society and the Article 88a of theRPCdidnotstatethatsentencemaybe Napoles is not entitled to be released on recognizance
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page67of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
hichismerelyanalternativeformofbail.RANo.10389,
w e xecuted successively or as nearly as may be possible,
ii. as violated the conditions of bail or
h
provides that recognizance is available to those who are should a pardonhavebeengrantedastothepenaltyor
release on recognizance without valid
entitled to bail, but are unable to post bail due to abject justification; penaltiesfirstimposed,orshouldtheyhavebeenserved
poverty. However, it does NOT apply to those charged out.
d. Th
e accused had previously committed a
withoffensespunishablebydeath,reclusionperpetua,or e respective severity of the penalties shall be
Th
crime while on probation, parole or under
life imprisonment when evidence of guilt is strong. determined in accordance with the following scale:
conditional pardon;
ere, Napoles never claimed that she was an indigent.
H 1. Death,
e. Th
e personalcircumstancesoftheaccusedor
Moreover, she was convicted of an offense punishableby
nature of the facts surrounding his/her case 2. Reclusion perpetua,
reclusion perpetua. Clearly, RANo.10389,doesnotapply
indicatetheprobabilityofflightifreleasedon 3. Reclusion temporal,
to her.
recognizance;
4. Prision mayor,
7. Disqualifications for Release on Recognizance. —
§ f. Th
ere is a great risk that the accused may
Any of the following circumstances shall be a valid commit another crime during the pendency 5. Prisión correccional,
ground for the court to disqualify an accused from of the case; and 6. Arresto mayor,
availing of the benefits provided herein:
g. Th
e accused has a pending criminal case 7. Arresto menor,
a. Th
eaccusedbadmadeuntruthfulstatements which has the same or higher penaltytothe
8. Destierro,
in his/her sworn affidavit prescribed under new crime he/she is being accused of.
Section 5(a); 9. Perpetual absolute disqualification,
Successive Service of Sentence 10. Temporal absolute disqualification.
b. Th
e accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, 11
Revised Penal Code, Art. 70
habitual delinquent, or has committed a 11. S
uspension from public office, the right tovote
crime aggravated by the circumstance of Material accumulation system andbevotedfor,therighttofollowaprofession
reiteration; or calling, and
Whentheculprithastoservetwoormorepenalties,he
c. The accused s hall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the 12. Public censure.
i. ad been found to have previously
h penaltieswillsopermitotherwise,thefollowingrulesshall
Juridical accumulation system
escaped from legal confinement, evaded be observed:
1. Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next
sentenceor I n the imposition of the penalties, the order of their
preceding, the maximum durationoftheconvict's
respectiveseverityshallbefollowedsothattheymaybe
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page68of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
s entence shall NOT be more than three-fold the uration of thirty (30) years in relation to the penalty of
d penalties, the maximum of which is forty years.
length oftimecorrespondingtothemostsevereof reclusion perpetuaimposed by it on the accused inthis case.
us, courts should still imposeasmanypenaltiesas
Th
the penalties imposed upon him. No otherpenalty
there are separate and distinct offenses committed,
to whichhemaybeliableshallbeinflictedafterthe us, the imputation of a thirty-yeardurationtoreclusion
Th
since for every individual crime committed, a
sum total of those imposed equals the same perpetuain Articles 27 and 70 only serves:
corresponding penalty is prescribed by law. Each
maximum period. 1. as the basis fordeterminingtheconvict'seligibility single crime isanoutrageagainsttheStateforwhich
2. Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forpardon; or the latter, thru the courts of justice,hasthepowerto
forty (40) years. 2. f or the application of the three-fold rule in the impose the appropriate penal sanctions.
3. I n applying the provisions of this ruletheduration service of multiple penalties. ence, this Court must still imposetheproperpenalties
H
of perpetual penalties (p ena perpetua) shall be AND NOT as basis for the duration of the penalty for each count of the crime of usurpation of official
computed atthirty (30) years. which is intended to beperpetual. functions duly proven.
Three-Fold Rule Legaspi, Sr. v. People2022
12
Revised Penal Code, Art. 70 Indeterminate Sentence Law
onsidering that petitioner is convicted of 38 counts of
C 13
Act No. 4103, as amended by R.A. No. 4203, Secs. 1-2
usurpation of official functions, the threefold rule found
People v. Tena in Article 70 of the Revised Penal Code on successive Procedure
service of sentences shall be observed. 1. Getting theMAXIMUM range
isperiodofthirty(30)yearsvis-a-visreclusionperpetuais
Th
reiteratedinArticle70ofthecode.Saidarticlepertinently People v. Santos2020explained that: a. Start with the imposable penalty of the RPC;
rovides that in applying the so called “three-foldrule”
p eapplicationofArticle70shouldnotyettobetaken
Th b. I f there are privileged mitigating(Art68-69),or
— i.e., that “when the culprit has to serve two or more into account in the court's imposition of the special mitigating circumstances (Art 64[5]),
penalties,themaximumdurationoftheconvict'ssentenceshall appropriate penalty. Article 70 speaks of "service" of lower thepenaltyfirstby1degreeormore,then
notbemorethanthree-foldthelengthoftimecorrespondingtothe sentence, "d uration" of penalty and penalty "t o be start from there.
most severe of the penalties imposed upon him” — “the inflicted." Nowhere in the article is anything
durationofperpetualpenalties(penaperpetua)shallbecomputed 2. Getting theMINIMUM range;
mentionedaboutthe"impositionofpenalty."Itmerely
at thirty years.” provides that the prisoner cannot be made to serve a. Th
e degree nextlowertothemaximumrangeis
more than three times the most severe of these the minimum range of the indeterminate
It was thus incorrect for the Trial Court to specify the
sentence.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page69of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
3. Getting the MAXIMUMTERM 8. w
hose maximum term of imprisonment does not h. O
rdinary attendant circumstances may offset
a. C exceed one year. each other.
onsider the presence of attendant
circumstances in order to determinetheperiod In summary 3. A
pply the indeterminate sentence law, when
of the penalty; 1. Determine first thedegreebefore fixing the periods; applicable.
b. S aid period shall be the actual maximum term a. T
ake the penalty for the principal in the People v. Temporada
of the indeterminate sentence; consummated stage as the starting point;
Discussion on relevant terminologies
4. Getting the MINIMUMTERM b. Disregard the attendant circumstances;
1. Th
eRPCprovidesforaninitialpenaltyasageneral
a. S hall be taken from any period of the minimum c. Consider the factors in graduating by degree.
prescriptionforthefeloniesdefinedthereinwhich
range, taking into consideration the factors
2. D
etermine the proper period in accordance with consistsofarangeofperiodoftime.Thisiswhatis
stated inPeople v. Ducosin
Arts 62 and 64 by considering the following: referred to as the "prescribed penalty."
Inapplicability
a. Ordinary mitigating — minimum period; 2. Th
e Code provides for attending or modifying
1. p ersons convicted of offenses punished with death
b. Generic aggravating — maximum period; circumstances which when present in the
penalty or life-imprisonment;
commission ofafelonyaffectsthecomputationof
2. c onvicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to c. A
lternative circumstances — depends on
the penalty to be imposed on a convict. This
commit treason; whether it mitigates or aggravates;
penalty, as thus modified, is referred to as the
3. c onvicted of misprision of treason, rebellion, d. Complex crimes — always maximum; "imposable penalty."
sedition or espionage; e. C
rimes due to error in personae (Art 49), the 3. F
rom this imposable penalty, the court chooses a
4. convicted ofpiracy; penalty for the lesser offense, as between that single fixedpenalty(alsocalledastraightpenalty)
committed and intended, is imposed in the hich is the "p
w enalty actually imposed" on a
5. habitual delinquents;
maximum period; convict, i.e., the prison term he has to serve.
6. haveescapedfrom confinement or evaded sentence;
f. A
buse of public position or membership in an 4. W
ith the passage of the ISL, the law created a
7. t hose who having been granted conditionalpardon organized syndicate (Art 62 par 1[a]) — prison term which consists of a minimum and
bytheChiefExecutiveshallhaveviolatedtheterms maximum period. maximum term called the indeterminate
thereof;
g. Quasi-recidivism (Art 160) — maximum period; sentence. Thus, the penalty actually imposed
under the pre-ISL regime became the maximum
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page70of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
term under the ISL regime. People v. Cesar range.
ccused-appellant pleaded guilty toandwasconvictedof
A The proper method, thus, is
the crime of direct assault upon a person in authority 1. t ostartfromthepenaltyimposedbytheRPC,i.e.,
People v. Simon
ith homicide. Thisbeinga complexcrime,thepenalty
w reclusion temporal;
1. I fthejudgmentwhichcouldbeaffectedandmodified for the more serious crime should be imposed,thesametobe
by thereducedpenaltiesprovidedinRepublicActNo. 2. t henapplytheprivilegedmitigatingcircumstance
applied in its maximum period. The more seriouscrimeis
7659 has already become final and executory or the of minority and determine the penalty
homicidepunishablebyreclusiontemporal(theprescribed
accusedisservingsentencethereunder,thenpractice, immediatelyinferiorindegree,i.e.,prisionmayor;
penalty).
procedure and pragmatic considerations would and
ccused has to his credit two mitigating circumstances:
A
warrant and necessitate the matter being brought to 3. fi
nally,applythesameinitsmaximumdegreedue
the special or privileged mitigating circumstance of
thejudicialauthoritiesforreliefunderawritofhabeas to thecomplexnature of the crime
inority and the ordinary mitigating circumstance of
m
corpus.
plea of guilty. 4. b
utwithintheminimumrangethereofbecauseof
2. M
itigating circumstances should be considered and the ordinary mitigating circumstance of plea of
applied only if theyaffecttheperiodsandthedegreesofthe 1. Therefore, under Art. 64, par. 5, the penalty
guilty.
penalties within rational limits. imposable is the penalty next lower to that
rision mayor being the maximum of the indeterminate
P
prescribedby law.
3. Th
e final query is whether or not the Indeterminate sentence, the minimum of the indeterminate penalty is
Sentence Law is applicable to the case now before us. 2. U
nder Art. 71, the penalty next lower to reclusion within the range of the penalty next lower to it as
Apparently it does, since drug offenses are not temporalisprision mayor. prescribed by the RPC, i.e.,prision correccional.
includedinnorhasappellantcommittedanyactwhich 3. B
ecause of the complex nature of the crime
would put him within the exceptions to said law and committed, the penalty of prision mayor is to be
the penalty to be imposed does not involve reclusion applied in itsmaximumperiod. Lumauig v. People2014
perpetua or death.
4. H
owever, having in his favor the ordinary e ISLaw, under Section 2, is not applicable to, among
Th
4. I tisheldthatSec1ofISLawreferstoanoffenseunder mitigating circumstance of plea of guilty without others,caseswherethemaximumtermofimprisonment
a special law wherein the penalty imposed was not any offsetting aggravating circumstance, applying does not exceed one year. In determining “whether an
taken from and is without reference to the RPC. Art. 64, par. 2, the penalty of prision mayor indeterminate sentence and not a straight penalty is
maximum should be imposed in its minimum proper, what is considered is the penalty actually
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page71of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
imposed by the trial court, after considering the 6. Th
e minimum term of the indeterminate penalty
etitioner’s act as a grave felony had it been intentional,
p
attendant circumstances, andnot the imposable penalty.” shouldbeanywherewithinsixyearsandonedayto andshouldnothaveimposedthepenaltyatarrestomayor
12 years ofprision mayor. in its maximum period to prision correccional in its
I n the case at bar, since the maximum of the imposable
medium period. Instead, the petitioner’s act that caused
penaltyissixmonths,theISLawisnotapplicable.Thus,it
the serious physical injuries, had it been intentional,
i s proper to impose a straight penalty of four months
ould be a less grave felony under Article 25, because
w
andonedayofarrestomayoranddeletetheimpositionof Gelig v. People2010
Ferdinand’s physical injuries were those under Article
fine. e penalty for the crime of direct assault is prision
Th 263[3], for having incapacitated him from the
correccional in its medium and maximum periods. The performance of the work in which he was habitually
penalty should be fixed in its medium period in the engaged in for more than 90 days.
Cajigas v. People
absence of mitigating or aggravating circumstances.
onformablywithArticle365,theproperpenaltyisarresto
C
Applying theISLaw, ApplyingtheISLaw,thepetitionershouldbesentencedto
mayor in its minimum and medium periods, which ranges
an indeterminate term, the minimum ofwhichiswithin
1. theminimumof f rom one to four months. As earlier mentioned, the
the range ofthepenaltynextlowerindegree,i.e.,arresto
2. t he indeterminate sentence can be anywhere rules in Article 64 are NOT applicable in reckless
mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its
within the range of the penalty next lower in minimum period, and the maximum of which is that imprudence, and considering furtherthatthemaximum
degreetothepenaltyprescribedbytheRPCforthe term of imprisonment would not exceed one year,
properly imposable under the RPC, i.e., prision
crime. renderingtheIndeterminateSentenceLawinapplicable,
correccional in its medium and maximum periods.
t he Court holdsthatthe straightpenalty oftwomonths
3. Th
e determination of the minimum term of the
of arresto mayor was the correct penalty for the petitioner.
indeterminate sentence should be done without
considering any modifying circumstance Mariano v. People2014
attendant to the commission of the crime and
eath stands alone as the capital punishment. The RPC
D People v. Medroso
withoutreferencetotheperiodsintowhichitmay
classifies the felony of seriousphysicalinjuriesinArt263
be subdivided. aragraph 5 of Article 365 expressly states that in the
P
based on the gravity of the physical injuries.
4. Th
e penalty prescribed under Article 315, impositionofthepenaltiesprovidedforintheArticle,the
ithFerdinandnotbecominginsane,imbecile,impotent,
W courts shall exercise their sound discretionwithoutregard
paragraph2(d)oftheRPC,asamendedbyPD818,
or blind, his physical injuries did not fall under Article to the rules prescribed in Article 64.
isreclusion temporal.
263[1]. Consequently, the CA incorrectly considered the
5. The penalty next lower in degree isprision mayor. The penalty for homicide thru recklessimprudencewith
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page72of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
v iolation of the Automobile Law is prisioncorreccionalin eensentencedtosufferthedeathpenaltyhaditnot
b
a) t hepenaltyofreclusionperpetua,whenthelaw
itsmediumandmaximumperiodswithadurationfromtwo been for R.A. No. 9346.
violatedmakesuseofthenomenclatureofthe
years,fourmonths,andonedaytosixyears.Applyingthe penalties of the RPC; or
ISLawtowhichappellantisentitledtheimposablepenalty 15 Pecuniary Liabilities
b) t he penalty of life imprisonment, when the
covers RT 38.Pecuniaryliabilities;Orderofpayment.—In
A
law violated does not make use of the
a) a minimum to be taken from the penalty one nomenclature of the penalties of the RPC. case the property of the offender should not be
degree lowerthanthatprescribedbylaworarresto sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary
3. Person convicted of offenses punished with
§
mayor in its maximum period toprisioncorreccionalin liabilities, the same shall be met in the following
reclusionperpetua,orwhosesentenceswillbereduced
itsminimumperiod,i.e.fourmonthsandonedayto order:
toreclusionperpetua,byreasonofthisAct,shallNOT
two years and four months, and 1. Thereparationof the damage caused.
be eligible for parole under the Indeterminate
b) a maximum to be taken in turn from the penalty Sentence Law. 2. Indemnificationof consequential damages.
prescribedfortheoffensethedurationofwhichis
.M. No.15-08-02-SCprovidesforthefollowingguidelines
A 3. Thefine.
from two years, four months and one day to six
that shallbeobservedintheimpositionofpenaltiesandin
years. 4. Thecostof the proceedings.
the use of the phrase "without eligibility for parole":
edeterminationoftheminimumandmaximumterms
Th
1) I n cases where the death penalty is not warranted, F Extinction of Criminal Liability
is left entirely to the discretion of the trial court, the
thereisnoneedtousethephrase"withouteligibility
exercise of which will not be disturbed on appeal unless
for parole" to qualify the penalty of reclusion Total Extinction
there is a clear abuse.
perpetua; it is understood that convicted persons
Partial Extinction
penalizedwithanindivisiblepenaltyarenoteligible
for parole; and
Anti-Death Penalty Law Total Extinction
14 2) W
hen circumstances are present warranting the Revised Penal Code, Art. 89
R.A. No. 9346, Secs. 1-3
imposition of the death penalty, but this penaltyis
1. The imposition of the penalty of deathishereby
§
Death of Convict
not imposed because ofR.A.9346,thequalification
prohibited. 1
of "without eligibility for parole" shall be used in Service of Sentence
2.Inlieuofthedeathpenalty,thefollowingshallbe
§ order to emphasize that the accused should have Amnesty
imposed.
Absolute Pardon
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page73of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
rticle 1155 of the Civil Code, that should thereby
A
Prescription of Crimes 2. C
orollarily, the claim for civil liability survives
notwithstanding the death of the accused, if the avoid any apprehension on apossibleprivationof
Prescription of Penalties right by prescription.
same may also be predicated on a source of
arriage between the Offender and the
M obligation other than delict.
b. Service of Sentence
Offended Party rticle 1157 of the Civil Code enumerates these
A
Probation other sources of obligation from which the civil Villareal v. People2014
liability may arise as a result of the same act or
ccused Bantug asserts that their criminal liability has
A
a. Death of Convict omission:
already been extinguished as a result of their discharge
a. Law; from probation and the eventual termination of the
People v. Reyes2023
b. Contract; criminal case against them.
eople v. Monroyo stressed that the "death of the accused
P
c. Quasi-contracts; ecsonetal.cannotinvokeArticle89oftheRevisedPenal
T
pending appeal of the conviction extinguishes his or her
Code, as it is inapplicable to this case. One of the
criminal liability, as well as thecivilliability,basedsolely d. Quasi-delicts;
hallmarks of the Probation Law is precisely to “suspend
thereon."Hence,uponVilloria'sdeath,thecriminalaction
3. W
here the civil liability survives, as explained in the execution of the sentence,” and not to replace the
against him is extinguished.
Number 2 above, an action for recovery therefor original sentence with another, as was pointed out in
maybepursuedbutonlybywayoffilingaseparate Baclayon v. Mutia:
civil action.
People v. BayotasEn Banc n order placing defendant on “probation” is not a
A
4. F
inally, the private offended party neednotfeara “sentence” but is rather in effect a suspension of the
1. D eath of the accused pending appeal of his
forfeiture of his right to file this separate civil imposition of sentence. It is not a final judgment but is
conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as
action by prescription, in cases where during the rather an “interlocutory judgment” in the nature of a
well as the civil liability based solely thereon.
prosecution of thecriminalactionandpriortoits conditional order placing the convicted defendant under
e death of the accused prior to final judgment
Th extinction, the private-offended party instituted the supervision of the court for his reformation, to be
terminates his criminal liability and only thecivil together therewiththecivilaction.Insuchacase, followed by a final judgment of discharge, if the
liability directly arising from and based solely on the statute of limitations on the civil liability is conditions of the probation are complied with, or by a
the offense committed, i.e., civil liability exdelicto deemed interrupted during the pendency of the final judgment of sentence if the conditions are violated.
in senso strictiore. criminal case, conformably with provisions of
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page74of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Pardon Amnesty e xtinguished, butnot the accessory penaltiesattached
c. Amnesty to it, except when an absolute pardon is granted
People v. Vera ranted
G ePresidentat his
Th e President
Th afterthetermofimprisonmenthasexpired,everything
by sole discretion concurred by Congress is removed.
I t has been consistently ruled that amnesty looks
backwardandabolishesandputsintoobliviontheoffense oes not erase effect
D Pardon by President Offended party
itself, it so overlooks and obliterates the offense with Effect of penalty for purposes Erases such effect
which he ischarged;thatthepersonreleasedbyamnesty of recidivism Applicable to Any crimes Private crimes only
stands before the law precisely as though he had
s to criminal
A nly bars
O
committed no offense. d. Absolute Pardon Extinguishes
liability prosecution
mnesty is a public act of which the court should take
A r efers to the total extinction of the criminalliabilityof
judicialnotice.Thus,therighttothebenefitsofamnesty, the individual to whom it is granted without any oes not
D
As to civil liability Extinguishes
once established by the evidence presented,eitherbythe condition. It restores to the individual his civil and affect
complainant or prosecution orbythedefense,cannotbe political rights and remits the penalty imposed forthe
particular offense of which he was convicted. ay be
M
waived,becauseitisofpublicinterestthatapersonwhois ot subject to
N
As to conditions absolute or
regarded by the Amnesty Proclamation, which has the 1. s hallnotworktherestorationoftherighttohold conditions
conditional
forceoflaw,notonlyasinnocent,forhestandsintheeyes publicoffice,ortherightofsuffrage,unlesssuch
of the law as if he had never committed any punishable rights be expressly restored by thetermsofthe fter
A efore institution of
B
Must be given
offense because of the amnesty, but as a patriot orhero, pardon. conviction case
and not be punished as criminal.
2. s hall in no case exempt the culprit from the I n adultery or
payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon
concubinage, must be
him by the sentence. Given to Any party
Pardon Amnesty given to both
1) Limitationsupon its exercise offenders.
NLY AFTER
O sually BEFORE
U
Granted a. Only after conviction;
conviction conviction e. Prescription of Crimes
b. Does not extend to cases of impeachment.
eePeriodsofPrescriptionforViolationsPenalized
S
Applies to ALL kinds of offenses Political offenses
2) W
hen the principal penalty is remitted by pardon, by Special Acts (R.A. No. 3326, Secs. 1-2)
only the effect of that principal penalty is
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page75of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a nd shall begin to run again if the proceedings are eingconvictedoracquitted,orareunjustifiably
b
1. Violations penalized by special acts shall,unless
§
dismissed for reasons not constituting jeopardy. stopped for any reason not imputable to him.
otherwise provided in such acts, prescribe in
accordance with the following rules: e term of prescription shall not run when the
Th
Prescription of Crime Penalty Fine
offender isabsent from the Philippines.
a) a fter a year for offenses punished only by a
fine or by imprisonment for not more than Death, RP, RT 20Y 20Y 1. W
hat is taken into account is the penalty
one month, orboth; [<1M] imposableunder the law.
Reclusion temporal 20Y 15Y
b) a fter four (4) years for those punished by 2. Th
e highest penalty which may be imposed for
imprisonmentformorethanonemonth,but Other afflictive 15Y 15Y >1.2m the crime should be the basis, even if accused
less than two years; [>1M—<2Y] was subsequently sentenced to a lower penalty.
Correctional 10Y 10Y >40k – 1.2m 3. A
nypossiblesubsidiaryimprisonment,however,
c) a fter eight (8) years for those punished by
imprisonmentfortwoyearsormore,butless should NOT be considered.
excArresto mayor 5Y 5Y
than six years; and [2Y—<6Y]
Libel 1Y People v. Basalo
d) a fter twelve (12) years for anyotheroffense
o determine the prescriptibility of an offensepenalized
T
punished by imprisonment for six years or Light 2M 1Y ≤40k
with a fine, whether imposed as a single or as an
more,exceptthecrimeoftreason,whichshall
alternative penalty, such fine should not be reduced or
prescribe aftertwenty years. [6Yor more] Computation of prescription of offenses
converted into a prison term, but rather it should be
iolationspenalizedbymunicipalordinancesshall
V The period of prescription
considered as such fine under Article 26 of theRPC;and
prescribe aftertwo months. 1. shall commence to run from the day on which that for purposes of prescription of the offense, denned
2. Prescription shall begin to run from the day of
§ t he crime is discovered by the offended party, and penalized in Article319,thefineimposablethereinif
thecommissionoftheviolationofthelaw,andifthe the authorities, or their agents, and correctional or afflictive under the terms of Article 26,
same be not known at thetime, fromthediscovery should be made the basis rather than that of arresto
2. s hallbeinterruptedbythefilingofthecomplaint
thereofandtheinstitutionofjudicialproceedingsfor mayor, also imposable in said Article 319.
or information, and
its investigation and punishment.
3. s hall commence to run again when such
e prescription shall be interrupted when
Th proceedings terminate without the accused People v. Crisostomo
proceedings are institutedagainsttheguiltyperson,
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page76of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
e classification of fine into afflictive, correctional or
Th otgivenhimselfup,orbeencaptured,orgoneto
n
light,underArticle26,shouldbemadeonlywhenafineis Recebido v. People a foreign country with which we have no
i mposed either as a single or as alternative penalty; extradition treaty, or committed another crime;
andthatnosuchclassificationshouldbemadewherethe vengrantingarguendothatthedeedofsalewasexecuted
E
4. Th
epenaltyhasprescribed,becauseofthelapseof
fine is imposed in conjunction with another penalty. by the private complainant, delivered to the
time fromthedateoftheevasionoftheserviceof
petitioner-accused in August 13, 1983 and registered on
the sentence by the convict.
thesameday,theten-yearprescriptiveperiodofthecrime
had not yet elapsed atthetimetheinformationwasfiled rticle93provideswhentheprescriptionofpenaltiesshall
A
People v. Reyes
in1991.Thus,thecrimehadnotprescribedatthetimeof commence to run. Under said provision, it shall
e crime of falsification of a public document carries
Th the filing of the information. commence to run from the date the felon evades the
with it an imposable penalty of prision correccional in its serviceofhissentence.PursuanttoArticle157,evasionof
medium and maximum periods and a fine of not more f. Prescription of Penalties service of sentence can be committedonlybythosewho
thanP5K.Beingpunishablebyacorrectionalpenalty,this have been convicted by final judgment by escaping
1. Th
e prescription of penalties foundinArticle93
crimeprescribesinten (10) years. during the term of his sentence.
oftheRPC,appliesonlytothosewhoareconvicted
ere, the public document allegedly falsified was a
H by final judgment and are serving sentence which " Escape" in legal parlanceandforpurposesofArticles93
notarizeddeedofsaleregisteredonMay26,1961withthe consist of deprivation of liberty. and 157oftheRPCmeansunlawfuldepartureofprisoner
Register of Deeds in the name of the accused. The two from the limits of his custody. Clearly, one who has not
2. The period for prescription of penalties begins
informations were, however, filed only on October 18, beencommittedtoprisoncannotbesaidtohaveescaped
o nlywhentheconvictevadesserviceofsentence
1984. The complainants claim that they discovered the therefrom.
by escaping during the term of his sentence.
falsified notarized deed of sale in June1983.
Pangan v. Gatbalite Computation of the prescription of penalties
e rule is well-established that registration in a public
Th
registry is a notice to the whole world. The record is The period of prescription of penalties
The elements of prescription are:
constructive notice of itscontentsaswellasallinterests, 1. s hall commence to run from the date when the
legal and equitable, included therein. All persons are 1. That the penalty is imposed byfinal judgment;
culprit should evade theserviceofhissentence,
charged with knowledge of what it contains. Thus, the 2. Th
at convict evaded the serviceofthesentenceby and
criminalinformationshavingbeenfiledformorethanten escaping during the term of his sentence;
2. it shall beinterruptedif
(10) years, the crime for which the accused was charged
3. Thattheconvictwhohadescapedfromprisonhas
hasprescribed. a. the defendant shouldgivehimselfup,
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page77of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a pplicable to the co-principals, accomplices and
b. becaptured, b. u
pon application by said defendant within the
accessories after the fact of the above-mentioned period for perfecting an appeal,
c. s hould go to some foreign country with crimes.
which this Government has no extradition s uspendtheexecutionofthesentenceandplacethe
treaty, or People v. De Guzman2010 defendant on probation for such period and upon
d. s hould commit another crime before the such terms and conditions as it may deem best.
ased on the documents, including copies of pictures
B
expiration of the period of prescription. taken aftertheceremonyandattachedtothemotion,the 2) N
oapplicationforprobationshallbeentertainedor
Court finds the marriage between appellant and private granted if the defendant has perfected the appeal
g. M
arriage between the Offender and the from the judgment of conviction:
Offended Party complainant to have been contracted validly, legally, and
in good faith, as an expression of their mutual love for rovided, That when a judgment of conviction
P
RT 266-C. Effect of Pardon. — The subsequent
A
each other and their desire to establish a family of their imposing a non-probationable penalty is appealed
valid marriage between the offender and the
own.Givenpublicpolicyconsiderationsofrespectforthe or reviewed, and such judgment is modified
offendedpartyshallextinguishthecriminalactionor
sanctity of marriage and the highest regard for the through the imposition of a probationable penalty,
the penalty imposed.
solidarity of the family, the Court accords appellant the the defendant shall beallowedtoapplyforprobation
I ncaseitisthelegalhusbandwhoistheoffender,the full benefits of Article 89, in relation to Article 344 and based on the modified decision before such decision
subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended Article 266-C of the RPC. becomes final. (Colinares v. People2011 En Banc)
party shall extinguish the criminal action or the
ppellant Ronie de Guzman is ABSOLVED of the two(2)
A 3) Th
is notwithstanding, the accused shall lose the
penalty: Provided, That the crime shall not be
counts of rape against private complainant Juvilyn benefit of probation should he seek a review of the
extinguishedorthepenaltyshallnotbeabatedifthe
Velasco, on account of theirsubsequent marriage. modified decision which already imposes a
marriage is voidab initio.
probationable penalty.
RT 344. Prosecution of the crimes o f adultery,
A h. Probation
4) P
robation may be granted whether the sentence
concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape and acts of
.D. No. 968, Secs. 4, 9 and 16,asamendedbyR.A.
P imposes atermofimprisonmentorafineonly.The
lasciviousness.— xxx No. 10707 filingoftheapplicationshallbedeemedawaiverof
I n cases of seduction, abduction, acts of the right to appeal.
Application
lasciviousness and rape, the marriage oftheoffender
with the offended party shall extinguish the criminal 1) The trial court may, 5) Anordergrantingordenyingprobationshallnotbe
action or remit the penalty already imposed upon a. a fter it shall have convicted and sentenced a appealable.
him. The provisions of this paragraph shall also be defendant for a probationable penalty and
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page78of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
l aw inflicts for the offense he hadcommittedresulting
Disqualified offenders c. Good Conduct Allowances
in the partial extinction of his criminal liability.
1. s entenced to serve a maximum term of evisedPenalCode,Art.97,asamendedbyR.A.No.
R
imprisonment ofmore than six (6) years; 1. Th
e conditions shall be fully set forth in the
10592, Sec. 3
pardon.
2. convicted of any crime against thenational security; s hall entitle him to the following deductions from the
2. I f the court shall find that one or more of the
3. w ho have previously been convicted by final period of his sentence:
conditions of suchpardonhasbeenviolatedby
judgment of an offense punishedbyimprisonment thepersonsopardoned,thecourtshallorderthe
ofmorethansix(6)monthsandone(1)dayand/ora During the A deduction of
recommitmentandconfinementofsuchperson
fine of more than one thousand pesos(P1,000.00);
intheproperprisonfortheunexpiredportionof 2 0days, for each month of good
First 2 years
4. whohave been once on probation; and his original sentence. behavior
5. w ho are already serving sentence at the time the RT 95. Obligation incurred by person granted
A 3rd - 5th year 23days
substantive provisions of this Decree became conditional pardon. — Any person who has been
applicable. grantedconditionalpardonshallincurtheobligation 6th - 10th year 25days
of complying strictly with the conditions imposed
Partial Extinction therein otherwise, his non-compliance with any of 11th year onwards 30days
evisedPenalCode,Art.94,asamendedbyR.A.No.
R theconditionsspecifiedshallresultintherevocation
10592, Secs. 2-5 15days for each month of study,
+
of the pardon and the provisions of Article 159 shall ny time teaching or mentoring service time
A
Conditional Pardon be applied to him. rendered
2
Commutation of Sentence b. Commutation of Sentence ➔ A
n appeal by the accused shall not deprive him of
Good Conduct Allowances r efers to the reduction of the duration of a prison entitlement to the above allowances for good
sentence of a prisoner. conduct.
Parole
RT 96. Effect of commutation of sentence. — The
A Disqualified
a. Conditional Pardon commutation of the originalsentenceforanotherof
e following shall not be entitled to anyGCTAduring
Th
a different length and nature shall have the legal
Act No. 1524 preventive imprisonment:
e ffect of substituting the latter in the place of the
r efers totheexemptionofanindividual,withincertain former. a. Recidivists;
limits or conditions, from the punishment which the
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page79of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
b. A n accused who has been convicted previously 3. w
ithin 48 hours following the issuance of a 4. Special conduct and workmanship allowance;
twiceor more times of any crime; proclamation announcing the passing away of 5. Loyalty allowance;
c. A the calamity or catastrophe referred to in said
n accused who,uponbeingsummonedforthe 6. Preventive imprisonment (Art 29);
article.
executionofhissentencehasfailedtosurrender
7. Confinement in a rehabilitation center.
voluntarily before a court of law; deduction of two-fifths (⅖) of the period of his
A
d. Habitual Delinquents; sentence shall be granted in case saidprisonerchoseto
Inmates of the New Bilibid Prison v. De Lima2019En Banc
stay in the place of his confinement notwithstanding the
e. Escapees; and
existence of a calamity or catastrophe enumerated in eprospectiveapplicationofthebeneficialprovisionsof
Th
f. PDL charged ofHeinous Crimes. Article 158 of this Code. R.A. No. 10592 actually works to the disadvantage of
e following shall not be entitledtoanyGCTAduring
Th petitioners and those who are similarly situated. It
is Article s hall apply to any prisoner w
Th hether
serviceofsentence andTimeAllowanceforStudy,Teaching undergoing preventive imprisonment or s erving precludes the decrease in the penalty attached to their
and Mentoring (TASTM): respective crimes and lengthens their prison stay; thus,
sentence.
makingmoreonerousthepunishmentforthecrimesthey
a. Recidivists; Who Grants Time Allowances committed. Depriving themoftimeofftowhichtheyare
b. Habitual Delinquents; heneverlawfullyjustified,thefollowingofficialsshall
W justly entitled as a practical matter results in extending
grant time allowances: their sentence and increasing their punishment.
c. Escapees; and
Evidently, this transgresses the clear mandate of Article
a. Director General of the Bureau of Corrections;
d. PDL convicted ofHeinous Crimes. 22 of the RPC.
b. C
hief of the Bureau of Jail Management and
Special time allowance for loyalty
Penology; and/or
deduction of one fifth (⅕) of the period of his
A
c. W
arden of a Provincial, District, City or Miguel v. Director of Bureau of Prisons2021
sentenceshall be granted to any prisoner who,
Municipal Jail.
urderisconsideredaheinouscrimeinsofarastheGCTALawis
M
1. h aving evaded his preventive imprisonment or
How sentence served is reduced concerned,andpersonschargedwithand/orconvictedofsuchare
the service of his sentence under the
circumstances mentioned in Article 158 of this 1. Conditional pardon; disqualified from availing of the benefits of the law.
Code, 2. Commutation of sentence; iguel is NOT entitled to the benefits of the GCTA Law.
M
The GCTA Law and the 2019 Revised IRR have made it
2. gives himself up to the authorities 3. GCTA;
abundantly clear that persons charged with and/or
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page80of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c onvicted of heinous crimes are not entitled to the Disqualification for Parole 10. Those convicted for violation of the laws on
benefits under the law. The following prisoners shallNOTbe granted parole: terrorism, plunderandtransnationalcrimes.(B
PAP
einous Crimes include crimes which are mandatorily
H Resolution No. 24-4-10)
1. Th
ose convicted of offenses punished with death
punishablebyDeathundertheprovisionsofRANo.7659.
penalty or life imprisonment;
ThecrimeofMurderisonethatismandatorilypunishable G Civil Liability Ex-Delicto
by death, in accordance with the Death Penalty Law. 2. Th
ose convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal
Murder is considered a heinous crime in so far as the to commit treason or espionage; Primary and Subsidiary
GCTALawisconcerned,andpersonschargedwithand/or 3. Th
ose convicted of misprisionoftreason,rebellion, estitution, Reparation, and
R
convicted of such are disqualified from availing of the sedition or coup d’etat; Indemnification
benefitsofthelaw.Also,thepenaltyofreclusionperpetua
4. Th
oseconvictedofpiracyormutinyonthehighseas ivil Liability of an Offender Exempted from
C
requires imprisonment of at least thirty (30) years, after
or Philippine waters; Criminal Liability
which the convict becomes only eligible for pardon, and
not for release. 5. Those who are habitual delinquents; hare of Each Person Civilly Liable for a
S
6. Th
ose who escaped from confinement or evaded Felony
e Writ of Habeas Corpus may not be issued and the
Th
discharge of Miguel from imprisonment should not be sentence; Preference in Payment
authorized. 7. Th
ose who having beengrantedconditionalpardon Persons who Participated Gratuitously
by the President of the Philippines shall have
d. Parole violated any of the terms thereof; xtinction and Survival of Civil Liability
E
Ex-Delicto
People v. Abesamis 8. Th
osewhosemaximumtermofimprisonmentdoes
not exceed one (1) year or those with definite 1 Primary and Subsidiary
arolereferstotheconditionalreleaseofanoffenderfrom
P sentence;
a correctional institution after he serves the minimum RT 100.Civilliabilityofapersonguiltyoffelony. —
A
term of his prison sentence. The grant thereof does not 9. Th
oseconvictedofoffensespunishedwithreclusion
Every person criminally liable for a felony is also
extinguish the criminal liability of the offender.Paroleis perpetua, or whose sentences were reduced to
civilly liable.
not one of the modes of totally extinguishing criminal reclusion perpetua by reason of RA 9346; and
liability under Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code. Who are subsidiarily liable
1. P
ersons causing damages under the compulsion of
an irresistible force or the impulse of an
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page81of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
ncontrollable fear used or created by the person
u c orporations for criminal acts engaged in by t heir 3. Th
ethingwaspurchasedunderfactorsorrecording
primarily liable; employees in the discharge of their duties, s aid laws, or under a sale authorized by law or by the
2. i nnkeepers, tavern keepers and proprietors of subsidiaryliabilityappliesonlytofelonies,andnotto court,orinamerchant’sstore,fairsormarkets(Art
establishments. c rimespenalizedbyspeciallawssuchasB.P.Blg.22.And 1502,ibid.);
3. e mployers, teachers, persons, and corporations nothinginB.P.Blg.22imposessuchsubsidiaryliabilityto 4. I tisinthepossessionofaholderinduecourseofa
engaged in any kind of industry for felonies the corporation in whose name the check is actually negotiable document of title (Art 1518,ibid.);
committed by their servants, pupils, workmen, issued.Clearlythen,shouldthechecksignatorybeunable
to pay the obligation incurred by the corporation, the 5. I t is in the hands of a holder in due course of a
apprentices, or employees in the discharge of their
negotiable instrument (Sec 57 NIL); and
duties; and complainantwouldbebereftofremedyunlesstherightof
action to collect on the liability of the corporation is 6. Th
e property is covered by a Torrens title and was
4. P rincipals, accomplices and accessories, for the recognized and given flesh. purchased for value in good faith (PD 1529).
unpaidcivilliabilityoftheirco-accusedintheother
classes (Art 110). May be demanded even from third persons.
ny person who has participated gratuitously in the
A
estitution, Reparation, and
R
Ozoa v. Madula proceeds of a felonyshallbeboundtomakerestitution
2 Indemnification
eforetheemployer'ssubsidiaryliabilityisexacted,there
B Revised Penal Code, Arts. 104-108 in an amount equivalent to the extent of such
must be adequate evidence establishing that participation. (Art 111)
Restitution
1) he is indeed the employer of the convict; Reparation
o fthethingitselfmustbemadewheneverpossible,with
2) that he is engaged in some kind of industry; of the damage caused
allowance for any deterioration,ordiminutionofvalue
3) t he crime was committed by the employee in the as determined by the court. ecourtshalldeterminetheamountofdamage,taking
Th
discharge of his duties; and into consideration the price of the thing, whenever
Inapplicable
possible,anditsspecialsentimentalvaluetotheinjured
4) execution against the employee is unsatisfied. 1. I f the thingwaspurchasedingoodfaithatapublic
party, and reparation shall be made accordingly.
sale (Art 559 NCC);
2. Th
e movable property was acquired byprescription Indemnification
Gosiaco v. Ching and CastaandNavarra v. People2016 for consequential damages
by the third person (Art 1133,ibid.);
While the RPC imposes subsidiary civil liability to
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page82of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
s uch persons, those doing the act shall be liable,
s hallincludenotonlythosecausedtheinjuredparty,but People v. Velasco2014
savingalwaystothelatterthatpartoftheirproperty
alsothosesufferedbyhisfamilyorbyathirdpersonby
exempt from execution. What was the extent of Inovero’s civil liability?
reason of the crime.
The nature of the obligationoftheco-conspiratorsinthe
eparation and indemnification can berequiredONLY
R hare of Each Person Civilly Liable for
S
4 c ommission of the crime requires solidarity, and each
from the accused or his heirs. a Felony debtormaybecompelledtopaytheentireobligation.Asa
RT109.Shareofeachpersoncivillyliable.—Ifthere
A co-conspirator,then,Inovero’scivilliabilitywassimilarto
ivil Liability of an Offender Exempted
C
3 from Criminal Liability aretwoormorepersonscivillyliableforafelony,the that of ajoint tortfeasorunder the rules of thecivil law.
Revised Penal Code, Art. 101 courts shall determine the amount for which each J oint tortfeasors are not liable pro rata. The damages
must respond. cannotbeapportionedamongthem,exceptbythemselves.
1. I n case of insane, imbecile or minors, primary
They cannot insist upon an apportionment, for the
liability devolvesuponthosewithlegalauthorityor Preference in Payment
control 5 purpose of each paying an aliquot part. They are jointly
Revised Penal Code, Art. 110
and severally liable for the whole amount. Hence,
nless it appears that there was no fault or
u 1. Th
e principals, accomplices, and accessories, each Inovero’s liability towards the victims of their illegal
negligence on their part. within their respective class, shall be liable recruitment was solidary, regardless of whether she
bsentanypersonwithlegalauthorityorcontrol,or
A solidarily among themselves for their quotas, and actually received the amounts paid or not, and
iftheybeinsolvent,theownpropertyoftheaccused subsidiarilyfor those of the other persons liable. notwithstanding that her co-accused, having escaped
shall besecondarilyliable. arrest until now, have remained untried.
2. Th
e subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first
2. I n case of avoidance of greater evil or state of against the property oftheprincipals;next,against
necessity, that of the accomplices, and, lastly, against that of
People v. Tampus and Montesclaros
the accessories.
t he persons for whose benefit the harm has been
ivil indemnity ex delicto is mandatory uponfindingof
C
prevented shall be civillyliableinproportiontothe 3. W
henever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary
the fact of rape. This is distinct from moral damages
benefit which they may have received. liability has been enforced, the person by whom
payment has been made shall have aright of action awardeduponsuchfindingwithoutneedoffurtherproof,
3. I n cases of compulsion of an irresistible force or because it is assumed that a rape victim has actually
against the others fortheamountoftheirrespective
impulse of an uncontrollable fear, suffered moral injuries.
shares.
t hepersonsusingviolenceorcausingthefearsshall The victim in simple rapecasesisentitledtoanawardof
beprimarilyliableandsecondarily,or,iftherebeno
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page83of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
50K as civil indemnity ex delicto and another P50K as
P ratuitously in the proceeds of a felony shall be
g
Acquittal bars civil liability
moral damages. However, Tampus' civil indemnity ex bound to make restitution in an amount equivalent
1. Accused did not commit the act;
delicto has been extinguished by reason of his death to the extent of such participation.
before the final judgment, in accordance with Article89. 2. He was not guilty of criminal or civil negligence.
xtinction and Survival of Civil
E
Thus, the amount of civil indemnity which remains for 7
Liability Ex-Delicto Rimando v. Aldaba2014
accompliceIda to pay is put at issue.
RT 112. Extinctionofcivilliability. —Civilliability
A imando’sacquittalintheestafacasedoesnotnecessarily
R
ecourtshavethediscretiontodeterminetheapportionment
Th
established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103 of this absolveherfromanycivilliabilitytoprivatecomplainants,
of the civil indemnity which the principal, accomplice and
Code shall be extinguished in the same manner as Sps. Aldaba. It is well-settled that “the acquittal of the
accessoryarerespectivelyliablefor,withoutguidelineswith
obligations, in accordancewiththeprovisionsofthe accused does not automatically preclude a judgment
respect to the basis of the allotment.
Civil Law. againsthimonthecivilaspectofthecase.Theextinction
rticle109providesthat"iftherearetwoormorepersons
A
RT113. Obligationtosatisfycivilliability.—Except
A ofthepenalactiondoesnotcarrywithittheextinctionof
civilly liable for a felony, the courts shall determine the
incaseofextinctionofhiscivilliabilityasprovidedin the civil liability where:
amount for which each must respond." Article 110
thenextprecedingarticletheoffendershallcontinue a) t he acquittal isbasedonreasonabledoubtasonly
provides that "the principals, accomplices, and
to be obliged to satisfy the civil liability resulting preponderance of evidence is required;
accessories, each within their respective class, shall be
from the crime committed byhim,notwithstanding
l iable severally (in solidum) among themselves for their b) t hecourtdeclaresthattheliabilityoftheaccusedis
thefactthathehasservedhissentenceconsistingof
quotas, and subsidiarily for those of the other persons only civil; and
deprivationoflibertyorotherrights,orhasnotbeen
liable."
required to serve the same by reason of amnesty, c) t hecivilliabilityoftheaccuseddoesnotarisefrom
ach principal should shoulder a greater share in the total
E pardon, commutation of sentence or any other or is not based upon the crime of which the
amount of indemnity and damages than every accomplice, and reason. accused is acquitted.
each accomplice should also be liable for a greater amount as
I nthiscase,Rimando’scivilliabilitydidnotarisefromany
against every accessory. Civil liability in spite of acquittal of the crime
purported actconstitutingthecrimeofestafaastheRTC
1. Acquittal is based on reasonable doubt; clearlyfoundthatRimandoneveremployedanydeceiton
2. C
ourtdeclaresthataccused’sliabilityisonlycivil Sps. Aldaba to induce them to invest money in Multitel.
6 Persons who Participated Gratuitously in nature; Rather, her civilliabilitywascorrectlytracedfrombeing
RT 111. O
A bligation to make restitution in certain an accommodation party tooneofthecheckssheissued
3. Civil liability did not arise from the criminal act.
cases. — A ny person who has participated to Sps. Aldaba on behalf of Multitel.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page84of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
e CAisalsocorrectinholdingthatRimando’sacquittal
Th Crimes Against Honor a) levies war against the Government; or
and subsequent exoneration in the BP 22 cases had no b) a dheres to the enemy, giving them aid or
Quasi-offenses
effect in the estafa case, even if bothcaseswerefounded comfort
on the same factual circumstances.
rimes Against National Security
C
and the Laws of Nations
A NOTES
Title One
1. T
reason is a breach of allegiance to a government,
III Revised Penal Code - Book Two committed by a person who owes allegiance to it.
Anti-Terrorism Act
rimes Against National Security and the
C 2. Levying warrequires:
errorism Financing Prevention and
T
Laws of Nations
Suppression Act a) actual assembling of men; and
rimes Against the Fundamental Laws of
C b) f or the purposeofexecutingatreasonabledesign
Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law
the State by force.Mere enlistment of men isnot sufficient.
hilippine Act on Crimes Against
P
Crimes Against Public Order 3. C
an't be complexedandisacontinuouscrime.Since
International Humanitarian Law, Genocide
Crimes Against Public Interest and Other Crimes Against Humanity treason is a political crime, the Political Offense
Doctrinefinds application.
Crimes Against Public Morals 114 Treason
4. I f the alien is a co-conspirator, he need not be a
Crimes Committed by Public Officers Acts punished resident of the Philippines. General rule: Alien
offender must be resident, except if co-conspirator.
Crimes Against Persons 1) By levying war against the Government;
(Regalado)
rimes Against Personal Liberty and
C 2) B
y adhering to the enemies, giving them aid or
Security comfort. 115 Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit Treason
Crimes Against Property Elements onspiracy:In time of war, two or more persons agree
C
and decide to commit treason.
Crimes Against Chastity 1) Offender is either a Filipino or a resident alien;
roposal:A person has decided to commit treason and
P
2) There is a war where the Philippines is involved;
rimes Against the Civil Status of
C proposes its execution to others.
Persons 3) The offender either:
116 Misprision of Treason
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page85of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
1) F
ilipinooffender owes allegiance to the c) D
iscloses contents toarepresentativeofa c) might be useful to the enemy.
Government; foreign nation.
121 Flight to enemy's country
2) H
as knowledge of any conspiracy to commit
118 Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals
treason; Filipino or a resident alien
3) C
onceals or does not disclose the same ASAP to rovocation or giving occasion for a war involving or
P 1) There is a war involving PH;
the governor, mayor, or fiscal. liable to involve the RP or expose Filipinos to reprisals.
2) Offender owes allegiance to the Government;
1) Performs unlawful or unauthorized acts;
117 Espionage 3) O
ffender attempts to flee or go to the enemy
2) S
uch acts provoke or give occasion for a war country;
Acts punished with corresponding elements involving or liable to involve the RP or expose
4) G
oing to enemycountryprohibitedbycompetent
1) ( Anyperson)Entersw/oauthorityawarship,fort, Filipinos to reprisals.
authority.
or naval or military establishment or reservation
119 Violation of neutrality
to obtain any info, plans, photographs of a 122 Piracy
confidential nature relative to the defense of the Violation of a regulation for neutrality
PH Acts punished
1) There is a war wherein PH is not involved;
a) Enters any of the places aforementioned; 1) A
ttacking or seizing a vessel on the high seas or in
2) C
ompetent authority has issued regulation of
PH waters;
b) Unauthorized; neutrality;
2) S
eizing in the vessel while on the high seas or in
c) P urpose is to obtain confidential 3) Offender violates such regulation. PH waters the whole or part of its cargo, its
information relative to Philippine defense.
120 Correspondence with hostile country equipment or personal belongings of its
2) ( Publicofficer)Disclosingtotherepresentativeof complement or passengers.
a foreign nationinformationobtainedinthefirst 1) There is a war involving PH;
Elements
act, which he possessed by reason of his public 2) Offender makes correspondence with the enemy;
office. 1) A vessel is on the high seas or PH waters;
3) Correspondence is either:
a) Public officer; 2) Offenders are strangers to the vessel;
a) prohibited by Government; or
b) p ossesses any of the articles by reason of 3) Offenders commit any of the acts punishable.
b) carried on in signs or ciphers; or
his public office;
Mutiny
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page86of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Acts punished Anti-Terrorism Act b) E
ngages in acts intended to cause extensive
1 damage or destruction to a government or
1) Unlawful resistance to a superior officer; R.A. No. 11479, Secs. 3-12, 25, 26, 29 and 36
public facility, public place or private property;
2) R
aising of commotions on board against the
authority of its commander. c) E
ngages in acts intended to cause extensive
Calleja v. Executive Secretary2021 En Banc interference with, damage or destruction to
Element critical infrastructure;
e Court declares the following provisions of Republic
Th
1) O
ffenders are members of the crew or are Act No. 11479UNCONSTITUTIONAL: d) D
evelops, manufactures, possesses, acquires,
passengers. transports,suppliesorusesweapons,explosives
1) Th
ephraseintheprovisoofSection4whichstates
123 Qualified Piracy "w hicharenotintendedtocausedeathorserious orofbiological,nuclear,radiologicalorchemical
physicalharmtoaperson,toendangeraperson's weapons; and
Qualifying circumstances
life, or to create serious risk to public safety;" e) R
eleaseofdangeroussubstances,orcausingfire,
1) S
eizing the vessel by boarding or firing upon the floods or explosions.
2) Th
e second mode of designation found in
same;
paragraph 2 of Section 25; and hen the purpose of such act, by its nature and
W
2) Pirates have abandoned their victims helpless; context, is to
3) A
s a necessary consequence, the corresponding
3) A
ccompanied by murder, homicide, physical reference/provisions in the IRR of RA No. 11479 a) i ntimidate the general public or a segment
injuries, or rape. relative to the foregoing items. thereof,
Elements b) c reate an atmosphere or spread a message of
1) Offender committed Piracy; Punishable Acts of Terrorism fear,
2) Any of the qualifying circumstances is present 1) T
errorism.—committedbyanypersonwho,within c) p
rovoke or influence by intimidation the
oroutsidethePhilippines,regardlessofthestageof government or any international organization,
Considered asTerrorismunder RA 11479
execution: or
hen it results to a condition of widespread and
w
a) E
ngages in acts intended to cause death or d) s eriouslydestabilizeordestroythefundamental
extraordinary fear and panic, in order to coerce the
seriousbodilyinjurytoanyperson,orendangers political, economic, or social structures of the
government to give in to an unlawful demand.
a person's life; country, or
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page87of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a nyoftheactsspecifiedabovebymeansofspeeches, ersons may travel to a foreign state for the
p
e) c reate a public emergency or seriously
undermine public safety, proclamations,writings,emblems,bannersorother purpose of serving in any capacity in or with
representations tending to the same end. such armed force; or
s hall be guilty of committing terrorism and shall
7) R
ecruitment to and Membership in a Terrorist d) P
erforming any other act with intention of
suffer the penaltyoflifeimprisonmentwithoutthe
Organization. — Any person who shall recruit facilitating or promoting the recruitment of
benefit of parole and the benefits of RA No. 10592
another to participate in, join, commit or support persons to serve in anycapacityinorwithsuch
errorism shall NOT include advocacy, protest,
T terrorism or a terrorist individual or any terrorist armed force.
dissent,stoppageofwork,industrialormassaction, organization, association or group of persons.
and other similar exercises of civil and political ny person who shall voluntarily and knowingly
A
rights nypersonwhoorganizesorfacilitatesthetravelof
A join any organization, association or group of
individuals to a state other than their state of persons knowing that such organization,
2) Th
reat to Commit Terrorism. — Any person who residence or nationality for the purpose of association or group of persons is proscribed, or
shall threaten to commit any of the acts above. recruitment which may be committed through any designatedbytheUNSCasaterroristorganization,
3) P lanning, Training, Preparing,andfacilitatingthe of the following means: or organized for the purpose of engaging in
Commission of Terrorism.— terrorism.
a) R
ecruiting another person to serve in any
a) p ossessing objects connected with the capacity in or with an armed force in a foreign 8) F
oreign Terrorist. — The following acts are
preparation for the commission of terrorism, or state,whetherthearmedforceformspartofthe unlawful:
armed forces of the government of thatforeign
b) c ollectingormakingdocumentsconnectedwith a) F
oranypersontotravelorattempttotraveltoa
state or otherwise; state other than his/her state of residence or
the preparation of terrorism.
b) P
ublishing an advertisement orpropagandafor nationality for the purpose of perpetrating,
4) C onspiracy to Commit Terrorism. — There is
thepurposeofrecruitingpersonstoserveinany planning, or preparing for, or participating in
conspiracywhentwo(2)ormorepersonscometoan
capacity in or with such armed force; terrorism, or providing or receiving terrorist
agreementconcerningthecommissionofterrorism
training;
and decide to commit the same. c) P
ublishing an advertisement or propaganda
containinganyinformationrelatingtotheplace b) F
oranypersontoorganizeorfacilitatethetravel
5) Proposal to Commit Terrorism.
at which or the manner in which persons may of individuals who travel to a state other than
6) I nciting to Commit Terrorism. — Any person who makeapplicationstoserveorobtaininformation their states of residence or nationalityknowing
withouttakinganydirectpartinthecommissionof relatingtoserviceinanycapacityinorwithsuch that such travel is for the purpose of
terrorism, shall include others to the execution of armed force or relating to themannerinwhich perpetrating, planning, training, or preparing
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page88of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
f or,orparticipatinginterrorismorprovidingor
2) T
errorist Organization, Association or Group of 1) A
lawenforcementagentormilitarypersonnelmay,
receiving terrorist training; or Personsshall refer to any entity upon a written order of the Court of Appeals
c) F oranypersonresidingabroadwhocomestothe a) proscribed under Section 26, or secretly wiretap, overhear and listen to, intercept,
Philippines to participate in perpetrating, screen, read, survey, record or collect, withtheuse
planning, training, or preparing for, or b) d
esignated by the United Nations Security of any mode, form, kind or type of electronic,
participatinginterrorismorprovidesupportfor Council as a terrorist organization, or mechanical or other equipment or device or
or facilitate or receive terrorist training hereor c) o rganized for the purpose of engaging in technology now known or may hereafter be known
abroad. terrorism. toscienceorwiththeuseofanyothersuitableways
9) P and means for the above purposes, any private
roviding Material Support to Terrorists. — Any 3) A
ccessory. — Anypersonwhohavingknowledgeof
person who communications, conversation, discussion/s, data,
the commission of any of the crimes defined and
information, messages in whatever form, kind or
a) p rovides material support to any terrorist penalizedwithouthavingparticipatedtherein,takes
nature, spoken or written words
individual or terrorist organization,association part subsequent to its commission in any of the
or group of persons committing any oftheacts following manner: a) b
etween members of a judicially declared
and outlawed terrorist organization;
punishable, a) b
y profiting himself/herself or assisting the
b) k nowing that such individual or organization, offender to profit by the effects of the crime; b) b
etween membersofadesignatedpersonas
association, or group of persons is committing defined inSection 3(e) of RA No. 10168; or
b) b
y concealing or destroying the body of the
or planning to commit such acts, crime,ortheeffects,orinstrumentsthereof, c) a ny person charged with or suspected of
in order to prevent its discovery; or committing any of the crimes defined and
s hall be liable as principal to any and all terrorist
penalized herein.
activities committed by said individuals or c) b
y harboring, concealing, orassistinginthe
organizations, in addition to other criminal escape of the principal orconspiratorofthe 2) H
owever, surveillance,interceptionandrecordingof
liabilities he/she or they may have incurred in crime. communications between
relation thereto. o person, regardless of relationship or affinity,
N a) lawyers and clients,
shall be exempt from liability under this section. b) doctors and patients,
Who are Liable
Surveillance of Suspects and Interception c) j ournalists and their sources and
1) T erroristIndividualshallrefertoanynaturalperson
and Recording of Communications confidential business correspondence
who commits anyoftheactsdefinedandpenalized
above;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page89of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
o r administrative investigation, inquiry,
shall not be authorized. ii) t opreventthecommissionofanother
terrorism; and proceeding, or hearing.
Detention Without Judicial Warrant
b) t heinvestigationisbeingconductedproperly errorism Financing Prevention and
T
and without delay.
1) A
ny law enforcement agent or military personnel, 2 Suppression Act
who, having been dulyauthorizedinwritingbythe 3) I mmediately after taking custody, the law R.A. No. 10168, Secs. 4- 9, 17 and 19
ATC has taken custody of a person suspected of enforcementagentormilitarypersonnelshallnotify
committing any of the acts defined and penalized 1. §4.Financing of Terrorism.—
inwritingthejudgeofthecourtnearesttheplaceof
under Sections 4-12 of this Act, shall, without apprehension or arrestof the following facts: a. Any person
incurring any criminal liability for delay in the
a) the time, date, and manner of arrest; b. w
ho, directly or indirectly, willfully and
delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial
without lawful excuse,
authorities, deliver said suspected person to the b) t he location or locations of the detained
proper judicial authority within a period of suspect/s and i. ossesses, provides, collects or uses
p
fourteen (14) calendar days counted from the property or funds or
c) t he physical and mental condition of the
oment the said suspected person has been
m detained suspect/s. ii. akes available property, funds or
m
apprehended or arrested, detained, and taken into financial service or other related
custody by the law enforcement agent or military No Torture or Coercion in Investigation services, by any means,
personnel. and Interrogation
c. w
ith the unlawful and willful intention that
2) The period of detention may be extended to a 1) Th
e use of torture and other cruel, inhumane and they should be used or with the knowledge
aximum period of (10) calendar days if it is
m degrading treatment or punishment, asdefinedin that they are to be used, in full or in part:
established that Sections4and5ofthe"Anti-TortureActof2009,"at i. t o carry out or facilitate the
a) f urther detention of the person/s is anytimeduringtheinvestigationorinterrogationof commission of any terrorist act;
necessary a detained suspected terrorist is absolutely
ii. y a terrorist organization,
b
prohibitedand shall be penalized.
i) t o preserve evidence related to association or group; or
terrorism or complete the 2) A
ny evidence obtained from said detained person
resulting from such treatment shall be, in its iii. by an individual terrorist,
investigation;
e ntirety, inadmissible and cannot be used as s hall be guilty of the crime of financing of
evidence in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative, terrorism and shall suffer the penalty of reclusion
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page90of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t emporal in its maximum p eriod to reclusion enerated from property or fundsownedor
g
6. §
7.. Accessory. — Any person who, having
perpetua and a fine of P hp500,000.00 to controlled, directly or indirectly, by a
knowledge of the commission of the crime of
Php1,000,000.00. designatedperson,organization,association
financing of terrorism but without having
2. A or group of persons; or
ny person who organizes or directs others to participated therein as a principal, takes part
commit financing of terrorism under the subsequent to its commission, b. m
akes available any property or funds, or
immediately preceding paragraph shall likewise be financialservicesorotherrelatedservicesto
a. by profiting from it or
guilty of an offense and shall suffer the same a designated and/or identified person,
penaltyas herein prescribed. b. b
y assisting the principal or principals to organization, association, or group of
profit by the effects of the crime, or persons,
3. F or an act to constitute a crime under this Act, it
shallnotbenecessarythatthefundswereactuallyused c. b
yconcealingordestroyingtheeffectsofthe s hall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal in its
to carry out a crime. crime in order to prevent its discovery, or maximum period toreclusionperpetua andafineof
d. b
y harboring, concealing or assisting in the Php500,000.00 to Php1,000,000.00.
4. § 5. Attempt or Conspiracy to Commit the Crimes of
Financing of Terrorism and Dealing with Property or escape of a principal of the crime 8. §
9. Offense by a Juridical Person, Corporate Body or
Funds of Designated Persons. — Any attempt to s hall be guilty as an accessory to the crime of Alien. — If the offender is a corporation,
commitanycrimeunderSection4orSection8shall financing of terrorism and shall be imposed a association,partnershiporanyjuridicalperson,the
be penalized by a penalty two degrees lower than penalty two degrees lower than thatprescribedfor penalty shall be imposed upon the responsible
that prescribed. principals. officers, as the case may be,
nyconspiracytocommitanycrimeunderSection4
A 7. §
8. Prohibition Against Dealing with Property or a. w
hoparticipatedin,orallowedbytheirgross
or Section 8 of this Act shall be penalized by the Funds of DesignatedPersons.—Anypersonwho,not negligence, the commission of the crime or
same penaltyprescribed. being an accomplice under Section 6 or accessory b. w
hoshallhaveknowinglypermittedorfailed
5. § 6.. Accomplice. — Any person who, not being a under Section 7 in relation to any property or fund: to prevent its commission.
principal or a conspirator hereof, cooperatesinthe a. d
ealsdirectlyorindirectly,inanywayandby I f the offender is a juridical person, the courtmay
execution of either the crime of financing of anymeans,withanypropertyorfundthathe suspend or revoke its license.
terrorism or conspiracy to commit the crime of knowsorhasreasonablegroundtobelieveis
financing of terrorism by previousorsimultaneous owned orcontrolledbyadesignatedperson, I ftheoffenderisanalien,thealienshall,inaddition
acts shall suffer the penalty one degree lower than to the penalties herein prescribed, be deported
organization, association or group of
that prescribed for the conspirator. persons, including funds derived or
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page91of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
ithout further proceedings after serving the
w a way of the whole or part thereof or its cargo,
c. t o individual persons who commit any of
penaltiesherein prescribed. equipment, or the personal belongings of its
said crimes within any embassy, consulate,
9. § complement or passengers, irrespective of the value
17. Predicate Offense to Money Laundering. — or diplomatic premises belonging to or
FinancingofterrorismunderSection4andoffenses occupiedbythePhilippinegovernmentinan thereof,bymeansofviolenceagainstorintimidationof
punishable under Sections 5, 6, and 7 of this Act personsorforceuponthings,committedbyanyperson,
official capacity;
shall be predicate offenses to money laundering as includingapassengerormemberofthecomplementof
d. t o individual persons who, although said vessel, in Philippine waters.
defined in the Anti-Money Laundering Actof2001, physicallyoutsidetheterritoriallimitsofthe
as amended, and subject to its suspicious Philippines, commit said crimes against 2. M
utiny is the unlawful resistance to a superior officer,
transaction reporting requirement. ortheraisingofcommotionsanddisturbancesonboard
Philippine citizens or persons of Philippine
10. §19. Extra-Territorial Application. — Subject to the descent, where theircitizenshiporethnicity ashipagainsttheauthorityofitscommander.Intentto
provision of an existing treaty, including the wasafactorinthecommissionofthecrime; gain is not essential in mutiny. Ignoring authority is
InternationalConventionfortheSuppressionofthe sufficient,andmaybepromptedbyadesiretocommit
and
FinancingofTerrorismofwhichthePhilippinesisa plunder.
e. t o individual persons who, although
StateParty,andtoanycontraryprovisionofanylaw physicallyoutsidetheterritoriallimitsofthe 3. Philippine Watersshall refer to
of preferential application, the criminal provisions
Philippines, commit said crimes directly a. a ll bodies of water,suchasbutnotlimitedto,seas,
of this Act shall apply: against the Philippine government. gulfs,baysaround,betweenandconnectingeachof
a. t o individual persons who, although the Islands of the Philippine Archipelago,
physicallyoutsidetheterritoriallimitsofthe nti-Piracy and Anti-Highway
A irrespective of its depth, breadth, length or
Philippines, commit, conspire or plot to 3 Robbery Law dimension, and
commit any of the crimes defined and P.D. No. 532, Secs. 2-4 b. a ll other waters belonging to the Philippines by
punished in this Act inside the territorial historic or legal title, including territorial sea, the
limits of the Philippines; Definition of Terms
sea-bed, the insular shelves, and other submarine
b. t o individual persons who, although 1. P
iracy is robbery or forcible depredation on the high areas over which the Philippineshassovereigntyor
physicallyoutsidetheterritoriallimitsofthe seas, without lawful authority and done with animo jurisdiction.
Philippines, commit any of the said crimes furandi and in the spirit and intention of universal
4. V
essel. — Anyvesselorwatercraftusedfortransportof
on board Philippine ship or Philippine hostility.Intent to gain is essential in piracy.
passengers and cargo from one place to another
airship; Any attack upon or seizure of any vessel, orthetaking throughPhilippineWaters.Itshallincludeallkindsand
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page92of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
types of vessels or boats used in fishing. pirates or highway robbers/brigands, such as i) Willful killing;
5. P hilippine Highway shall refer to any road, street, i. ivingtheminformationaboutthemovementof
g ii) orture or inhuman treatment, including
T
passage,highwayandbridgesorotherpartsthereof,or policeorotherpeaceofficersofthegovernment, biological experiments;
railway or railroad within the Philippines used by or
persons, or vehicles, or locomotives or trains for the iii) illfully causing great suffering, or serious
W
ii. a cquires or receives property taken by such injury to body or health;
movementorcirculationofpersonsortransportationof piratesorbrigandsorinanymannerderivesany
goods, articles, or property or both. benefit therefrom; or iv) xtensive destruction and appropriation of
E
6. H ighway Robbery/Brigandage. The seizure of any property not justified by military necessity
b. d
irectlyorindirectlyabetsthecommissionofpiracy and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;
person for ransom, extortion or other unlawful or highway robbery or brigandage,
purposes,orthetakingawayofthepropertyofanother v) illfullydeprivingaprisonerofwarorother
W
by means of violence againstorintimidationofperson s hall be considered as an accomplice of the principal protected person of the rights of fair and
or force upon things of other unlawful means, offendersandbepunishedinaccordancewiththeRules
regular trial;
committed by any person on any Philippine Highway. prescribed by the RPC.
vi) rbitrary deportation or forcible transfer of
A
hilippine Act on Crimes Against
P population or unlawful confinement;
Punishable Acts
International Humanitarian Law, vii) Taking of hostages;
7. P D 532 or the Anti-Piracy and Highway Robbery Law 4 Genocide and Other Crimes Against viii) ompelling a prisoner a prisoner of war or
C
punishes Humanity
other protectedpersontoserveintheforces
a. an attack upon or seizure of any vessel, or R.A. No. 9851, Secs. 3-6, 10-12, and 17 of a hostile power; and
b. t he taking away of the whole or part thereof or its ix) njustifiable delay in the repatriation of
U
War Crimes
cargo, equipment, or prisoners of war or other protected persons.
ar crimes or crimes against International Human
W
c. t he personal belongings of the complement or Humanitarian Lawmeans: b) I n case of a non-international armed conflict,
passengers, irrespective of the value thereof, by seriousviolationsofcommonArticle3tothefour(4)
a) I n case of an international armed conflict, grave
meansofviolenceagainstorintimidationofpersons Geneva Conventions of 12 August1949,namely,any
breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August
or force upon things. ofthefollowingactscommittedagainstpersonstaking
1949, namely, any of the following acts against
8. Any person who persons or property protected under provisions of no active part in the hostilities,includingmemberof
the relevant Geneva Convention: thearmedforceswhohavelaiddowntheirarmsand
a. knowingly and in any manner aids or protects
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page93of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t hose placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds,
3) D
eliberatelyinflictingonthegroupconditionsoflife g) R
ape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced
detention or any other cause;
calculated to bringaboutitsphysicaldestructionin pregnancy,enforcedsterilization,oranyotherform
i) iolence to life and person, in particular,
V whole or in part; of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
willful killings, mutilation, cruel treatment
4) I mposing measures intended to prevent births h) P
ersecution against any identifiable group or
and torture; within the group; and collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic,
ii) ommittingoutragesuponpersonaldignity,
C 5) F
cultural, religious, gender, sexual orientation or
orcibly transferring children of the group to
in particular, humiliating and degrading other grounds that are universally recognized as
another group.
treatment; impermissible under international law, in
I t shall be unlawful for any person to directlyandpublicly connection with any act referred to in this
iii) Taking of hostages; and incite others to commit genocide. paragraph or any crime defined in this Act;
iv) e passing of sentences and the carrying
Th
outofexecutionswithoutpreviousjudgment
Other Crimes Against Humanity i) Enforced or involuntary disappearance of persons;
pronouncedbyaregularlyconstitutedcourt, eans anyofthefollowingactswhencommittedaspartofa
M j) Apartheid; and
affording all judicial guarantees which are widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian
k) O
ther inhumane acts of a similar character
generally recognized as indispensable. population, with knowledge of the attack:
intentionally causing great suffering, or serious
c) O ther serious violations of the laws and customs a) Willful killing; injury to body or to mental or physical health.
applicable in armed conflict,withintheestablished b) Extermination; Notes
frameworkofinternationallaw.(Pleaseseefulltextfor
c) Enslavement; 1. A
superior shall be criminally responsible as a
extensive list)
d) A
rbitrary deportation or forcible transfer of principal for such crimes committed by
Genocide population; subordinates under his/her effective commandand
eans any of the following acts with intent to destroy, in
M control,oreffectiveauthorityandcontrolasthecase
e) I mprisonment or other severe deprivation of
whole or in part,anational,ethnic,racial,religious,socialor may be, as a result of his/her failure to properly
physical liberty in violationoffundamentalrulesof
any other similar stable and permanent groupas such: exercise control over such subordinates, where:
international law;
1) Killing members of the group; a. Th
at superior either knew or, owing to the
f) Torture;
circumstances at the time, should have
2) C ausing seriousbodilyormentalharmtomembers
known that the subordinates were
of the group;
committing or about to commit such crimes;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page94of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
ct, regardless of where the crime is committed,
A NOTES
b. Th
atsuperiorfailedtotakeallnecessaryand
provided, ANY one of the following conditions is
reasonablemeasureswithinhis/herpowerto 1. Variations:
met:
prevent or repress their commission or to
a. A
rbitrary detention-Noground,intentisjustto
submit the matter to the competent a. The accused is a Filipino citizen;
authorities for investigation and detain without intent to deliver to judicial
b. Th
e accused, regardless of citizenship or authorities.
prosecution. residence, is present in the Philippines; or
2. N b. U
nlawful arrest (Art 269) - Detention of no legal
on-prescription. — The crimes defined and c. Th
e accused has committed the said crime
penalizedunderthisAct,theirprosecution,andthe ground, purpose to deliver to judicial authorities
against a Filipino citizen.
execution of sentences imposed on their account, c. D
elay of delivery (Art125)-thereislegalground,
shall NOT be subject to any prescription. but unduly delays delivery.
rimes Against the Fundamental
C
3. Th
efactthatacrimehereinhasbeencommittedbya Laws of the State
B d. C
oercion (Art 286) - no intention to detain but
person pursuant to an order of a government or a Title Two victim was restricted of freedom of movement
superior, whether military or civilian, shall NOT
1. Th
esearecrimesthatviolatetheBillofRightsunder e. A
bduction (Art 342)-victimisawomandetained
relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless
the Constitution. with lewd designs
all of the following elements occur:
2. O
ffendersaregenerallypublicofficers(excArt133on 2. J uridicalexistenceofacrimecommittedbythevictim
a. Th
e person was under a legal obligation to is not essential. What is determinative is the good
Offending Religious Feelings) who must act in the
obey orders of the government or the faith and the purpose of the public officerunderthe
exercise of public functions.
superior in question; circumstancesofthecaseastheyappearedtohim.If
3. P
rivatepersonsmaybeheldliableasco-conspirator,
b. Th
e person did not know thattheorderwas it turns out the person detained was innocent, the
or be an accomplice or accessory thereto.
unlawful; and officer acted under amistake of fact.(Regalado)
c. The order was not manifestly unlawful. 124 Arbitrary Detention 125 Delay in delivery to judicial authorities
4. O rders to commit genocideorothercrimesagainst
1) Offender is a public officer or employee; ailure to deliver a detained person to the proper judicial
F
humanity are manifestly unlawful.
2) Detains a person; authorities for a specific period of time.
5. J urisdiction. — The State shall exercise jurisdiction
3) Detention is without legal grounds. 1) Offender is apublic officeror employee;
overpersons,whethermilitaryorcivilian,suspected
or accused of a crimedefinedandpenalizedinthis 2) Persondetained for some legal ground;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page95of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
3) There isno warrant of arrest. Elements 2) Excess in executing search warrant;
4) F
ails to deliversuch person to proper judicial 1) Public officer or employee; a) Offender is a public officer or employee;
authoritieswithin: 2) Does either acts punished; b) Search warrant legally procured;
a) 12 hours for light; 3) Not authorized by law. c) Exceeds authority, or unnecessary severity.
b) 18 hours for correctional;
128 Violation of domicile 130 Searching domicile without witnesses
c) 36 hours for afflictive or capital offenses.
Acts punished onduct of judicially authorized search without
C
126 Delaying release witnesses present
1) Entering a dwelling against owner's will;
Delaying: 2) Searching without owner's previous consent; 1) Offender is a public officer or employee
1) P
erformance of a judicial or executive order of 2) Valid search warrant;
3) Refusing to leave when so required.
release; 3) Searches the domicile;
Elements
2) Service of notice; or 4) No witness present.
1) Offender is a public officer or employee;
3) Proceedings upon any petition for release.
2) No judicial order. rohibition, interruption, and
P
Elements 131
dissolution of peaceful meetings
1) Offender is a public officer or employee; Search warrants maliciously obtained
129
and abuse in the service of those legally obtained 1) P
rohibiting or interrupting theholding of a
2) Th
ere is a judicial or executive order of release, or
peaceful meetingwithout legal ground, or
a proceeding upon a petition of release; Acts punished with corresponding elements
dissolving same;
3) Offender baselessly delays. 1) Procuring search warrant without just cause;
2) H
indering any person fromjoining lawful
127 Expulsion associationsor from attending their meetings;
a) Offender is a public officer or employee;
3) P
rohibiting or hindering any person or group
Acts punished b) Procures a search warrant; frompetitioning for redress of grievances.
1) Expels a person from PH;
c) No just cause. 132 Interruption of religious worship
2) Compels him to change residence
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page96of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
1) Public officer or employee; Medina v. Orozco i nvestigation as mandated by Section 7, Rule 112 of the
2) R
eligious ceremonies or manifestation of religion Rules of Court. Detentionbeyondthisperiodviolatesthe
ovember 7 was a Sunday; November 8 was declared an
N
are about to take place or are ongoing; accused's constitutional right to liberty.
officialholiday;andNovember9(electionday)wasalsoan
3) Prevents or disturbs the same. officialholiday.Theseareconsiderationssufficientenough ccordingly, the Court rules that a detainee under such
A
to deter us from declaring that Arthur Medina was circumstances must be promptly released to avoid
133 Offending the religious feelings arbitrarily detained. For, he was brought to court on the violation of the constitutional right to liberty, despite a
very first office day following arrest. aiver of Article 125, if the 15-day period (or the thirty
w
erforms acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the
P
30-dayperiodincasesofviolationofR.A.No.9165)forthe
faithful.
conduct of the preliminary investigationlapses.Thisrule
1) Acts performed in Sayo v. Chief of Police of Manila also applies in cases where the investigating prosecutor
a) a place devoted to religious worship; OR resolves to dismiss the case, even if such dismissal was
orthepurposeofdeterminingthecriminalliabilityofan
F
appealed to the DOJ or made the subject ofamotionfor
b) during religious ceremony; officer detaining a person for more than six hours
reconsideration, reinvestigation or automatic review.
prescribed by the Revised Penal Code, the means of
2) A
cts are notoriously offensive to the feelings of the
communication as well as the hour of arrest and other
faithful.
circumstances, such as the time of surrender and the
materialpossibilityforthefiscaltomaketheinvestigation C Crimes Against Public Order
Soria v. Desierto andfileintimethenecessaryinformation,mustbetaken Title Three
asthereadelayinthedeliveryofdetainedpersontotheproper
W into consideration.
judicial authorities under the circumstances? The answerisin 134 Rebellion or insurrection
thenegative.Thecomplaintsagainsthimwereseasonably
Public uprisingandtaking armsagainst the government
filed in the courtofjusticewithinthethirty-six(36)-hour IBP v. DOJ2017 En Banc
period prescribed by law. The duty of the detaining 1) There be a
ewaiverofArticle125oftheRPCdoesnotvestuponthe
Th
officers is deemed complied with upon the filing of the a) public uprising, and
DOJ, PPO, BJMP, and PNP the unbridled right to
complaints. Further action, like issuance of a Release
indefinitely incarcerate an arrested person and subject b) taking arms against the Government.
Order, then rests upon the judicial authority.
him to the whims and caprices of the reviewing
2) Purposeis either:
prosecutor of the DOJ. The waiver of Article 125 must
coincide with the prescribed period for preliminary a) to remove from the allegiance thereto or its
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page97of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
laws: r elatively benign attitude towards political crimes. In adre Garcia, Batangas on 20 February 2006 and that 14
P
i) PH territory or any part thereof; or cases of rebellion, motive relates to the act, and mere yearsearlier,hewaspresentduringthe1992CPPPlenum.
membership in an organization dedicated to the None of the affidavits stated that Beltran committed
ii) a ny body of land, naval or other furtherance of rebellion would not, by and of itself, specific acts of promoting, maintaining, or heading a
armed forces; or suffice. rebellion as found in the DOJ Resolution of 27 February
b) t o deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, 2006.NoneoftheaffidavitsallegedthatBeltranisaleader
I ntheabsenceofclearandsatisfactoryevidencepointing
wholly or partially, of any of their powers toapoliticalmotiveforthekillingofSPO3JesusLucilo,we of a rebellion. Beltran's alleged presence during the 1992
or prerogatives. are satisfied that the trial court correctly convicted CPPPlenumdoesnotautomaticallymakehimaleaderof
appellant of the crime ofmurder. a rebellion.
NOTES
1. R
ebellion is to overthrow and supersedetheexisting
Prosecutor of Zamboanga v. CA Enrile v. Amin
Government.
2. I nsurrection merely seeks to effect some change of e political motivation for the crime must be shown in
Th e attendant circumstancesintheinstantcase,however
Th
minor importance, or to prevent the exercise of constrain us to rule that the theory of absorption in
order to justify finding the crime committed to be
governmental authority with respect to particular rebellioncasesmustnotconfineitselftocommoncrimes
rebellion. Otherwise, as in People v. Ompad, although it
matters or subjects. was shown that the accused was anNPAcommander,he but also to offenses under special laws which are
was nonetheless convicted of murder for the killing of a perpetrated in furtherance of the political offense.
3. C
onsidered as Terrorism under RA 9372 when it
results to a condition of widespread and person suspected of being a government informer. I ntent or motive is a decisive factor. If Senator Ponce
extraordinary fear and panic, in order to coerce the Enrile is not charged with rebellion and he harbored or
government to give in to an unlawful demand. concealed Colonel Honasan simply becausethelatterisa
Beltran, et al v. Gonzalez friend and former associate, the motive for the act is
completely different. But if the act is committed with
People v. Lovedioro etitioners are party-list representatives charged with
P
political or social motives, that is in furtherance of
Rebellion.
egravamenofthecrimeofrebellionisanarmedpublic
Th rebellion, then it should be deemed to form part of the
uprisingagainstthegovernment.Politicalmotiveshould e allegations in the affidavits are far from the proof
Th crime of rebellion instead of being punished separately.
be established before a person charged with a common needed to indict Beltran for taking part in an armed
crime — alleging rebellion inordertolessenthepossible public uprising against the government. What these
imposable penalty — could benefit from the law's documents prove, at best, is that Beltran was in Bucal, Ocampo v. Abando, et al2014 En Banc
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page98of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
e political offense doctrine is not a ground to dismiss
Th strategyorstealth; 2) Incites others to rebel;
thechargeagainstpetitionerspriortoadeterminationby 3) A
ttack is directed against duly constituted
the trial court that the murders were committed in 3) I nciting done by means of speeches, and others
authorities of RP, or any military camp or tending to the same end.
furtherance of rebellion.
installation, communication networks, public
nder the political offense doctrine, “common crimes,
U facilities or others needed for the exercise and 139 Sedition
perpetrated in furtherance of a political offense, are continued possession of power.
divested of their character as “common” offenses and ublic and tumultuous uprising employing force,
P
4) Purpose is to seize or diminish state power. intimidation, or other means outside of legal methods.
assume the political complexion of the main crime of
which they are mere ingredients, and, consequently, onspiracy and proposal to commit coup,
C 1) Offenders rise
136
cannotbepunishedseparatelyfromtheprincipaloffense, rebellion or insurrection
a) publicly, and
orcomplexedwiththesame,tojustifytheimpositionofa
1) Conspiracy to commit rebellion; b) tumultuously;
graver penalty.”
2) Proposal to commit rebellion. 2) Employ force, intimidation, and illegal means;
e burden of demonstrating political motivation must
Th
be discharged by the defense, since motive is a state of 137 Disloyalty of public officers or employees 3) Purpose is either to:
mindwhichonlytheaccusedknows.Ifitisshownthatthe
a) P
revent the promulgation or execution of
properchargeagainstpetitionersshouldhavebeensimple 1) Offender is a public officer;
any law or the conduct of elections;
rebellion,thetrialcourtshalldismissthemurdercharges 2) Fails to resist a rebellion;
uponthefilingoftheInformationforsimplerebellion,as b) P
revent the Government, national or local,
3) C
ontinues to discharge official duties under the or any public officer from freely exercising
long as petitioners would not be placed in double
control of the rebels; its or his functions, or prevent the
jeopardy.
4) Accepts appointment under them. execution of an administrative order;
134- 138 Inciting to rebellion c) I nflict hate or revenge upon the person or
Coup d'etat property of any public officer or employee;
A
I nciting to rebel through speeches, proclamations,
d) C
ommit any act of hate or revenge against
1) O
ffender belongs to the military or police or writings, emblems, banners, etc.
private persons or social classes, for any
holding public office or employment;
1) D
oes not take arms or is not in open hostility political or social end;
2) Swift attack withviolence,intimidation,threat, against the Government;
e) Despoil, for any political or social end, the
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page99of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
overnment, national or local of all or any
G 4) Knowingly concealing such evil practices. 145 Violation of parliamentary immunity
part of its property.
Elements Committed by any person
NOTES 1) O
ffender does not take direct part in the crime of 1) O
ffender uses force, intimidation, threats, or
sedition; fraud;
1. S
editionistheraisingofcommotionsordisturbances
in the State. 2) I ncites other to accomplish any of the acts 2) Purpose is to prevent a member of Congress from
2. A
rt 153 defines tumultuousasanactifcommittedby constituting sedition; a) attending any of its meetings;
more than three (3) persons who are armed or 3) I nciting is done through speeches, proclamations, b) expressing his opinions; or
provided with means of violence. writings, emblems, cartoons, banners, etc.
c) casting his vote.
3. A
ct 3 must have been motivated onlybythefactthat cts tending to prevent the meeting of Congress
A
the victim is a public officer, otherwiseitwouldbea 143 Committed by a public officer
and similar bodies
case of malicious mischief or any other ordinary 1) Public officer or employee;
crime. (Regalado) 1) Th
ere be a projected or actual meeting of
2) Arrests or searches a member of Congress;
Congress, its comm., subcomm., constitutional
141 Conspiracy to commit sedition comm. or divisions thereof, or any LG council; 3) Congress is in session;
142 Inciting to sedition 2) Such is prevented by force or fraud. 4) M
ember arrested has not committed a crime
punishable by a penalty higher than PM under the
Acts punished isturbance of proceedings of congress or similar
D Code.
144
bodies
1) I nciting others to sedition through speeches,
146 Illegal assemblies
proclamations, writing, emblems, etc. 1) Th
ere be a projected or actual meeting of
2) U
ttering seditious words or speeches that tend to Congress, its comm., subcomm., constitutional Acts punished with corresponding elements
disturb the public peace; comm. or divisions thereof, or any LG council; 1) A
ny meeting attended by armed persons for the
3) W
riting, publishing, or circulating scurrilous 2) Offender either: purpose of committing a crime under the RPC
libels against the Government or any of its duly a) disturbs such meeting; or a) Th
ere is a meeting, either in a fixed place
constituted authorities, which tend to disturb the or moving;
b) b
ehaves in such an interruptive manner, or
public peace.
to impair the respect due it. b) Attended by armed persons;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page100of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a crime otherthanTRISA,theremustbearmedpersons his agent;
c) P
urpose is to commit a crime under the
RPC; in attendance therein; otherwise, the offense will be c) Offended party
public disorder (Art 153) or unlawful utterances (Art
2) A
ny meeting in which the audience is incited to 154[2]).(Regalado) i) is performing official duties,OR
commit TRISA. ii) t hat he is assaulted, by reason of
148 Direct assaults
a) There is a meeting; the past performance of official
b) Th
e audience, whether armed or not, is Without public uprising: duties;
incited to commitTRISA. 1) b
y employing force or intimidation, for the d) O
ffenderknowsthe offended party as a
NB: Treason, Rebellion or Insurrection, Sedition,or attainment of any of the purpose of rebellion or person in authority or his agent.
Assault upon a person in authority or his agents sedition; e) No public uprising.
(TRISA). a) Offender employs force or intimidation;
NOTES
147 Illegal associations b) Aim is the same as rebellion or sedition;
1. I f the offended party is a mereagent,forceemployed
c) No public uprising.
ounders, directors, presidents, forming or organizing,
F must be of a serious character as to indicate
and members in an association totally or partially 2) b
y attacking, employing force, or by seriously determination to defy the law and its representative
organized for: intimidating or seriously resisting any person in atallhazards.Otherwise,offenseissimpleresistance
authority or any of his agents, while engaged in or disobedience under Art 151.
1) the purpose of committing a crime; or
the performance of official duties, or on the
2) some purpose contrary to public morals 2. F
orce employed need not be serious when offended
occasion of such performance.
party is aperson in authority.
Elements a) Offender
3. Agentof a person in authority is one who,
1) An association is formed or organized; i) attacks,
a. by direct provision of law or
2) Th
e purpose of which is to commit a crime or ii) employs force,
contrary to public morals. b. by election or
iii) makes a serious intimidation,OR
c. by appointment of competent authority,
NOTE iv) serious resistance;
i s charged with the maintenanceofpublicorderand
Iftheassemblywascalledforthepurposeofcommitting b) Person assaulted is a person in authority or the protection and security of life and property.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page101of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
4. K
nowledge of the accused that offended party is a 2) A person comes to the aid of the offended party; 5) I nducing disobedience to a summons or refusal to
person in authority or his agent, essential andmust 3) O
ffender makes use of force or intimidation upon
be sworn.
be alleged in the information. him. Elements
Gelig v. People2010 1) A
person has been duly summoned by Congress or
NOTES the Constitutional Commissions;
TC convicted Lydia Gelig for committing the complex
R
1. Important points from Regalado: 2) Commits any of the acts punishable.
crime of direct assault with unintentionalabortion.On
the day of the commission of the assault, Gemma was a) V
ictimofDAisPIA,attackagainstpersoncoming
151 Resistance and serious disobedience
engagedintheperformanceofherofficialduties,thatis, to his aid will be Direct Assault, Resistance or
she was busy with paperwork while supervising and disobedience dependingonthedegreeofforceor 1) A
person in authority or his agent is engaged in
lookingaftertheneedsofpupils.Lydiawasalreadyangry violence against him. the performance of official duty or gives a lawful
when she entered the classroom and accusedGemmaof b) V
ictim of DA is Agent, attack against person order to the offender;
callinghersona"sissy".Gemmathenproceededtowards coming to his aid will be Indirect Assault; 2) Resists or seriously disobeys;
the principal's office but Lydia followed and resorted to resistance or disobedience will only be physical
the use of force by slapping and pushing her against a 3) A
ct of the offender not included in Arts 148, 149,
injuries or coercion dependingontheactagainst
wall divider. The violent act resulted in Gemma's fall to 150.
him.
the floor.
151 Simple disobedience
150 Disobedience to summons issued by Congress
emma, being a public school teacher, belongs to the
G
class of persons in authority expressly mentioned in 1) A
n agent of a person in authority is engaged in the
Refusing:
Article 152 of the RPC. performance of official duty or gives a lawful order
1) W
ithout legal excuse, to obey summons of to the offender;
149 Indirect assaults Congress or any part thereof, or the
2) Offender disobeys;
Constitutional Commissions, or any part thereof;
sing force or intimidation upon any person aiding a
U 3) Disobedience not serious.
2) To be sworn or placed under affirmation;
person in authority or his agent under direct assault.
3) T
o answer any legal inquiry or to produce any 153 Tumults and other disturbances of public
documents in his possession, when so required; or order
1) A
person in authority or his agent is a victim of
Direct Assault; 4) Restraining another from attending as a witness; 1) Causing any serious disturbance in a public place,
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page102of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
office, establishment; c onstituted authorities or by praising, justifying 156 Delivering prisoners from jails
2) I nterrupting or disturbing performances, or extolling any act punished by law;
Acts punished
functions, gatherings, peaceful meetings, if the 3) M
aliciously publishing or causing to be published
act is not included in Arts 131 and 132; any official resolution or document without 1) Removal of a person from jail;
3) M
aking an outcry tending to incite rebellion or proper authority, or before they have been 2) Assists in the escape of a prisoner.
sedition in any gathering; officially published.
Elements
4) D
isplaying placards or emblems which provoke 4) P
rinting, publishing or distributing (or causing
1) There is a person confined in a jail;
disturbance; the same) books, pamphlets, periodicals, or
leaflets which do not bear the real printer's name, 2) O
ffender removes therefrom such person, or helps
5) B
urying with pomp the body of a legally executed or which are classified as anonymous. him escape.
person.
155 Alarms and scandals NOTES
ualified: If the disturbance or interruption is
Q
tumultuous. 1) D
ischarging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or 1. Separate and distinct from Bribery:
➔ M
ay commit a separate crime, i.e. serious physical other explosive, within any town or public place, a) B
riber - Art 156 + Art 212, corruption of a public
injuries. calculated to cause (which produces) alarm or officer;
danger;
➔ M
ay also be complexed, i.e. assault and b) J ailer, if public officer - Art 223, infidelity in the
tumultuous disturbance. 2) I nstigating or taking an active par in any charivari custody of prisoners + Art 210, bribery;
or other disorderly meeting offensive to another
nlawful use of means of
U i fprivateperson-Art225,nextlowerthatArt223
or prejudicial to public tranquility;
+ Art 210;
154 publication and unlawful
3) D
isturbing the public peace while wandering
utterances c) P
risoner, if convict - Not liable in Art156,butin
about at night or while engaged in any other
Art 157;
1) P
ublishing or causing to be published as news any nocturnal amusements;
i f detention - no liability, but if convicted, shall
false news which may endanger the public order, 4) C
ausing any disturbance or scandal in public
not avail of ISLAW.
or cause damage to the interest or credit of the places while intoxicated or otherwise, provided
State. Art 153 is not applicable. 157 Evasion of service of sentence
2) Encouraging disobedience to the law or to the
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page103of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Escape of a prisoner by final judgment from jail. onvict by final judgment commits a new felony
C
punishable by the RPC before beginning to serve or while Counterfeiting or Mutilating coins
1) Offender is a convict by final judgment;
serving a sentence. 163 Making, importing and uttering false coins.
2) H
e is serving sentence consisting of deprivation of
1) Offender is a convict by final judgment;
liberty; 1) There befalseorcounterfeitedcoins;
3) He escapes. 2) C
ommitted a new felony before beginning to serve
2) O
ffender eithermade, imported, or utteredsuch
such sentence, or while serving the same.
coins;
159 Violation of conditional pardon
3) I ncase of uttering, heconnivedwith the
onditionally pardoned convict violates any of the
C Crimes Against Public Interest
D counterfeiters or importers.
conditions set forth in the pardon. Title Four
utilation of coins, importation and uttering of
M
1) Offender was a convict; 164
161 Counterfeiting or forging mutilated coins
2) Granted conditional pardon by Chief Executive;
Forging the: 1) Mutilatingcoins withintent to damageor defraud.
3) Violated any of the conditions of the pardon.
1) Great Sealof the Government of the PH; 2) I mportingorutteringsuch mutilated coins with
NOTES RE EVASION connivancewith the mutilator or importer.
2) signatureof the President;
1. Art 157, Qualified: 3) stampof the President. 165 S
elling of false or mutilated coins, without
1) means of unlawful entry; connivance
162 U
sing forged signature or counterfeit seal or
2) b reaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs, or stamp Acts punished with corresponding elements
floors; 1) P
ossession of coin, counterfeited or mutilated by
1) G
reat Seal of the Republic was counterfeited or the
3) u sing picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit, another
signature or stamp of the Chief Executive was
violence or intimidation; or a) Possession
forged by another person;
4) c onnivance with other convicts or employees of b) With intent to utter
2) Offender knew of the counterfeiting or forgery;
the penal institution.
3) H
e used the counterfeit seal or forged signature or c) Knowledge.
160 Quasi-recidivism stamp. 2) Actually uttering
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page104of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a) Actually uttering 1) A
ny treasury or bank note or certificate or other
obligation and securitypayable to bearer, or any Falsification
b) Knowledge. instrumentpayable to orderor other document of 170 Falsification of legislative documents
creditnot payable to beareris forged or falsifiedby
False Treasury or Bank notes 1) Th
ere be abill, resolution, or ordinanceof any
another person.
orging treasury or bank notes or other
F stage and of any legislative body;
2) Knowledge;
documents payable to bearer, importing, and 2) Offenderalters;
166 3) Performsany of these acts:
uttering of such false or forged notes and
3) He hasno proper authority;
documents a) U
sing any such forged or falsified instruments;
or 4) Alterationhas changed the meaning.
1) F
orgingorfalsificationof treasury or bank notes
or other documents payable to bearer; b) Possessing with intent to use. alsification by public officer, employee or notary
F
171
or ecclesiastical minister
2) Importation; 169 How forgery is committed
3) U
tteringin connivance with the forgers or ny public officer, employee, or notary, or ecclesiastical
A
1) G
iving to a treasury or bank note or any
importers. minister, who takes advantage of his official position.
instrument payable to bearer or to order
mentioned therein the appearance of a true and Acts punished with corresponding elements
ounterfeiting, importing and uttering
C
167 genuine document.
instruments not payable to bearer 1) C
ounterfeiting or imitating anyhandwriting,
e .g.Writing the word "Victory" in ink at the back signature or rubric.
1) Th
ere be an instrument payable to order or other
of the one-peso bill which accused gave as Two ways:
documentnot payableto bearer;
payment. (PP v Galano).
2) O
ffender eitherforged, imported or utteredsuch 1) Counterfeiting,requisites are:
2) Erasing,Substituting,Counterfeiting, orAltering
instrument; a) intent or attempt to imitate,
y any means the figures, letters, words, or sign
b
3) I n case of uttering, heconnivedwith the forger or contained therein. b) g
enuine and forgedbear some
importer. resemblance;and
e .g.A wrote B's name on the back of said treasury
I llegal possession and use of forged treasury or warrant as if B had indorsed it, and then 2) F
eigningwhich is simulating something
168 that does not exist.
bank notes and other instruments of credit presented it for payment. (US v. Solito)
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page105of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
aking it appear that a person who does
M ➔ P
erson making the narration of facts must ➔ I ncluding in a copy a statement contrary to, or
not know how to write has signed the have knowledge of its falsity. different from that of the genuine original—
document is feigning. 5) Alteringtrue dates Civil registrar stating that a person is
legitimate contrary to that stated in the
2) C
ausing it to appearthat persons have ➔ Date must be essential.
participated in any act or proceeding. original.
➔ M
ust affect either the veracity or the
a) C
ausing it to appear that a person alsification by private individuals and use of
F
effects of the document. 172
participated in an act; and falsified documents
➔ A
ltering dates in official receipts to prevent
b) Such person did not in fact participate. discovery of malversation is falsification. Acts punished with corresponding elements
3) A
ttributingto persons who have participated in 6) M
aking anyalterationorintercalationin a 1) F
alsification ofpublic,officialorcommercial
an act or proceeding statements other than those genuine document which changes its meaning. documents.
in fact made by them.
a) There be an alteration or intercalation; a) O
ffender is private individual or public
a) A person participated in an act; officer who did not take advantage of his
b) Made on a genuine document;
b) He made statements in that act; and official position;
c) Meaning of document has changed; and
c) S
tatements other than those made by such b) Committed any acts in Art 171;
person were attributed to him. d) C
hange made the document speak
c) F
alsification committed in public, official,
something false.
4) M
akinguntruthful statementsin a narration of or commercial documents.
facts. 7) I ssuing in authenticated form a document
2) Falsification ofprivatedocuments.
purporting to be a copy of an inexistent
a) I n a document, there be a narration of a) O
ffender committed act in Art 171 except
document.
facts; par 7;
➔ P
urporting to be a copy of an inexistent
b) O
ffender has legal obligation to disclose b) Committed in any private document;
document— Making a copy of a deed of sale
the truth; which was never executed; c) C
aused orwith intentto cause damage to
c) Facts are absolutely false; 8) I ntercalating any instrument or note relative to a third party.
d) Wrongful intent of injuring a third person. the issuance thereof in a protocol, registry or 3) Useof falsified documents.
official book.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page106of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
in a judicial proceeding 1) Usurpation of authority 1) Civilcase;
k nowingly and falsely representing oneself to be 2) Testimony is relevant, and
a) Knowledge;
an officer, agent, rep of the PH or any foreign gov't 3) False;
b) F
alse document embraced in Art 171 or 172
pars 1-2; 2) Usurpation of official functions 4) Knows of falsity;
c) I ntroduced in evidence in any judicial erforming any act pertaining to any person in
p 5) M
alicious with intent to affect the issues
proceeding. authority, under pretense of official position, and presented.
without being lawfully entitled to.
in any other transaction 183 False testimony in other cases and perjury
d) Used such document; False testimony
Acts punished
e) Caused or with intent to cause damage. 180 False testimony against a defendant
1) Falsely testifyingunder oath; and
alse medical certificates, false certificates of
F 1) There be acriminalproceeding;
174 2) Making afalse affidavit.
merit or service 2) O
ffender testifies falsely under oathagainst
Elements
defendant;
Punishable act committed by offender 1) M
ade statement under oath, or executed an
3) Knows of falsity;
1) Physicianfalsifiesmedical certificate, affidavit upon amaterial matter;
4) D
efendant is either acquitted or convicted by final
2) P
ublic Officerfalsifiescertificate of merit or 2) S
uch was made before acompetent officer,
judgment.
service, good conduct, etc, authorized to receive and administer oath;
3) Private personfalsifieseither. 181 False testimony favorable to the defendant 3) Willful and deliberate assertion of falsehood;
175 Using false certificates 1) There be acriminalproceeding; 4) Statement or affidavitrequired by law.
2) O
ffender testifies falsely under oathwith intentto 184 Offering false testimony in evidence
1) Art 174 has been committed;
favordefendant;
2) Offender knew of the falsity; 1) Offered in evidence a false witness or testimony;
3) Knows of falsity;
3) He used the same.
2) Knows of falsity;
182 False testimony in civil cases
177 Usurpation 3) Made in a judicial or official proceeding.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page107of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
ereisauthoritytotheeffectthatafourthrequisite,i.e.,
Th
b) To refrain bidders from taking part.
NOTES RE FALSE TESTIMONY thattheactoffalsificationwascommittedtothedamage
2) Attempting bidders to stay away ofathirdpartyorwithintenttocausesuchdamage,may
1. M
aterialmatteristhemainfactwhichisthesubjectof
theinquiryoranycircumstancewhichtendstoprove a) Attempted to cause bidders to stay away; be dispensed with as regards falsification of public or
that fact, or any fact orcircumstancewhichtendsto official documents. In the prosecution of cases involving
b) B
y threats, gifts, promises or other
corroborate or strengthen the testimony, or which falsification of daily time records, it is imperative that
artifice.
legitimately affects the credit of any witness who there be proof of damage to the government. Such
damage may take the form of salary paid to the accused
testifies. Common bid manipulation practices:
for services not rendered.
2. S
ubornation of perjury is committed by procuring 1. B
id cover happens when a competitor submits a
another to swear falsely. bid that is either
3. O
ffer of testimonial evidence, begins the moment a a) higher than that of the designated winner, epoco v. People2017
T
witnessiscalledtothewitnessstandandinterrogated reFalsification of public documents
b) too high to be accepted, or
by counsel. rongful intent on the part of the accused to injure a
W
c) c ontains special terms that are known to be
4. I fthefalsewitnessdesists,heisnotliable.Theofferor third person is NOT an essential elementofthecrimeof
unacceptable by the purchaser.
however is liable for attempted offering false falsification of public document.
testimony in evidence. 2. B
id suppression happens when a company does
not submit a bid for final consideration.
185 Machinations in public auctions
3. Bid rotation,takes turns winning bids. Malabanan v. Sandiganbayan2017
Common elements 4. M
arket allocation, agree not to compete for ffendersareconsideredtohavetakenadvantageoftheir
O
1) There be public auction; certain customers or in certain areas. official position in falsifying a document if
2) Intent to cause reduction of price as been repealed byRA 10667 or the Philippine
H 1) t heyhadthedutytomakeorprepareorotherwise
186
Acts punished with additional elements Competition Act intervene in the preparation of the document; or
1) Soliciting any gift or promise 2) they had official custody of the falsified document
a) Solicited gift or promise; Layug v. Sandiganbayan I n cases of falsification, we have interpreted that the
criminal intent to pervert the truth is lacking in cases
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page108of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
showing that t he session.Partisala'sparticipationinthefalsificationof e stablishedbytheprosecution.Theoffenderisconsidered
1) t he accused did not benefit fromthefalsification; the minutes cannot be denied, as he himself persuaded to have taken advantage of his or her official position in
and Trojillo to sign it to make it appear that there are two making the falsification when
resolutions justifying the MOA entered intobyMondejar
a. h
e or she has the duty to make or prepare or,
2) n odamagewascausedeithertothegovernmentor with IBC. otherwise, to intervene in the preparation of a
to a third person.
document; or
People v. Palma Gil-Roflo2022 b. h
e or shehastheofficialcustodyofthedocument
People v. Partisala2022 which he falsifies.
ccused-appellants are NOT guilty of violating Section 3
A
artisala was a public officer, being the Vice-Mayor of
P riminal intent is required in order to incur criminal
C
(e) of RA 3019 and Article 171 (4) of the RPC.
Maasin, Iloilo City, at the time material to the case. liabilityunderArticle171oftheRPC.Here,theelementof
orgery was not substantiated by clear, positive and
F malicious intent is sorely wanting. Accused-appellants
e took advantage of his official position as the vice
H convincing evidence. Accused-appellants were able to cannot be held criminally culpable for Falsification of
mayor, together with his co-accused, to falsify the adducesufficientevidencetoprovethattheytrulyworked Public Documents by making untruthful statements ina
Minutes oftheSBbymakingorpreparingorintervening in the satellite office of Roflo in Davao City. narration of facts in the absence of a clear showing that
in the preparation thereof, to makeitappearthattheSB
ere, Fidela, the private secretary of Palma-Gil,
H they acted with malicious intent when they affixed their
deliberated on the issuance of Resolution Nos. 30-A and
categorically declared under oath that the signatures signatures onthecontesteddocuments.Theywereacting
30-B giving Mondejar the authority to enter into a
thereonwerenotforgeriesasshewasphysicallypresentat in good faith and in the honest belief that they were
contract with IBC with respect to the rechanneling of
thetimeofsigningofthecontractsofservices,DTRsand permitted to work outside the agency's prescribed office
Tigum River.
ARs. Juxtaposed with the comparison made by the hours pursuant to CSC Resolution No. 020790, and as
alsification of Public Document is committed when the
F Sandiganbayan of the subject signatures, which is confirmedbytheHRDepartment.Theycannotbefaulted
publicdocumentissimulatedinamannersoastogiveit considered only as circumstantial evidence, Fidela's for indicating in their DTRs that they worked from 8:00
the appearance of a true and genuine instrument, thus, testimony constitutes direct evidence as to the a.m. to 5:00 p.m. because this was the directive of the
leading others to errors as to its authenticity. genuineness of the subject signatures on the subject accounting office, otherwise, their salaries would not be
e refusal of Trojillo and Albacete to sign the falsified
Th documents. The plain comparison of the questioned processed.
minutes prepared by Tolentino to legitimize the MOA signatures made by the Sandiganbayan cannot prevail
entered into by Mondejar, sufficiently proved that the over the direct evidence of Fidela.
minutesdidnotreflectthetrueandactualproceedingsof Falsification of a public document was not sufficiently
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page109of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
E Crimes Against Public Morals
roscribedunderthelanguageofOrdinanceNo.7780.As
p
iv) tend to abet us of prohibited drugs; and
Title Six part of their defense, petitioners can probably argue for
v) a re contrary to law, public order, morals, the adoption of the Miller standards, which requires the
good customs, established policies, lawful trier of fact to ascertain:
200 Grave scandal orders, decrees and edicts;
a) w
hether "the average person, applying
1) Act is performed; 3) Sell, give away, or exhibitoffensive displays. contemporary community standards" would find
2) S
uch behighly scandalousasoffendingagainst that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the
decencyorgood customs; Leus v. St. Scholastica’s College Westgrove2015 prurient interest;
3) Not under any other article; e determination of whetheraconductisdisgracefulor
Th b) w
hether the work depicts or describes, in a
immoralinvolvesatwo-stepprocess:first,aconsideration patently offensive way, sexual conductspecifically
4) D
one in a public place or within public knowledge
of the totality of the circumstances surrounding the defined by the applicable state law; and
or view.
conduct; and second, an assessment of the said
c) w
hether the work, taken as awhole,lacksserious
I mmoral doctrines, obscene publications and circumstances vis-à-vis the prevailing norms ofconduct,
literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
201 exhibitions i.e., what the society generally considers moral and
(as amended by PD 969) respectable.
e morality referred to in the law is public and
Th rimes Committed by Public
C
1) P
ublicly proclaimdoctrines openly contrary to
public morals;
necessarily secular, not religious. Officers
F
Title Seven
2) a .Authors or publishers of, or ownersof
establishment selling obscene literature; Madrilejos v. Gatdula2019En Banc Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
.Exhibit indecent or immoral plays, scenes,
b rdinance No. 7780 is a local legislation which
O Anti-Plunder Act
acts, or shows which: criminalizes obscenity.Obscenity is unprotected speech.
i) glorify criminals or condone crimes; nder the circumstances, the proper recourse for
U Who are public officers
ii) s erves no other purpose but to satisfy petitionerswouldhavebeentogototrialtoallowtheRTC, 1) T
aking part in the performance of public functions in
market for violence, lust or pornography; as the trier of fact, to judicially determine whether the the Government, or
materials complained of as obscene were indeed
iii) offend any race or religion;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page110of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
erforming in said Government public duties as an
P 4) Due toinexcusable negligenceor ignorance. 3) W
ithmalice and deliberate intent to favor
employee, agent or subordinate official, ofanyrank violator of law.
or class; 206 Rendering unjust interlocutory order
etrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor —
B
2) His authority must be by 1) Offender is ajudge; 209
revelation of secrets
a) direct provision of law; 2) ( a) knowingly renders unjust interlocutory order;
or 1) Causing damage to his client,by
b) popular election; or
( b) Rendersmanifestly unjustone through a) a ny malicious breach of professional duty,
c) appointment by competent authority.
inexcusable negligence or ignorance. or
or purposes of RPC, there is no distinction between a
F
b) inexcusable negligence or ignorance;
publicofficerandapublicemployee.Whatisdeterminative 207 Malicious delay in the administration of justice
is not the nature of appointment but of the duties he 2) R
evealing secretshe has learned from his client in
performs. 1) Offender is ajudge; his professional capacity, to which damage is not
2) There is a proceeding in his court; necessary;
Crimes Committed by Judges
3) Delays administration of justice; 3) U
ndertaking the defense of the opposing partyin
204 Knowingly rendering unjust judgment the same casewithout consentfrom the first one,
4) I t ismalicious,with intent to cause damage to
after having undertaken the defense or received
1) Offender is ajudge; either.
confidential information from said client.
2) Renders judgment; 208 Dereliction of duty in prosecution of offenses
210 Direct bribery
3) Such isunjust;
Officer of the law who maliciously
4) Knows it is unjust. Acts punished
1) Refrainsprosecution; or
1) Agree to perform, or perform a criminal act;
205 Rendering judgment through negligence 2) Toleratesoffenses.
2) A
ccepting a giftin consideration ofexecuting an
1) Offender is ajudge; Elements unjust actthat is not criminal;
2) Renders judgment; 1) Offender is a public officer or officer of the law; 3) A
gree to refrain, or refrain from doing an official
3) Such ismanifestly unjust; 2) There is dereliction of duty; duty.
Common Elements
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page111of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
1) Offender is a public officer; or
NOTE 2) F
ailing voluntarilyto issue a receipt, as
2) A
ccepts an offer or a promise, or receives gift
personally or through third person; I f offer is not accepted by public officer, only offeror provided by law, for any sum of money
criminally liable for attempted corruption of public collected by him officially;or
3) Does the act; officerin relation to Art 6. 3) C
ollecting or receivingby way of payment
4) A
greed act in connection with the performance of or otherwise, things or objects of a nature
official duties. Frauds
different from that provided by law.
213 Frauds against the public treasury
211 Indirect bribery
NOTE
1) Offender is apublic officer;
1) Offender a public officer;
tax collector who collects a sum larger than that
A
2) Intervenedin his official capacity;
2) Accepts gift; authorized and spends it is guilty of two crimes:
3) E
ntered into anagreementwith an interested Malversation, and Illegal Exaction.
3) By reason of his office.
party or speculator with regards to
ere must be clear intention on the part of the public
Th 214 Other frauds
a) furnishing supplies,
officer to take the gift and consider it as his from then on.
b) making of contracts,OR 1) Offender is a public officer;
211 A Qualified bribery 2) Takes advantage of official position;
c) t he adjustment or settlement of accounts
1) Public officer entrusted with law enforcement; relating to public property or funds; 3) C
ommits any of the frauds or deceits inArts
4) Intent to defraudthe Government. 315-318.
2) R
efrains from arresting or prosecuting offender
punishable by RP and/or Death; a) estafa,
Illegal Exactions
3) In consideration of any promise, gift. b) other forms of swindling,
a) P
ublic officerentrustedwith the collection of taxes,
c) windling a minor,OR
212 Corruption of public officials licenses, fees and other imposts;
d) other deceits.
1) Offers or promises or gives gifts to public officer; b) Acts or omissions:
TC has jurisdiction when this article is involvedbecause
R
2) W
ill make the public officer liable for Direct or 1) D
emandingthe payment of sumsdifferent
MTCs have no jurisdiction to impose the penalty of DQ.
Indirect bribery. from or largerthan those authorized by law;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page112of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
215 Prohibited transactions 4) H
e appropriated, took, misappropriated o r 2) Accountable for public funds or property;
1) Offender is anappointivePO. consented or, through abandonment or 3) R
equired by law or regulations to render accounts
negligence, permitted another to take them. to COA, or to a provincial auditor;
2) B
ecomes interested, directly or indirectly, in any
transaction of exchange or speculation; 4) F
ails to do sotwo monthsafter such accounts
NOTES
3) T
ransaction takes place within the territory should be rendered.
1. I f a subordinate PO, whose only responsibility is
subject to his jurisdiction; emandforaccountingnotnecessary,aslongasthereis
D
towards his superior, who is in turn accountable to
4) Becomes interested duringincumbency. the government, takes or misappropriates public a law requiring same. Misappropriation also not
funds or property, the crime is theft, not necessary.
Malversation malversation (Webster and Wickershamcases). People v. Suba2021
217 Malversation of public funds or property 2. B
utwherethePOhadtheauthoritytoreceivemoney
ere, all elements have been duly proven by the
H
due to the Government, notwithstanding he had no
Acts punished prosecution.
authority to disburse the same, is liable for
1) Appropriatingpublic funds or property. malversationwhen he misappropriated it. F irst, it is an undisputed factthataccused-appellantisa
public officer, being the Treasurer/Vice President for
2) Taking or misappropriatingthe same. 3. I n malversation not committed through negligence,
Operations of the Philippine Aerospace Development
3) C onsenting, or by abandonment or negligence, lack of criminal intent, good faith is a defense.
Corporation, a GOCC under the supervision of thethen
permittingany other person to take same. 4. C
onviction may be had even if there is no direct DoTC.
4) B eingotherwiseguiltyofthemisappropriationor evidenceofmisappropriationbecausetheshortagein
econd, he isalsoanaccountableofficerforpublicfunds
S
malversation of same. account that has not been able to be satisfactorily
orproperty.AsidefromthefactthatheistheTreasurerof
explainedisprima facie evidence.
Elements the PADC, he also received public funds through a cash
5. Th
ereturnofthefundsmalversedisonlyamitigating advance for their conference in Beijing, China.
1) Offender is apublic officer;
circumstance similar and analogous to voluntary
n accountable officer wasdefinedasapublicofficeror
A
2) H adthecustodyorcontroloffundsorpropertyby surrender (Art 13 par 7 in rel to par 10).
employee who, in the discharge of his office, receives
reason of his office;
218 Failure of accountable officer to render accounts money from the government which he is bound tolater
3) Th
osewerepublicfundsorpropertyforwhichhe account for.
wasaccountable; 1) Public officer, in the service or separated;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page113of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
is return to the Philippines before he submitted his
h a particular purpose.
I n the case of Manlangit v. Sandiganbayan, petitioner, as
the OIC of the Information, Education and liquidationreport,andonlyaftertheCOAhasissuedhim 2. C
riminal intent is not an element. The offense is a
CommunicationofthePinatuboCommission,anagency a Notice of Suspension. Therefore, evidence on record mala prohibita.
attachedtotheOfficeofthePresident,wasconsideredan duly establishes that the accused-appellant committed
nonfeasance in violation ofArticle 218of the RPC. Technical Malversation and Malversation distinguished:
accountableofficerwhenhereceivedpublicfundsforthe
celebrationoftheanniversaryofthecommission.Hewas 1) In both, offenders are public officers;
ailure of a responsible public officer to render
F
held liable for violation of Article 218 of the RPC forhis 219 2) I n first,nopersonalgainorprofit;insecond,there
accounts before leaving the country
failure to liquidate. Likewise, in the case of Lumauig v. is profit in certain cases;
People, Aloysius Diat Lumauig, who was then the 1) Public officer;
3) I n first, the fund is appliedtoanotherpublicuse;
Municipal Mayor of Alfonso Lista, Ifugao, was found 2) Accountablefor public funds or property; in second, it is for thepersonaluseandbenefitof
guiltyofviolatingArticle218oftheRPCwhenhefailedto
3) U
nlawfully left(or be on the point of leaving) PH offender or another.
liquidate his cash advance which was used to purchase
without securing from COA a certificate showing
vehicles for the municipality. 221 ailure to make delivery of public funds or
F
that his accounts have been fully settled.
property
s with the cases of Manlangit and Lumauig,
A
accused-appellant received public funds pursuant tothe I llegal use of public funds or property or
220 Acts punished
Request for Cash Advance he submitted to their Technical Malversation
1) Failing to make payment;
Accounting Division. He wasapublicofficerwho,inthe
1) Public officer;
discharge of his duties, received money from the 2) R
efusing to make delivery after being ordered by
government which he is bound to later account for. 2) Th
ere is public fund or property under his competent authority;
administration.
ird, EO 29853 and COA Circular No. 96-004 explicitly
Th Elements
require government officials who requested for cash 3) Such has been appropriated by law or ordinance;
1) P
ublic officer has Government funds in his
advancesfortheirofficiallocalorforeigntraveltosubmit 4) A
pplies the same to a public use other than that possession;
a liquidation report within a period specified by law. for which it has been appropriated.
2) Obliged to make payment from such;
nowing fully well that he has the duty to render an
K
accounting for his cash advance, he should have NOTES 3) Fails to paymaliciously.
submitted his liquidation report despite the absence of 1. N
o technical malversation if there is no law or Infidelities
the travel authority. It took him almost 10monthsfrom ordinanceappropriatingpublicfundsorpropertyfor
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page114of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
223 Conniving with or consenting to evasion his official capacity. 231 Open disobedience
1) Offender is a public officer; a) Offender is apublic officer; 1) Offender is ajudicial or executive officer;
2) Had custody of prisoner; b) Knows a secret through official capacity; 2) There is a judgment, decision or order of a superior;
3) Such prisoner escaped; c) R
eveals without authority or justifiable 3) S
uch was made within scope of jurisdiction and
4) There was connivance. ⭐ reasons; legally issued;
d) Damage be caused to public interest. 4) O
ffender openly refuses to execute without any
224 Evasion through negligence
2) W
rongfully delivers papers or copies, of which he legal justification.
1) Offender is public officer; may have charge and which should not be
235 Maltreatment of prisoners
published.
2) C
harged with the conveyance or custody of a
a) Offender is apublic officer; 1) Offender is apublic officer;
prisoner;
3) Such prisoner escapes through negligence. b) Has charge of papers; 2) In charge of a prisoner;
c) Should not be published; 3) Maltreatssuch either:
scape of prisoner under the custody of a person
E
225 a) byOverdoingcorrection or handling either by
not a public officer d) Delivers to third persons;
e) Wrongful delivery; i) i mposing punishments not authorized by
1) Offender is aprivateperson;
regulations,OR
2) C
onveyance or custody of a prisoner or a person f) Damage be caused to public interest.
ii) i nflicting punishments in a cruel and
under arrest isconfidedto him; 230 Public officer revealing secrets of private individual humiliating manner;OR
3) Prisoner or person under arrest escapes;
1) Offender is apublic officer; b) t oextort a confession or to obtain some
4) There was either consent or negligence. information.
2) K
nows of secrets of a private person by reason of his
office; 239 Usurpation of legislative powers
229 Revelation of secrets by an officer
3) R
eveals same without authority or unjustifiable
1) Offender is ajudicial or executive officer;
Acts punished with corresponding elements reasons.
2) Offender
1) Reveals any secrets known to offender by reason of
Other Offenses or Irregularities
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page115of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a) m
akes general rules or regulations beyond woman; emand by any duly authorized officer, the failure of a
d
the scope of his authority, or 3) Such woman must be: publicofficertohavedulyforthcominganypublicfundsor
property–withwhichsaidofficerisaccountable–should
b) attempts to repeal a law, or a) i nterested in matters pending before the beprimafacieevidencethathehadputsuchmissingfunds
c) suspends the execution thereof. offender; or properties topersonaluse.Whenthesecircumstances
b) u
nder the custody of the offender who is a are present, a “presumption oflaw”arisesthattherewas
240 Usurpation of executive functions malversation of public funds or properties.
warden or of similar position and duty;
1) Offender is ajudge; c) t he wife, daughter, sister, or relative within
2) Offender the same degree of affinity of the person in
the custody of offender. Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
a) a ssumes a power pertaining to executive
1 R.A. No. 3019, Secs. 2-6, 9 and 11, as amended by
authorities, or .A. No. 3047; P.D. No. 677; P.D. No. 1288; B.P. Blg.
R
Lumauig v. People2014
b) o bstructs the executive in the lawful exercise 195; R.A. No. 10910
priornoticeordemandforliquidationofcashadvances
A
of their powers.
is not a condition sine qua non before an accountable Definition of Terms
241 Usurpation of judicial functions public officer may be held liable under Article 218.
a) P
ublic officer include elective and appointive
1) Offender is anexecutive officer; officials and employees, permanent or temporary,
Legrama v. Sandiganbayan2012 whether in the classified or unclassified or exempt
2) Offender
servicereceivingcompensation,evennominal,from
a) assumes judicial powers, or ere absence of funds is not sufficient proof of
M
the government.
conversion;neitheristhemerefailureofthepublicofficer
b) o bstructs the execution of any order or b) Receiving any giftincludes
toturnoverthefundsatanygiventimesufficienttomake
decision rendered by any judge within his
even the prima facie case. In fine, conversion must be i) t he act of accepting directly or indirectly a
jurisdiction.
proved.However,anaccountableofficermaybeconvicted gift
245 Abuses against chastity of malversation even in the absence of direct proof of
ii) f rom a person other than a member of the
misappropriationsolongasthereisevidenceofshortage
1) Offender isapublic officer; public officer's immediate family,
in his account which he is unable to explain.
2) Solicits or makesimmoral or indecent advancestoa UnderArticle217,apresumptionwasinstalledthatupon
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page116of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
iii) i n behalfofhimselforofanymemberofhis overnment, or giving any private party
G
1. that the accused is apublic officer;
family or relative within the fourth civil unwarranted advantage in the discharge of the
degree, either by consanguinity or affinity, official functions, with manifest partiality, 2. t hat he entered into a contract or
evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence. transaction on behalf of the government;
iv) e ven on the occasion of afamilycelebration and
or national festivity like Christmas, Elements
3. t hatsuchcontractortransactionisgrossly
v) i f the value of the gift is under the 1. t hat the accused must be a public officer and manifestly disadvantageous to the
circumstancesmanifestly excessive. discharging administrative, judicial, or
government.
official functions, or a private individual
Corrupt Practices of Public Officers acting in conspiracy with such public h) D
irectlyorindirectlyhavingpecuniaryinterestin
officers; any business in connection with which he
a) P ersuading, inducing or influencing another intervenes, or he is prohibited.
2. t hat he acted with manifest partiality,
public officer to violate rules and regulations; Elements
evident bad faith, or inexcusable
b) D irectly or indirectly requestingorreceivingany negligence; and 1. that the accused is a public officer;
gift for himself or another in connection with a
3. t hat hisactioncausedanyundueinjuryto 2. h
e has a direct or indirect financial or
contract or transaction between Gov't and any
any party, including the government, or pecuniary interest in any business,
other party.
giving any private party unwarranted contract, or transaction;
c) D irectly or indirectly requestingorreceivingany benefits, advantage, or preference in the
3. he either:
gift for himself or another in consideration for discharge of his functions.
securing or having secured any Government a) i ntervenes or takes part in his
f) N
eglecting or refusing, after due demand or
permit or license. official capacityinconnectionwith
request, without sufficient justification, to act
such interest, OR
d) A ccepting or having any member of his family within a reasonable timeonanymatterpending
accept employment in aprivateenterprise before him. b) i s prohibited from having such
interest by the Constitution or by
1) w ithin one year after termination of g) E
ntering, on behalf of the Government, intoany
law.
official business therewith,OR contract or transaction manifestly and
disadvantageous to the same. i) D
irectly or indirectly becoming interested, for
2) which he has pending official business.
personal gain, or having material interest in any
e) Causing anyundueinjurytoanyparty,including Elements
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page117of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a ct requiring the approval of a board, panel or e word "c lose personal relation" shallincludeclose
Th 2. n
or to any transaction, contract or
group of which he is a member. personal friendship, social and fraternal application already existing or pending at
j) K nowingly approving permits to unqualified or connections, and professional employment all the time of such assumption of public office,
not legally entitled persons. ivingrisetointimacywhichassuresfreeaccessto
g 3. n
or to any application filed by him the
such public officer. approvalofwhichisnotdiscretionaryonthe
k) D ivulging valuable, confidential i nfo t o
unauthorized persons, or releasing same in b) I t shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to part of the officialorofficialsconcernedbut
advance. induce orcauseanypublicofficialtocommitanyof depends upon compliance with requisites
the offenses. provided by law, or rules or regulations
issued pursuant to law,
Prohibition on Private Individuals
Prohibition on Certain Relatives 4. n
or to any act lawfully performed in an
a) It shall be unlawful for any person
a) I tshallbeunlawfulforthespouseorforanyrelative, official capacity or in the exercise of a
i) avingfamilyorclosepersonalrelationwith
h by consanguinity or affinity, within the third civil profession.
any public official degree, of the
Exceptions
ii) t o capitalize or exploitortakeadvantageof i) President,
such family or close personal relation Unsolicited gifts or
ii) the Vice-President,
iii) y directly or indirectly r equesting o r
b 1) presents of small or insignificant value
iii) the President of the Senate, or
receiving any present, gift or material or
2) o ffered or given as a mere ordinary token of
pecuniary advantage iv) the Speaker of the House of Representatives,
gratitude or friendship
iv) f rom any other person having some t o intervene, directly or indirectly, in anybusiness,
3) according to local customs or usage.
business, transaction, application, request transaction, contract or application with the
or contract with the government, Government:
NOTES
v) in which such public official has to intervene. rovided, That this shall NOT apply to any person
P
1. P
rivate individuals. Capitalizing or exploiting such
who, prior to the assumptionofofficeofanyofthe
Family relationshallincludethespouseorrelatives relation by directly or indirectly requesting or
above officials, has been already dealing with the
by consanguinity or affinity in the third civil receiving any gift from the person having
Government
degree. transaction with Government.
1. along the same line of business,
2. Relationwithpublicofficersincludesfamilialwithin
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page118of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
3 rd degree, or a close personal one, i.e. social, punished under RA 3019 is20 years. Estarija v. People
fraternal, employment.
9. T
ermination of Office. Not allowed to resign, retire ecisions of the RTC — convicting an accused who
D
3. R elatives. Prohibitrelativeswithin3rddegreeofthe pendinginvestigationorprosecutionforanyoffense occupies a positionlowerthanthatwithsalarygrade27
four highest officials from intervening in any under this Act or for bribery. or those not otherwise covered by the enumeration of
business with the Government.
10. Suspension and loss of benefits. Officerwithpending certainpublicofficersinSection4ofPD1606asamended
EXC: prosecution shallbesuspendedbyRTC(nowSB).If by RA 8249 — are to be appealed exclusively to the
1) A lready transacting prior to assumption of convicted, shall lose all retirement or gratuity Sandiganbayan.
office; benefits. If acquitted, shall be reinstated with
ecause of Estarija's failure to perfect his appeal to the
B
salariesandbenefitswhichhefailedtoreceivewhile
2) Not within discretion of official; Sandiganbayan within the period granted therefor, the
being suspended. If convicted officer already
Decision of the RTC convicting him of violatingSection
3) Official act or profession. received such benefits he shall restitute same.
3(a) of Republic Act No. 3019 has thus become final and
4. C ongressmen.Receivinganypecuniaryinterestfrom 11. M
aximum of 90 days. — Dismissal of case not executory.
business that benefited from an act he had equivalent to acquittal.
previously authored oradoptedbyCongressinthat
12. Exception.Giftsofinsignificantvalueorasordinary
term. PCGG v. Ombudsman2023
token of gratitude or friendship according to local
5. S AL.The accuracy of the entries in SAL becomes customs or usage. e Ombudsman found no proof of manifest partiality,
Th
materialincriminalandadministrativeproceedings evidentbadfaith,orgrossinexcusablenegligenceonthe
for violating Sec 7. Canlas v. People2020reiteratingGo v. Sandiganbayan partoftherespondents,noracontractenteredintotothe
6. P rima facie evidence of and dismissal due to ewell-settledruleisthat"privatepersons,whenacting
Th great disadvantage or prejudice of the Philippine
unexplained wealth inconspiracywithpublicofficers,maybeindictedand,if government; hence,noliabilityunderSec.3(e)and(g)of
found guilty, held liableforthepertinentoffensesunder Republic Act No. 3019 attached to respondents.
round for
G admin suspension pending
Section 3 of RA 3019, in consonance with the avowed
investigation.
policy of the anti-graft law to repress certain acts of
7. C ompetent court. within original jurisdiction of public officers and private persons alike constituting Fainsan v. Field Investigation Office2023
Sandiganbayan (SB) graft or corrupt practices act or which may lead thereto." e Ombudsman explained that the elements of the
Th
8. R
A10910whichlapsedintolawonJuly21,2016,now offense are present in this case.
provides that the prescription period for crimes
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page119of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
i nstitution of judicial proceeding for its investigation,"
efirstelementofSection3(e)ofRA3019ispresentsince
Th c) when the period was interrupted.
petitioners are public officials. As tothesecondelement, Peoplev.Duqueheldthatincaseswheretheillegalityofthe
t the time of enactment of RA 3019, the original
A activityisnotknowntothecomplainantatthetimeofits
theOmbudsmanfoundthatthelackofapprovedpayrolls prescriptive period of offenses defined and penalized
and committee resolution authorizing the commission, Act No. 3326, Section 2 requires that
therein was 10 years. the prescriptive period was prescription,insuchacase,wouldbegintorunonlyfrom
disbursements, and the failure to comply with auditing extendedto15,andthento20yearsasperRA10910.The
regulations, were indicative of petitioners'badfaithand the discovery thereof, i.e., discovery of the unlawful
prescriptive period when the Complaint was filed for natureof the constitutive act or acts.
partiality. Lastly, the Ombudsman found that the offenses punishable under RA 3019 was 10 years. The
government suffered injury because the depletion of amendatory laws, i.e., BP 195 and RA 10910, which I t has beenconsistentlyheldinanumberofcases,some
MMFF's funds was occasioned by petitioners' irregular provide longer periods of prescription, cannot be of which likewiseinvolvebehestloanscontractedduring
and illegal spending. the Marcos regime, that the prescriptive period for the
retroactively applied to crimes committed prior to their
crimes therein involved generally commences from the
ertainly, the decision of the Ombudsman to indict
C passage.
petitioners for violation of RA 3019 cannot be discovery thereof, and not on the date of its actual
s to the reckoning point oftheprescriptiveperiod,RA
A commission.
characterized as arbitrary, capricious, whimsical, or 3019 fails to explicitly provide. Thus, reference is to be
despotic.TheCOAreportdetailingtheactsandviolations n evaluation of thejurisprudenceonthematterreveals
A
made to Act No. 3326.
of petitioners, unless sufficiently rebutted, qualifies as the following guidelines in the determination of the
evidence justifying probable cause. It should be ec. 2 of Act No. 3326 provides that prescription
S reckoning point for the period of prescription of
underscored that the conduct of a preliminary commences from: violations of RA 3019,viz.:
investigation is only for the determination of probable a) t he day of the commission oftheviolationofthe 1. A
s a generalrule,prescriptionbeginstorunfrom
cause. law, which is thegeneralrule; or the date of the commission of the offense.
b) i f the same is not known, from the time of 2. I f the date of the commission of the violation is
discovery thereof and the institution of judicial not known, it shall be counted from the date of
Republic v. Desierto2023
proceedingforitsinvestigationandpunishment, discovery thereof.
oresolvetheissuesconcerningprescriptionofoffenses,
T whichistheexceptionandotherwiseknownasthe
discovery rule or the blameless ignorance 3. I n determining whether it is the general rule or
the Court must determine the following:
the exception that should apply in a particular
doctrine.
a) the prescriptive period of the offense; case, the availability or suppression of the
I ninterpretingthemeaningofthephrase"ifthesamebe information relative to the crime should first be
b) when the period commenced to run; and
notknownatthetime,fromthediscoverythereofandthe
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page120of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
determined. s to when the period was interrupted, Perez v.
A
3 (e) of RA No. 3019. As an element of the offense, the
a. I f the necessary information, data, or Sandiganbayan citing People v. Pangilinan declared that prosecutionmustpresentproofbeyondreasonabledoubt
recordsbasedonwhichthecrimecouldbe prescription is interrupted when the preliminary thattheofficer'sactoromissionisaccompaniedwiththe
discovered is readily available to the elements of manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or
investigation against the accused is commenced.
public, the general rule applies. gross inexcusablenegligencetojustifytheconviction.It
s to special laws not covered by the Revised Rules on
A has been consistently held that errors or omissions
Prescription shall,therefore,runfromthe Summary Procedure, such as a violation ofRA3019,the committedbypublicofficials,nomatterhowevident,are
date of the commission of the crime. rule is that the prescriptive period is interrupted by the not actionable absent any clear showing that they were
b. O therwise,shouldmartiallawpreventthe institution of proceedings for preliminaryinvestigation. motivated by malice or gross negligence amounting to
filingthereoforshouldinformationabout Plainly, the ruling laid down in Perez and Pangilinan, as bad faith.
the violation be suppressed, possibly well as the justification elucidated in Panaguiton, are
through connivance, then the exception relevant and appropriate in the case at bar. ere, no evidence supports the conclusion that evident
H
appliesandtheperiodofprescriptionshall bad faith or even gross inexcusable negligence attended
ence, the filing of the instant complaint against
H such failure. The Sandiganbayan gravely erred in
be reckoned from the date of discovery respondents with the Office of the Ombudsman in 1990 equating petitioners' failure to discharge their duties
thereof. effectively tolled the running of the prescriptive period. under RANo. 8291 to evident bad faith.
ere, the exception on the date of discovery or the
H Fromthereckoningpoint,i.e.1986,onlyfouryearshave
blamelessignorancedoctrineapplies.Withthelegislative lapsed.
imprimatur of PD 582, PD 961, and PD 1468, it became Limbo v. People2023
erespondentscannot,therefore,arguethattheoffense
Th
nearly impossibleforpetitionerRepublictoquestionthe
has already prescribed on the basis of the absence of
MOA and its series of supplemental agreements and ere, all essential elements of Sec. 3(e) of RA 3019 are
H
Information filed with the Sandiganbayan.
amendments prior to the discovery of the offense. present.
us, the reckoning point of the prescriptive period
Th 1. L
imbo is a public officer, being the Assistant
should be from the promulgation of the 1986 Freedom Ismael v. People2023Lopez, M., J. Department Manager of PNB-CDO;
Constitution. Therefore, petitioner Republic'sComplaint 2. L
imbo acted with manifestpartialityandevident
e Court finds no basis to hold petitioners guilty of
Th
dated February 12, 1990 filedagainstrespondentsbefore bad faith. Limbo acted withclearbiasinfavorof
corrupt practices underSection 3(e)of RA No. 3019.
the PCGG, which was subsequently referred to the the Valued Clients as they enjoyed privileges
Ombudsman, for violation of RA 3019 is well within the heer failure to discharge a statutory duty does not
S which are not otherwise allowed under BSP
10-year prescriptive period. automatically serveasbasisforconvictionunderSection regulations and PNB's policy. Moreover,
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page121of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c onsideringLimbo'sexperienceinbanking,being government, or nder Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 does not simply
u
a former Manager of PNB-Limketkai, we are 2) g connote bad judgment or negligence but of having a
ivinganyprivatepartyanyunwarrantedbenefit,
convinced that he is conscious of the dishonest advantage, or preference in the discharge by the palpably and patently fraudulent and dishonestpurpose
andfraudulentpurposeofapprovingtheoutright accused of his official, administrative, orjudicial todomoralobliquity,orconsciouswrongdoingforsome
encashment of the Valued Client's out-of-town perverse motive, or ill will.
functions.
checks.
L lorente,Jr.v.Sandiganbayanunderscoredthattheconcept ere, there is no showing that Tidalgo's failuretoseize,
H
3. L imbo acts caused undue injury to the of undueinjurycontemplatedinSection3(e)ofRepublic detain,andforfeitMVRodeoanditscargowasmotivated
government, and gave unwarranted benefits, ActNo.3019referstoactualdamageasunderstoodunder by malice or gross negligence amounting to bad faith.
advantage, and preference to the Valued Clients. the Civil Code. Instead, the record shows that in view of the PCG's
PNB-CDOwasobligatedtohonorencashmentsor request, Tidalgo sent a radio message to the Clearing
any withdrawals from the accounts of these ere, the alleged undue injury to the government arose
H Officer, Fortun to hold the departure clearance of MV
ValuedClientstotheextentofthefacevalueofthe from the purported overstatement of appraisal in the Rodeo.
checks. This entailed lost interest to PNB-CDO. allegederroneouslyissuedTaxDeclarationNo.02947that
was made as the basis for the payment of just n the other hand, Tidalgo likewise cannot be
O
successfully accused of gross negligence since, as the
compensation to Servy Realty. However, this was not
recordsshow,hetookprudentstepstoholdthevesselby
People v. Reyes2023 proven with moral certainty as the measurement of the
requesting the non-issuance of a departure clearance.
warehouse made by the state auditors is questionable.
I n resolving whether the prosecution was able to prove s the prosecution in this case failed to prove beyond
A
e prosecution failedtoprovebeyondreasonabledoubt
Th
beyondreasonabledoubtthethirdandfourthelementsof reasonable doubt all the elements of Section3(e)ofR.A.
the non-existence of the subject warehouse from which
Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 to justify the No.3019underwhichTidalgowascharged,heshouldbe
criminal liability may arise. Therefore, Macapugay et al.
conviction oftheaccused-appellantsMacapugayetal.,it entitled to anacquittal.
are acquitted.
mustfirstnecessarilybedeterminedwhetherthesubject
of the expropriation, a 457.2-square meter warehouse
standing on the lot owned by Servy Realty, actually Reyes v. Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon2023
Tidalgo v. People2023
existed.
e Court finds insufficient evidence to hold Tidalgo
Th ere is no probable cause to indict and prosecute
Th
ithrespecttothefourthelement,thisrequiresthatthe
W petitioner for violatingSection 3(e)of R.A. No.3019.
act that gives rise to the offense consist of either criminally liable underSection 3(e)of R.A. No. 3019.
Sistozav.Desiertoruledthattoestablishaprimafaciecase
1) causing undue injury to any party, including the Jurisprudence instructs that the bad faith referred to
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page122of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
f or a violation of Sec. 3, par. (e), R.A. 3019, the s et forth under R.A. No. 9184 and the 2003 IRR that
e last element was also established. The permit was
Th
prosecution must show not only the defects in the TabingDaanMartwasthebestsupplierwhocanprovide granted in favor of those notqualifiedorlegallyentitled
biddingprocedure,butalsotheallegedevidentbadfaith, the most advantageous price to the Municipality of thereto.TheLigangmgaBarangay,whosememberswere
grossinexcusablenegligenceormanifestpartialityofthe Palauig.
barangay officials are not qualified to such grant
publicofficer.Thus,allegedirregularitiesinprocurement
ccordingly, there is no probable cause to indict
A pursuant to the prohibition set forth by Section 89(a)(2)
orviolationsofprocurementlaws,rulesandregulations,
petitioner for violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019. RA 7160.
on their own, do not ipso facto lead to a violation of
Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019. This was affirmed in ere is no merit in Chan's contention that she had no
Th
Sabaldan, Jr. v. Ombudsman. intent to committheoffensecharged.Criminalintentis
Chan v. People2022
notnecessaryinmalaprohibita offensessuchasviolation
lso, Duque v. Ombudsman and Fact-Finding Investigation
A ofSection 3(j)of RA 3019.
eprosecutionprovedeachelementofSection3(j)ofRA
Th
Bureau heldthatmereparticipationbyapublicofficerin
3019 which are as follows:
animperfectprocurementprocessdoesnotautomatically
serveasbasisforhiscriminalindictmentfortheviolation 1. that the offender is a public officer;
People v. Cerezo2022
ofSection3(e)ofR.A.No.3019.Martelv.Peoplereiterated 2. t hat he/she knowingly approved or granted any
that a violation of procurement laws, its IRR, and ere is reasonable doubt to hold Castillo liable for
Th
license, permit, privilege or benefit; and
guidelines should not be the sole basis for a criminal violation ofSection 3(e)of R.A. No. 3019.
3. t hat the license, permit, privilege or benefit was
charge under Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019. e prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable
Th
grantedinfavorofanypersonnotqualifiedornot
ere, the second and third elements are manifestly
H legallyentitledtosuchlicense,permit,privilegeor doubt that Cerezo's acts caused undue injury to the
lacking. Petitioner and the other members of the BAC advantage,orinfavorofamererepresentativeor governmentorgaveunwarrantedbenefits,advantageand
substantially complied with the requirements for the dummy of one who is not qualified or entitled. preference to a private party.
resortandconductofShoppingasanalternativemethod ere, there was no finding by the Sandiganbayan that
H
han was the incumbent Mayor of Babatngon, Leyte at
C
ofprocurement.Accordingly,sincetheprocurementwas Cerezo and Castillo caused undue injury to the
the time material to this controversy.
doneaboveboardandbeyondreproach,ittotallynegates government. In any event, the prosecution failed to
the Ombudsman's finding that petitioner acted with e existence of a Mayor'sPermitinfavoroftheLigang
Th specify, quantify, and prove to the point of moral
manifest partiality or evident badfaith.TheBACmerely mga Barangay points to Chan's culpability suchthatshe certainty that thegovernmentsufferedanyundueinjury
followed and complied with the procurementguidelines knowingly approved or granted a permit satisfying the due to Cerezo entering into the lease contracts with
and requirements and determined based on the criteria second element of the offense. MTAC's Merchandising. Verily, aside from establishing
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page123of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t hat the leasing of heavy machinery was in violation of c ertain items not included nor discussed on the regular
ere, the first and third elements are present, but the
H
government procurement laws, theprosecutionfailedto session. As a result thereof, Mondejar was given the second element is not.
provethatthelocalgovernmentsufferedanydamagedue authority to enter into a MOA with IBC with respect to
to the same. the rechanneling of Tigum River, which was grossly e circumstances show that Enojo's purpose of
Th
disadvantageous to the government. IBC was given requesting SPO4 Briones to schedule a conference does
ikewise, there is reasonable doubt that Cerezo gave
L not correspond to any of the above duties of the PNP.
unwarranted benefits, advantage, and preference to unwarrantedbenefits,advantage,orpreferencebyvirtue
oftheMOA.AsperSection138oftheLGC,thepermitto WhatEnojoactuallywantedtoaccomplishwasto"extract
Castillo. information from Hughes, et al" with regard to his
extract sand, gravel, and otherquarryresourcesshallbe
issuedexclusivelybytheprovincialgovernor,byvirtueof alleged ownership of a portion of Lot 394.
People v. Partisala2022 an ordinance of the sangguniang panlalawigan. ection3(a)requiresadeliberateintentonthepartofthe
S
public official concerned to violate those rules and
mpil v. Office of the Ombudsman specified the following
A regulationsdulypromulgatedbycompetentauthority,or
elements of the offense falling under Section3(e)ofRA People v. Enojo2022 to commit an offense in connection with official duties.
3019: BothEnojo,withhispresumedknowledgeofthelawasa
e prosecution failedtoprovebeyondreasonabledoubt
Th
1. The offender is a public officer; lawyer, and SPO4 Briones, with his 20 years of police
all the elements of Section 3(a) of RA 3019 under which
experience, should have been well apprised of the
2. e act was done in the discharge of the public
Th Enojo was charged. The elements of the crime are the
boundaries of police authority in the settlement of civil
officer's official, administrative judicial functions; following:
disputes.
3. e act was done through manifest partiality,
Th 1. the offender is a public officer;
s regard the second element, the Court cannot agree
A
evidentbadfaith,orgrossinexcusablenegligence; 2. t he offender persuades, induces, or influences withtheconclusionoftheSandiganbayanthatEnojohad
and another public officer to perform an act, or the persuaded or induced SPO4 Briones into sending the
4. e public officercausedanyundueinjurytoany
Th offenderallowshimselftobepersuaded,induced, radio message. While SPO4 Briones actually performed
party, including the Government, or gave any or influenced to commit an act; and theactinquestion,hedidsonotbecauseAtty.Enojotold
unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference. 3. t he act performed by the other public officer, or himto,butbecausehebelievedthatitwashisoffice'sSOP
ere,Partisaladeliberatelyactedwithmanifestpartiality
H committedbytheoffender,constitutesaviolation to entertain and provide assistance to any person who
andbadfaithwhenhe,asthepresidingofficeroftheSB, of rules and regulations duly promulgated by comes to the police for help. In other words, SPO4
signed Exhibit "8"andpersuadedtheothersangguniang competent authority, or an offenseinconnection Brionesmadetheinvitationonthemistakenbeliefthatit
members to sign it, knowing fully well that there were with the official duty of the latter. was his duty to do so, which necessarily negates the
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page124of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
presence of any undue influence. the third element of Section 3 (e) of RA 3019 I nall,petitioneractedinconnivancewithhisco-accused
onsidering that the prosecution failed to provebeyond
C 1. efirstpunishableactisthattheaccusedissaid
Th public officials by participating in the flawed bidding
reasonable doubt all the elements of Section 3 (a) of RA tohavecausedundueinjurytothegovernmentor resulting in unwarranted benefits and advantagestohis
3019 under which Enojo was charged, an acquittalmust any party when the latter sustains actual loss or favor, in stark violation of Section 3 (e) of RA 3019.
therefore ensue. damage.
2. e second punishable act is that the accused is
Th
said to have given unwarranted benefits, Marzan v. People2021
Villanueva v. People2022 advantage, or preference to a private party. tty. Rupisan unlawfully issued the Recognizance and
A
illanueva was correctly foundguiltyunderSection3(e)
V ere, petitioner is liable under Sec. 3 (e) of RA 3019
H consequently caused the release of both Cyrus and
of RA 3019. Charge under Sec. 3 (e) of RA 3019 may be notwithstanding the absence of actual damageorinjury Pascua.
hingedfromactsalsopenalizedunderotherprovisionsof to the government or its instrumentalities. People v. Go I n reference to the second mode of Section 3(a) of RA
law, and when the acts or omissions complained of as has reiterated a private person's liability on graft and 3019, it is immaterial whether theonewhoinducedhim
constituting the offense are alleged in the Information, corrupt practices. Petitioner's participation in the was likewise a public officer or a private individual.The
conviction is proper. bidding andhisacceptanceofthebidaward,despitethe Sandiganbayan aptly held that Atty. Rupisan took
eprosecutionsatisfactorilyestablishedthattherewasa
Th overwhelmingdeficienciesinthebiddingprocess,which advantage of his position as Provincial Legal Officer to
failureofbidding,sinceatthetimeofthepublicbidding, he must be familiar with considering his record as a exert influence on Marzan as a jail officer.
theaccreditationofEuropharmaandPharmawealthwere supplierofmedicines,demonstratedhisconspiracywith
arzan,asajailofficer,shouldknowtheimportofBJMP
M
still suspended by the DOH. Consequently, only Mallix his co-accused public officers.
Manual,inparticularSection2(d)ofArticle13thereof.It
Drug is supposedly qualified. otably,petitionerwasnotonlythegeneralmanagerand
N washisdutytoapplythisprovisiondespitetheinfluence
etitioner cannot take refuge on the claim that the
P the owner of the 99% capital stock of Europharma but exerted by Atty. Rupisan. The release of an inmate by
transactions were under"EmergencyPurchase"andthus also the sole proprietor of Mallix Drug. The foregoing reason of acquittal, dismissal of case, payment of fines
a competitive bidding may be dispensed with. The thus display that the two "companies" owned by and/or indemnity or filing of bond, shall only be given
transaction could not be characterized as under an petitioner which participated in the defective bidding effect upon receipt of the Release Order.
"emergency purchase" since therequisitesofSection368 were"alteregos"ofeachotherandofpetitioner's.Hence,
us,alltheelementsoftheoffenseunderSection3(a)of
Th
of the LGC were not present. thepiercingoftheveilofEuropharma'scorporatefiction
RA 3019 were established.
was proper.
Cabrerav.Peopleelucidatedonthetwoseparateactsunder
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page125of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t he office or position of the public officer
Anti-Plunder Act 3) B
y himself or in connivance with relatives and/or
concerned; cronies;
R.A. No. 7080, as amended by R.A. No. 7659
3) B
y the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or 4) O
f which he has amassed a wealth of at least
Definition of Terms disposition of assets belonging to the
Php50M;
Definition of the Crime of Plunder Government;
2 5) Which are deemed ill-gotten.
Series and Combination 4) B
y obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or
indirectly any shares of stock, equity or any Prescription
Pattern otherformofinterestorparticipationincluding lunderprescribesin20years.However,therightofthe
P
Wheel and Chain Conspiracy promise of future employment in any business Statetorecoverpropertiesunlawfullyacquiredbypublic
enterprise or undertaking; officersfromthemorfromtheirnomineesortransferees
a. Definition of Terms 5) B
y establishing agricultural, industrial or shall not be barred by prescription, laches, or estoppel.
commercial monopolies or other combinations
Ill-gotten wealth c. Series and Combination
and/or implementation of decrees and orders
ny asset, p
A roperty, business enterprise or material intendedtobenefitparticularpersonsorspecial ereisnoneedtoprovebeyondreasonabledoubteach
Th
possession a cquired directly or indirectly through interests; or oftheallegedact.Whatisimportantistoproveaseries
dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or
6) B
y taking undue advantage of official position, of pattern that led to the accumulation of at least
usiness associates by any combination or series of
b
authority, relationship, connection or influence Php50Min ill-gotten wealth.
the following:
to unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the
1) Th
rough misappropriation, conversion, misuse, expense andtothedamageandprejudiceofthe Macapagal-Arroyo v. People 2017 En Banc
or malversation of public funds or raids on the Filipino people and the Republic of the " Combination,"wasexplainedinEstradav.Sandiganbayan
public treasury; Philippines. toreferto"atleastanytwodifferentpredicateactsinany
2) B
y receiving, directly or indirectly, any of said items" in Section 1(d).
commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks b. Definition of the Crime of Plunder
" Series" was explained as synonymous to “on several
oranyotherformofpecuniarybenefitfromany Elements instances” or a "repetition of the same predicate act in
person and/or entity in connection with any any of the items in Section 1(d) of the law."
1) Offender is a public officer;
government contract or project or by reason of
2) Committed a series of overt acts; The "overt or criminal acts described in Section1(d)"are
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page126of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
the following: isfamily,relativesbyaffinityorconsanguinity,business
h a nd received from Ocier the check representing the
1. M associates, subordinates or other persons, amasses, commission; and that Dichaves deposited the check
isappropriating, converting, misusing, or
malversing public funds; orraidingonthepublic accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth in the tothe"JOSEVELARDE"accountwhichwasshownto
treasury; a ggregateamountortotalvalueofatleastP50Mthrough be that of the former President.
a combination or series of overt criminal acts.
2. R eceiving any commission or kickbacks from a
urely, the law requires in the criminal charge for
S e. Wheel and Chain Conspiracy
government contract or project, or by reason of
one's office or position; plunder against several individuals that there must bea
main plunderer and her co-conspirators. In other Macapagal-Arroyo v. People2016 En Banc
3. Fraudulently disposing government assets;
ords, the allegation of thewheelconspiracyorexpress
w strada v. Sandiganbayan recognized two nuances of
E
4. O btaining any interest or participating m any conspiracy in the information was appropriate because appreciating conspiracy as a means to commit a crime,
business undertaking; the main plunderer would then be identified in either thewheel conspiracyand thechain conspiracy.
5. E stablishing m onopolies or implementing manner.Ofcourse,impliedconspiracycouldalsoidentify
e wheel conspiracy occurs when there is a single
Th
decrees that b enefit particular persons or the main plunderer, but that fact must be properly
person or group (the hub) dealing individually with two
interests; and alleged and duly proven by the Prosecution.
or more other personsorgroups(thespokes).Thespoke
6. T aking undue advantage of one'sofficialposition typically interacts withthehubratherthanwithanother
orinfluencetoenrichoneselfattheexpenseofthe spoke. In the event that the spoke shares a common
Dichaves v. Ombudsman2016
People and the Republic. purposetosucceed,thereisasingleconspiracy.However,
e Office of the Ombudsman correctly found probable
Th intheinstanceswheneachspokeisunconcernedwiththe
cause to charge petitioner with plunder in conspiracy success of the other spokes, there are multiple
d. Pattern
with the former President. Thus: conspiracies.
Macapagal-Arroyo v. People2017 En Banc e evidence indicates that the former President
Th eAmericancaseofKotteakosv.UnitedStatesillustratesa
Th
exerted influence over Arellano and Pascual to push wheel conspiracy where multiple conspiracies were
e law on plunder requires that a particular public
Th
through with the transactions, and that the established instead of one single conspiracy. There,
officer must be identified as the one who amassed,
transactions pushed through under that condition Simon Brown, the hub, assisted 31 independent
acquired or accumulated ill-gotten wealth because it
that the commission or profit would be given to the individuals to obtain separate fraudulentloansfromthe
plainly states that plunder is committed by any public
former President; that it was Dichaves who US Government. Although all the defendants were
officerwho,byhimselforinconnivancewithmembersof
orchestrated the consummation of the transactions engaged in thesametypeofillegalactivity,therewasno
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page127of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c ommon purpose or overall plan among them, andthey legitimacy; or 3) B
y means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion,
were not liable for involvement in a single conspiracy. b) a legitimate other ascendant, descendant or shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or
Each loan was an end in itself, separate fromallothers, spouse of accused. assault upon a railroad, fall of an airship (12), by
although all were alike in having similar illegal objects.
means of motor vehicles, or with the use of great
The law does not require knowledge of relationship.
e chain conspiracy recognized in Estrada v.
Th waste and ruin (20);
Sandiganbayan exists when there is successive eath or physical injuries under exceptional
D
247 4) O
n occasion of any of the preceding, or of an
communication and cooperation in much the same way circumstances
earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive
as with legitimate business operations between
1) A
legally married personor a parentsurpriseshis cyclone, epidemic or other public calamity (7);
manufacturer and wholesaler, then wholesaler and
spouse or his daughter, the latterunder 18yearsof 5) Evident premeditation (13);
retailer, and then retailer and consumer. This involves
age andliving with him,in the act of committing
individualslinkedtogetherinaverticalchaintoachievea 6) W
ith cruelty (21), by deliberately and inhumanly
sexual intercoursewith another.
criminal objective. augmenting the suffering of the victim, or
2) H
e or she kills, or inflicts anyseriousphysical outragingorscoffingathispersonorcorpse(notin
injuries uponany or both,in the act or Art 14).
immediately thereafter.
G Crimes Against Persons
Title Eight 3) H
e hasnotpromoted or facilitated the prostitution Rules for the application of circumstances to qualify murder
of his wife or daughter, nor has consented to the
Anti-Hazing Act of 2018 a) O
nly one of the circumstances required; others
infidelity of the spouse.
considered as generic aggravating;
248 Murder
Destruction of Life b) W
hen the other circumstances are absorbed or
included in the one that qualifies, they cannot be
Any of the following aggravating circumstances are present
246 Parricide considered as generic aggravating;
1) T
reachery (16), taking advantage of superior
1) A person iskilled; c) A
ny of the qualifying circumstances must be
strength (15), with the aid of armed men (8), or
alleged.Otherwise,thecrimeisonlyhomicidewith
2) Deceased is killed by the accused; employing means to weaken the defense(15),orof
the qualifying only considered as generic
means or persons to insure or afford immunity (8);
3) Deceased is: aggravating.
2) In consideration of a price, reward, or promise (11);
a) the father mother, or child, regardless of
249 Homicide
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page128of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
1) A person was killed; b) cannot be determined -PC med-max. 2) No intention to kill.
2) Without any justifying circumstance;
255 Infanticide
3) With intention to kill, which is presumed; NOTES
1. T
umultuous affray exists when at least four persons 1) Child was killed;
4) Not murder, parricide, nor infanticide.
took part; 2) Less than72 hoursof age;
NOTES 2. Th
epersonkilledinthecourseoftheaffrayneednotbe 3) Accused killed the child.
1. W one of the participants in said affray.
hen victim is under 12 years of age: RP (Sec 10 RA
7610); NOTES
252 Physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous affray
2. I ntent to kill is conclusively presumed when death 1. Penalty is same as that for parricide or murder.
1) There is atumultuous affray;
resulted. (US v Gloria) 2. C
oncealing dishonor mitigates liability forthemother
2) Th
ere are those who sufferedseriousorless serious
(PM med-max) and maternal grandparents (RT).
251 Death caused in a tumultuous affray physical injuriesonly;
1) There beseveralpersons; 3) Those responsiblecan not be identified; Abortion
2) D
id not composegroups organized for the common 4) Th
ose that have usedviolenceupon the offended 256 Intentional abortion
purpose of assaulting and attacking each other party areknown.
Acts punished
reciprocally;
253 Giving assistance to suicide 1) Using violence against a pregnant woman (RT).
3) Q
uarreledandassaultedone another in aconfused
andtumultuousmanner; 1) B
y assisting another to commit suicide, whether it 2) W
ithout violence and without consent of the
is consummated (PM)or not (AMay med-max); woman (PM).
4) Someone waskilled;
2) B
y lending his assistance to another to commit 3) With consent (PC med-max).
5) I tcannot be ascertainedwho actually killed the
suicide to the extent of doing the killing himself Elements
deceased;
(RT).
6) Th
ose who inflictedserious physical injuriesor 1) There is apregnantwoman;
who usedviolence: 254 Discharge of firearms 2) V
iolenceexerted, ordrugsorbeverages
a) can beidentified. -PM; 1) Discharges a firearm against or at another; administered, or acts upon the woman;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page129of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
3) As a result,fetus dies; the offended party of reproducing. 3) No intent to kill.
4) Abortion isintended. 2) M
ayhem- lopping or clipping off any other part of
265 Less serious physical injuries
the body.
257 Unintentional abortion 1) I ncapacitated for labor for10-30 days;or needs
263 Serious physical injuries
1) There is a pregnant woman; medical attendance for same period.
I f in consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, injured 2) Injuries not those described in Art 263-264.
2) Violence is used without intending an abortion;
person shall:
3) Violence intentionally exerted; 266 Slight physical injuries and maltreatment
1) becomeinsane, imbecile, impotent or blind
4) Fetus dies. 1) I ncapacitated offended party for labor from1-9
2) h
ave losttheuseofspeechorthepowertohearor
tosmell,aneye,ahand,afoot,anarm,oraleg,or days, or required medical attendance during same
260 Duel
lost the use of any such principal member, or have period; (AMen)
1) Killing one's adversary in a duel;(RT) become incapacitated for the work he was 2) D
id not prevent offended party from his habitual
2) I nflicting physical injuries upon such adversary; habitually engaged. work or did not require medical attendance. (AMen
(Penalty according to the nature) 3) h
avebecomedeformed,orhavelostanyotherbody or Fine <=200 and Censure);
3) M
aking combat although no physical injuries have part, or the use thereof, or have been ill or 3) I ll-treatment of another by deed without causing
been inflicted.(AMay) incapacitated to perform the work he was any injury. (AMen min or Fine <=50)
habitually engaged in formore than 90 days. Rape
Physical Injuries 4) h
avebecomeillorincapacitatedforlaborformore 266-A Rape by sexual intercourse(Ordinary)
262 Mutilation than 30 days.
Penalty isRPwhen:
Acts punished 264 Administering injurious substances or beverages
1) Offender isANY person;
1) C
astration- depriving another, either totally or 1) O
ffender inflicted upon anotherany serious
2) Hadcarnal knowledgewithANOTHER person;
partially, of some essential organ for reproduction. physical injury;
3) Accomplished
a) There is mutilation of penis or ovarium. 2) B
yknowingly administeringany injurious
substances or beverages or by taking advantage of a) usingforce, threatorintimidation;
b) It waspurposefulanddeliberate, to deprive
his weakness of mind or credulity.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page130of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
b) w
hen the offended party isdeprived of reason, d) offender knows victim asreligious; c) t hroughfraudulent machinationorgrave
orunconscious; abuse of authority; or when woman isunder
e) victim isbelow 7 years old;
c) t hroughfraudulent machinationorgrave abuse 12years of age ordemented.
f) o ffender knows he hasHIV/AIDS or other STD
of authority;AND and transmits to victim; Qualified
d) when offended party isunder16years of age g) o ffender belongs to AFP, PNP, para-military, a) w
ith the use of a deadly weapon or by at least 2
(statutory rape) ordemented. other law enforcement agency or penal persons;PM to RT
Penalty isRP to Deathwhen: institution and takes advantage of position. b) the victim has become insane;RT
1) w
ith the use of a deadly weapon or by at least 2 h) permanentmutilation/disability; c) s pecial complex crime of attempted rape with
persons; i) offender knows victim ispregnant; homicide;RT to RP
2) the victim has become insane; d) special complex crime of rape with homicide.RP
j) o ffender knows victim hasmental disability,
3) s pecial complex crimeof attempted rape with emotional disorderand/orphysical handicap. e) any of the 10 qualifying of par 1.RT
homicide;
266-A Rape through sexual assault(Object)
Penalty isDeathwhen: NOTES RE RAPE
Penalty isPM
1) special complex crimeof rape with homicide. 1. Indemnity and Damages
1) Offender commits sexual assault;
2) with any of the following: a. Civil indemnity is mandatory.(Pp v. Lascano)
2) Committed by inserting
a) v ictim isminorand the offender is a parent, b. I f qualified, increased to not less than P75K, (Pp v.
ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative a) his penis into another's mouth or anus; or Victor)
within the 3rd civil degree, or the common law b) a ny instrument or object into the genital or c. I n rape with homicide: P100K as civil indemnity +
spouse of the parent. anal orifice. P75K as moral + P25K as temperate + P100K as
b) u
nder the custodyof the police, military or any 3) Accomplished exemplarydamages. (Pp v. Cumimba)
law enforcement agency or penal institution. d. A
ward of moral damages, automatic. Exemplary
a) usingforceorintimidation;
c) i n full viewof the spouse, parent, child, or damages justified under Art 2230 of Civil Code if
b) w
hen the woman isdeprived of reason, or
other relatives within the 3rd degree of there is an aggravating circumstance.(Pp v. Lucena)
unconscious;
consanguinity. 2. Is resistance by the victim required to prove lack of
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page131of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c onsent totherape?Anyphysicalovertactmanifesting ape under the second paragraph of Article266-Aisalso
R guess.
resistance against the rape in any degree from the knownas“instrumentorobjectrape,”“gender-freerape,”
victim is admissible as evidence of lack of consent. or “homosexual rape.” The gravamen of rape through
Tenacious resistance, however, isnotrequired.Neither sexual assault is “the insertion of the penis into another Perez v. CA
is a determined andpersistentphysicalstruggleonthe person’s mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or erez was found guilty of attempted rape. However, a
P
part of the victim necessary. (Pp v. Gondaway) object, into another person’s genital or anal orifice.” careful review of the records of the case shows that the
3. F orce as an element of rape need notbeirresistible;it I n People v. Soria, the court discussed that a victimneed crime committedbypetitionerwasactsoflasciviousness
need but be present. Intimidation must be viewed in not identify what was inserted into his or her genital or not attempted rape.
light of the victim’s perception and judgment at the anal orifice for the courttofindthatrapethroughsexual ere is no showing in this case that petitioner’s sexual
Th
time of the commission of the crime and not by any assault was committed. organhadeventouchedcomplainant’svaginanoranypart
hard and fast rule.
of her body. Although the information filed against
4. I ntimidationincludesthemoralkindasthefearcaused petitionerwasforattemptedrape,hecanbeconvictedof
by threatening the girl with a knife or pistol. (Ppv. Frias) Baleros v. People
acts of lasciviousness because the crime of acts of
5. Th
e victim’s moral character isimmaterial,therebeing hether or not the act of the petitioner, i.e., the pressing of a
W lasciviousness is included in rape.
absolutely no nexus between it and the odious deed chemical-soakedclothwhileontopofMalou,constitutesanovert
committed. Even a prostitute or a woman of loose act of rape.
moralscanbethevictimofrape,forshecanstillrefuse People v. Aca-ac
O.Itwouldbetoostrainedtoconstruepetitioner'sactof
N
a man’s lustful advances. (Pp v. Agsaoay) pressing a chemical-soaked cloth in the mouth of Malou ecessarily,rapeisattemptedifthereisnopenetrationof
N
6. Evidence which may be accepted in the prosecution of rape which would induce her to sleep as an overtactthatwill the female organ because not all acts of execution were
logically and necessarily ripen into rape. As it were, performed. The offender merely commenced the
a) a nyphysicalovertactmanifestingresistanceagainst
petitionerdidnotcommenceatalltheperformanceofany commission of a felonydirectlybyovertacts.Takinginto
the act of rape in any degree from the offended
act indicative of an intent or attempt to rape Malou. It accountthenature,elements,andmannerofexecutionof
party; or
cannot be overemphasized that petitioner was fully the crime of rape and jurisprudence on the matter, it is
b) w here theoffendedpartyissosituatedastorender clothed and that there was no attempt on his part to hardly conceivable how the frustrated stage in rape can
him/her incapable of giving consent. undress Malou,letalonetouchherprivatepart.Forwhat ever be committed.
reasonpetitionerwantedthecomplainantunconscious,if
Ricalde v. People2015 that was really his immediate intention, is anybody's
People v. Dalisay
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page132of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
epresenceofeitherhymenallacerationorspermatozoa
Th mentalretardatecanbeclassifiedasaperson“deprived
A of Qualified Statutory Rape.
onLanie'sprivatepartisnotanessentialelementofrape. of reason,” not one who is “demented” and carnal
is Court reiterates that inconsistencies on one's
Th
InPeoplev.Parcia,weheldthattheabsenceofspermdoes knowledgeofamentalretardateisconsideredrapeunder testimony will only result to reasonable doubt when the
not disprove the charge of rape. Likewise, in People v. subparagraph(b),notsubparagraph(d)ofArticle266-A(1) detail pertains to an essential element of the crimeorto
Regala,weruledthatanintacthymendoesnotnecessarily of the RPC. the identity of the offender.
prove absence of sexual intercourse. Nonetheless, the mistake would not exonerate appellant.
eople v. Nocido clarified that minor inconsistencies may
P
I nPeoplev.Dalandas,citingPeoplev.Dumanon,thisCourt even work to enhance the credibility of a witness.
People v. Lining held that mental retardation can be proven by evidence
fficer Ebdane's findings of the absence of laceration or
O
other than medical/clinical evidence, such as the injury in AAA'sgenitaliaisnotfataltotheprosecution.It
TC found Gerry Lining guilty beyond reasonable doubt
R
testimony of witnesses and even the observation by the is settled that a medical report is dispensable in proving
for the crime of forcible abduction with rape, and for
trial court. the commission of rape. As to the presence of the
another count of rape.
qualifyingcircumstance,thefather-daughterrelationship
e medical finding that the victim was already a
Th
between XXX and AAA was also established through the
non-virgin, nor the fact that she had sexual relations People v. YYY2018
latter's Certificate of Live Birth.
before, would not matter. Even a woman of loose morals
medico-legalreportisNOTindispensableinrapecasesasit
A
could still be avictimofrape,fortheessenceofrapeisthe
is merely corroborative in nature. Thus,evenwithoutit,an
carnalknowledgeofawomanagainstherwillandwithout accused may still be convicted on the sole basis of the People v. XXX2022
her consent. testimony of the victim. As such, the credibility of the
e Court affirms the RTC's assessment of the witness,
Th
evertheless, accused-appellant could only be convicted
N witness should be assessed independently regardless of
AAA,regardingthenarrationoftheeventsthattranspired
for the crime of rape, instead of the complex crime of the presence or absence of a medico-legal report. Trial
during those three nights. Further, AAA's account was
forcible abduction with rape. Indeed, it would appear courts are expected to scrutinize the victim's testimony
corroborated by the medico-legal report issued by PSI
from the records that the main objective of the accused with greatcaution,withorwithoutamedico-legalreport
Ebdane.
when thevictimwastakentothehouseofMilaSalvacion to corroborate the same.
was torapeher.Hence,forcibleabductionisabsorbedin owever, the Court deems it necessary to correct the
H
the crime of rape. nomenclature of the crimes charged and to impose the
People v. XXX2022 properpenalties.Ifthevictimis12yearsoldandunder18
yearsold,andtheactscommittedfallunderrapethrough
The Court affirms theconvictionofXXXforthreecounts
People v. Monticalvo2013
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page133of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
s exualassaultundertheRPC,thepropernomenclatureis iscrepancies as to minor matters, irrelevant to the
d
owever, contrary to the finding of the CA, the special
H
"Lascivious Conduct under Section 5 (b) of RA 7610." The qualifying circumstance of relationship was sufficiently elements of the crime, cannot, thus, be considered a
imposable penalty is reclusion temporal in its medium alleged in the Information. If the offender is merely a
ground for acquittal.
period toreclusion perpetua.
relation — not a parent, ascendant, step-parent, or s to ZZZ allegedly unable tohaveanerectionduetoold
A
s for Rape through sexualintercourse,andthevictimis
A guardian or common-law spouse of the mother of the age, he did not present documentary evidence such as a
12 years old and under 18 years old, People v. Tulagan victim—itmustbeallegedintheinformationthatheisa medical certificate attesting to the physical impossibility
again instructs that the proper nomenclature is "Rape relative by consanguinity or affinity withinthethirdcivil of his having an erection and incapacity of raping AAA.
under Article 266-A (1) in relation to Article 266-B of the degree.
RPC," and the imposable penalty is reclusion perpetua.
eallegationthatXXXistheuncleofAAA,andabrother
Th
People v. XXX2020
of AAA's father, without specifically alleging that such
relationship was within the third civil degree, is specific bsentanyindicationthattheRTCandtheCAcommitted
A
People v. XXX2022
enough to satisfy the special qualifying circumstance of anyerrorintheevaluationoftheevidence,theCourtsees
I n the review of rape cases, We continuetobeguidedby relationship. Hence, XXX can be properly convicted of no reason to deviate from the factual findings that XXX
the following principles: Qualified Rape. sexually assaulted and had carnal knowledge of AAA.
a. a naccusationforrapecanbemadewithfacility,it nent the qualifying circumstances of minority and
A
is difficult to prove but more difficult for the relationship, we find the sametohavebeensatisfactorily
People v. ZZZ2021
person accused, though innocent, to disprove; alleged in the Informations and established during the
e date of commission is not even an element of the
Th trial.Basedonthefacts,andasfoundbyboththeRTCand
b. i n view of the nature of the crime of rape where
crime of rape.Itcannotbeconsideredthatappellantwas the CA, XXX forced AAA to perform fellatio on him by
only two persons are usually involved, the
testimony of the complainant is scrutinized with deprived of his constitutional righttobeinformedofthe placing his penis inside her mouth.
extreme caution; and nature and cause of the accusation against him.
XX should beadjudgedguiltyofRapebySexualAssault
X
c. t he evidencefortheprosecutionstandsorfallson stotheallegedinconsistenciesinAAA'stestimony,People
A under the RPC. People v. Tulagan held that if the acts
v. Lagbo explained that courts expect minor constitutingsexualassaultarecommittedagainstavictim
its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw
inconsistencieswhenachild-victimnarratesthedetailsof under12yearsofageorisdemented,thenomenclatureof
strength from the weakness of the defense.
aharrowingexperiencelikerape. Suchinconsistencieson the offense should now be 'Sexual Assault under
ere, the elements of Statutory Rape were duly
H minor details are in factbadgesoftruth,candidnessand paragraph 2, Article 266-A of the RPC in relation to
established. the fact that the witness is unrehearsed. These Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610.'
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page134of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a ccused-appellant, however, must be corrected. XXX is c ase,thereneednotbeactualforce,threatorintimidation
I n order to qualify the rape charge, thevictim'sminority
AND her relationship with the offender shouldBOTHbe liable for one count ofRapeunderArticle266,Paragraph because when a father commits theodiouscrimeofrape
1(a) of the RPC. against his own daughter, who was also a minor at the
alleged in theInformationandprovenbeyondreasonable
doubt during trial. Since both the qualifying time of the commission of the offenses, his moral
rticle266-BoftheRPCprovidesthat"whenevertherape
A
circumstancesofminorityandrelationshipwereproperly iscommittedwiththeuseofadeadlyweaponorbytwoor ascendancy or influence over the latter substitutes for
pleaded and proved during trial, the CA correctly more persons, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to violence and intimidation.
convicted XXX ofQualifiedRapeunderparagraph1(d)of death". In view of XXX's use of a bladed weapon in the
Article 266-A in relation to Article 266-B of the RPC. commission of the crime, he shouldsufferthepenaltyof
People v. XXX2020
reclusion perpetua under Article 266-B of the RPC since
e CA correctly affirmed the penalty of reclusion
Th
perpetua in light of the prohibition on the impositionof such use of the bladed weapon was alleged in the exual congresswithagirl under12yearsold isalways
S
Information and sufficiently proven during trial. rape.
the death penalty as mandated by RA 9346, without
eligibility for parole. e CA and the trial court correctly disregarded the
Th ere, AAA positively identified accused-appellant and
H
qualifying circumstance of XXX's relationship to the candidlytestifiedthatheundressedher,laidherdownon
victim as her mother's live-in partner since this the floor, and inserted his penis into her vagina. Her
People v. XXX2020 circumstance was not alleged in the Information, testimony was substantiated by Dr. Guzman, who, after
s a rule,courtsviewunfavorablyaffidavitsofdesistance
A although it was proven during trial. conducting her medical examination just a day after the
or arecantationofavictim'stestimony,especiallyinrape rape, reported that private complainant had hymenal
cases, since they can be easily obtained for monetary lacerations.
People v. XXX2020
consideration or through intimidation. Here, five years ere is no standard form of behavior for a rape victim,
Th
had passedfromthetimeshetestifiedagainsthimtothe ape shall be qualified and the death penalty shall be
R moresoforaminorsuchasprivatecomplainant,whowas
timesherecantedhertestimony.Thislongpassageoftime imposedunderparagraph1ofArticle266-BoftheRPCifit just eight (8) years old and who was under the moral
renders suspect her execution of the affidavit. is committed by a parent against his child who is below ascendancy of accused-appellant, a distant relative who
us, the prosecution has proven beyond reasonable
Th eighteen (18) years old. she considers her lolo or grandfather.
doubt, that indeed, accused-appellant is guilty of the ere, AAA was below eighteen years old when the crime
H ursuanttoPeoplev.Tulagan,accused-appellantshouldbe
P
crime of Rape. wascommittedagainsther.XXX,whoadmittedthatheis criminally held liable for Statutory Rape defined under
The designation of the crime committed by AAA's father, sexually took advantage of her without her Article 266-A, Paragraph 1(d) penalized under Article
consent.Whentheoffenderisthevictim'sfather,asinthis 266-B of the RPC. The correlation to RA 7610 is deleted.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page135of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
lthough AAA did not describe the incident of rape in
A
People v. ZZZ2020 more detail, it is apparent from her testimony that People v. Pueyo2020
appellant was successful in having carnal knowledge of
ZZ is guilty of two (2) counts of Rape under Art 266-A,
Z her. She is not expected to provide a detailed account of ueyo is instead guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the
P
par 1(a), and one (1) count of Statutory Rapefinedunder what transpired because of her mental handicap. graver offense of SexualAssaultunderArticle266-A(2)of
Art 266-A, par 1(d) of the RPC, as amended by RA 8353. the RPC, as amended, in relation to Section 5(b) of RA
I n cases where penetration was not fullyestablished,the 7610.
ZZ miserably failed to overturn the burden of evidence
Z Court had consistently enunciated that rape was
against him. His defenses were threefold: denial, alibi, nevertheless consummatedonthevictim'stestimonythat eople v. Dagsa sets the parameters in determining
P
and imputation of ill motive against the victim. she felt pain. The results of AAA's physical examination whether there is a violation of Section 5(b) of RA 7610, viz.:
ZZ cannot escape culpability by highlighting AAA's
Z which was conducted on the very samedaythattherape a. Th
e accusedcommitstheactofsexualintercourse
intimate relationship with her boyfriend. Premarital incident happened corroborates her testimony that she or lascivious conduct.
relationships do not necessarily entail sexual intimacy. was sexually molested by the appellant.
b. Th
e saidactisperformedwithachildexploitedin
Neither can the sexual behavior of a rape victim reverse ental retardation can beprovenbyevidenceotherthan
M prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse.
her violator's criminal culpability. Romantic affairs medical/clinical evidence, such as the testimony of
voluntarilyengagedintobyarapevictim,whetherbefore, c. Th
e child, whether male or female, is below 18
witnesses and even the observation by the trial court.
during, or after the rape incident, will not overwrite the years of age.
However, the conviction of an accused of rape based on
established fact that her violator forcibly obtainedcarnal thementalretardationofthevictimmustbeanchoredon I n relation to Section 5(b) of RA 7610, the apparent
knowledge of her without her consent. proof beyond reason able doubt of the same. circumstances here fit squarely as sexual assault:
e designation of the crimes committed by ZZZ,
Th ere, AAA is a mental retardate. The social worker who
H d. A
AA, 6 years young at the time of the incident,
however, must be corrected. Sexual intercourse with a conductedthecasestudy,testifiedthatAAAsufferedfrom received a penetrating blow onto her vagina that
victimwhoisunder12yearsold,asdefinedunderArticle typhoidfeverthataffectedhermentaldevelopment.Catig almost extended to her anus by a welding rod
266-A,Paragraph1(d)oftheRPC,isStatutoryRape.ZZZis even admitted that he knew of AAA's mental state. wielded by Pueyo.
liablefortwocountsofRapedefinedinArt266,par1(a)of
owever, although it was proven and admitted during
H e. Th
e severity of the genital injury inflicted upon
the RPC and one count of Statutory Rape underArt266,
trial thatappellantknewofAAA'smentalretardation,the AAA cannot be more telling of Pueyo's abusive
par 1(d) of the RPC.
same cannot be appreciatedasaqualifyingcircumstance intent.
for it was not specifically alleged in theInformationthat us,theactsofPueyohavebeenshowntofallwithinthe
Th
People v. Catig2020 he was aware of AAA's mental retardation. punitive purview of rape by sexual assault under Article
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page136of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
266-A(2) of the RPC in relation to Section 5(b) of RA 7610. a re not pleaded butproved,theyshallbeconsideredonly t hechildengagesinlasciviousconductunderthecoercion
as aggravating circumstances. orinfluenceofanyadult.Withal,thereisbasistorulethat
there was sexual abuse herein, given that Eulalio kissed
e Guzman cannot be held liableforqualifiedrapesince
D
People v. De Guzman2019 AAA, who was only 11 years old at the time.
the prosecution failed to properly designate in the
e GuzmanisguiltyinsteadofSimpleStatutoryRapeas
D Informations that De Guzman is actually BBB's
the qualifying circumstance of relationship was not common-lawhusband,whichwasprovenduringthetrial,
People v. Villegas, Jr.2019
proven beyond reasonable doubt. and not AAA's stepfather.
eminorityofthevictimandhisorherrelationshipwith
Th The elements of the special complex crime of rapewith
the offender should both be alleged in the Information homicideare as follows:
People v. Eulalio2019
andprovenbeyondreasonabledoubtduringtrialinorder a. the appellant had carnal knowledge of a woman;
to qualify the rape. I t is enough that the age of the victim is proven and that
b. c arnal knowledge of a woman was achieved by
there was sexual intercourse.
ere, the prosecution failed to e stablish t his
H means of force, threat or intimidation; and
stepparent-stepdaughter r elationship b etween D e ere,EulaliohadcarnalknowledgeofAAA,an11-year-old
H
c. b
yreasonoronoccasionofsuchcarnalknowledge
Guzman and AAA. victim, by using threats and intimidation. The Court is
by means of force, threat or intimidation, the
thus convinced that Eulalio is guilty of rape, specifically,
a. N o proof of marriage was presented in order to appellant killed a woman.
establishDeGuzman'slegalrelationshipwithBBB, statutory rape.
ere, the post-mortem examination of AAA's body
H
mother of AAA. lso, Eulalio was properly convicted of acts of
A
revealedthatshehadlacerationsonherprivatepartsand
lasciviousness, although charged with rape in the
b. D e Guzman was actually thecommon-lawspouse that she recently lost her virginity, which more likely
Information.HecommittedlewdactsuponAAA,whowas
of BBB as he was not legally married to her. meant that the assailant had carnal knowledge of her.
only 11 years old at the time,bykissingherusingthreats
c. S ince De Guzman's relationship with AAA as and intimidation. Following the variance doctrine s the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses
A
allegedintheInformationswasnotprovenbeyond enunciatedunderSection4inrelationtoSection5ofRule corroborated each other on materialpoints,theseshould
reasonabledoubt,DeGuzmancannotbeconvicted 120,Actsoflasciviousness;theoffenseproved,isincluded be given great weight since the trial court found these
ofQualifiedRape,onlySimpleStatutoryRapeand in rape, the offense charged. testimonies more convincing.
Simple Rape.
uimvelv.PeopleascitedintheMolejoncaseexplainedthat
Q hile Villegas maintained that he was at the house of
W
eople v. Begino held that the qualifying circumstances
P the childisdeemedsubjectedtoothersexualabusewhen Ronilo when the crime was committed, there was no
must be properly pleaded in the indictment. If thesame dispute that the abandoned house was accessible via
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page137of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t ransportation and that it would have only taken around had experienced the same. 6. L
ikely to adversely affect the physical and
ten (10) to fifteen (15) minutes to traverse the distance. psychological health of such recruit, neophyte,
etween Galuga's plain denial and AAA's categorical
B
incetherewasagreatpossibilitythatVillegaswasinthe
S testimony, the latter is given weight, especially because applicant, or member.
vicinity at the time of the commission of the felony, his Galugaadmittedthathewasactuallyfoundtogetherwith is shall also include any activity, intentionally made or
Th
defenseofalibifails.Hisdenialofthechargewasnegated AAA by AAA'sfatherandprosecutionwitnessesBorjaand otherwise, by one person alone or acting withothers,that
by the circumstantial evidence which alreadyestablished Garlitos. tends to humiliate or embarrass, degrade, abuse, or
his guilt. endanger, by requiring a recruit, neophyte, applicant, or
here there is no evidencethattheprincipalwitnessfor
W
the prosecution was actuated by improper motive, the member to do menial, silly, or foolish tasks.
presumption is that he/she was not so actuated and Nullity of Waiver and Consent
People v. Cabales2019
his/her testimony is entitled to full credence.
1. A
ny form of approval, consent, or agreement,
ere,withoutclearevidenceofconsent,AAA'sapparently
H
whether written or otherwise, or of an express
passive conduct will not negate the rape committed by
waiver of the right toobjecttotheinitiationriteor
Cabales against her person. Her statementsthatshehad Anti-Hazing Act of 2018
proceeding which consists of hazing made by a
been threatened into silence by Cabales were unwavering. 1 R.A. No. 8049, Secs. 2-3, 12 and 14, as amended by
recruit,neophyte,orapplicantpriortoaninitiation
J urisprudence has steadily held that "no woman, least of R.A. No. 11053
ritethatinvolvesinflictingphysicalorpsychological
all a child, would concoct a story of defloration, allow suffering, harm, or injury, shall be VOID and
Hazingrefers to any act that
examination of her private parts and subject herself to without any binding effect on the parties.
public trial or ridicule if she has not, in truth, been a 1. R
esults in physical or psychological suffering or
tendstoembarrass,degrade,abuseorendangerthe 2. Th
e defense that therecruit,neophyte,orapplicant
victim of rape and impelled to seekjusticeforthewrong
neophyte, member or applicant; consented to being subjected to hazing shall notbe
done to her being."
availableto persons prosecuted under this Act.
2. I nflicted on a recruit, neophyte, applicant, or
member; Who are liable for hazing
People v. Galuga2019
3. Inflicted as part of an initiation rite or practice; a. R
P + 3M Fine. Those who actually planned or
I ndeed, AAA described vividly how accused-appellant participatedinthehazingif,asaconsequenceofthe
4. M
ade asaprerequisiteforadmissionorarequirement
deflowered her and we cannot imagine how a child, as hazing, death, rape, sodomy, or mutilation results
for continuing membership;
young in years as AAA, could directly and consistently therefrom;
recount in open court such anordeal,unlessshe,infact, 5. Involves a fraternity, sorority, or organization;
b. RP + 2M Fine.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page138of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
1) A llpersonswhoactuallyplannedorparticipated c. R
T Max + 1M Fine. All persons who are present in ii. ut failed to take any action to prevent the
b
in the conduct of the hazing; the conduct of the hazing; same from occurring or
2) A ll officers o f the fraternity, sorority, or d. R
T + 1M Fine. Former officers, nonresident iii. f ailedtopromptlyreportthesametothelaw
organization who are actually present during member, alumni of the fraternity, sorority, or enforcement authorities if they can do so
the hazing; organization who, after the commission of any of without peril to their person or their family.
the prohibited acts proscribed herein, will perform
3) Th
e adviser of a fraternity, sorority, or h. I f the hazing is held in the home of one of the
organization who is present when the acts any act to hide, conceal, or otherwise hamper or officers or members of the fraternity, sorority, or
obstruct any investigation that will be conducted
constituting the hazing were committed and organization, the parents shall be held liable as
thereafter.
failed to take action to prevent the same from principals(s ame requisites as above)
occurring or failed to promptlyreportthesame e. P
C Min.Anypersonwhoshallintimidate,threaten,
i. Th
e school authorities including faculty members
to the law enforcement authorities if such force,oremploy,oradministeranyformofvexation
aswellasbarangay,municipal,orcityofficialsshall
adviser or adviseroradviserscandosowithout against another person for the purpose of
e liable as an accomplice and likewise be held
b
peril to their person or their family; recruitment in joining or promoting a particular
administratively accountable (same requisites as in[g])
4) A fraternity, sorority, or organization; and
ll former officers, nonresident members, or
j. Theincumbentofficersofthefraternity,sorority,or
alumni of the fraternity, sorority, or f. 1 M Fine. The school, if the fraternity, sorority, or
organization who are also present during the o rganization concerned shall be jointlyliable with
organization filed a written application to conduct
hazing. those members who actually participated in the
an initiation which was subsequently approved by
hazing.
5) O fficers or membersofafraternity,sorority,or theschoolandhazingoccurredduringtheinitiation
organization who knowingly cooperated in rites or when no representatives from the school Prima facieevidence
carrying out the hazing by inducing the victim were present during the initiation.
e presence ofanyperson,evenifsuchpersonisnota
Th
to be presentthereat; and g. The owner or lessee of the place where hazing is member of the fraternity, sorority, or organization,
6) m embers of the fraternity, sorority, or c onducted shall be liable as principal when such during the hazing is prima facie evidence of
organizationwhoarepresentduringthehazing owner or lessee has participationthereinasaprincipalunlesssuchpersonor
whentheyareintoxicatedorundertheinfluence i. persons
a ctual knowledge of the hazing conducted
of alcohol or illegal drugs; therein 1. p
reventedthecommissionoftheactspunishable
herein or
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page139of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
2. p romptly reported the same to the law organization; and Fraternity is not precluded.
enforcement authorities if they can do so 3. Th
attherecruit,neophyteorapplicantisplacedin
without peril, to their person or their family. some embarrassing or humiliating situations
Villarba v. CA and People2020
Praeter intentioneminapplicable suchasforcinghimtodomenial,silly,foolishand
other similar tasks or activities or otherwise gainst Dordas's candid testimony, petitioner's defense
A
ny personchargedunderthisActshallnotbeentitled
A
subjecting him to physical or psychological of denial utterly fails.
to the mitigating circumstances that there was no
suffering or injury.
intention to commit so grave a wrong. I ndeed, not one of petitioner's assertions haswithstood
F irst, other than SPO2 Patambang's bare testimony that the strength of the prosecution's evidence. The lower
Bartolome v. People2021 petitioners admitted to him during the conduct of the courts have given full faith to the testimony of Dordas,
investigation that a hazing incident occurred in a field andthisCourtfindsnoreasontodiffer.Thus,petitioner's
e Court is NOT convinced that petitioners are guilty
Th
located at Area C, Dasmariñas, Cavite, the prosecution conviction is sustained. Heis,beyondreasonabledoubt,
beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of hazing
presented no evidencetoprovethathazingactuallytook guilty of the crime of hazing.
ere,nodirectevidencewaspresentedtolinkpetitioners
H place.
to Samparada's death. It must be noted though that
econd,theassessmentofthehospitalstaffandthepolice
S
hazing,likeanyotherfelony,neednotbeprovenbydirect Dungo v. People2015
officers that the injuries sustained by Samparada were
evidence; it may be sufficientlyprovenbycircumstantial
caused by hazing remained inconclusive. eactofhazingitselfisnotinherentlyimmoral,butthe
Th
evidence.Moreover,convictionforhazingisstillpossible
through a single, credible witness. ird,thedocumentallegedlyseizedbythepoliceofficers
Th lawdeemsthesametobeagainstpublicpolicyandmust
from Bartolome, althoughcontaininghandwrittennotes be prohibited. Accordingly, the existence of criminal
ere, however, thecircumstantialevidencepresentedby
H intent is immaterial in the crime of hazing. Also, the
that included his name and markings related to Tau
the prosecution is insufficient for the conviction of
Gamma PhiFraternity,doesnotnecessarilyestablishhis defense of good faith cannot be raisedin its prosecution.
petitioners. Essentially, the prosecution failed to
membership in the fraternity. Moreover, assuming that ecognizing the malum prohibitum characteristic of
R
establish the elements of hazing under RA 8049, to wit:
he indeed had some connection with Tau Gamma Phi hazing,thelawprovidesthatanypersonchargedwiththe
1. Th
at there is an initiation rite or practice as a Fraternityonthebasisofthehandwrittennotesfoundin said crime shall not be entitled to the mitigating
prerequisite for admission into membershipina the document, such connection does not automatically circumstance that there was no intention to commitso
fraternity, sorority or organization; mean membership. In fact the possibility that he was graveawrong.Also,theframersofthelawintendedthat
2. Th
at there must be a recruit, n
eophyte o r himself a mere recruit, neophyte, or applicant who theconsent of the victim shall not be a defenseinhazing.
applicant of the fraternity, sorority or sought admission into membership in Tau Gamma Phi
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page140of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
.A.No.8049presentsanovelprovisionthatintroducesa
R accused,not by the prosecution. f oresight or skill. Here, the threatened harm is not
immediate, and the danger is not openly visible.
disputable presumption of actual participation; and owever, the indictment merely states thatpsychological
H
which modifies the concept of conspiracy. The presence pain and physical injuries were inflicted on the victim.
ofanypersonduringthehazingisprimafacieevidenceof There is no allegation that the purported acts were
participation as principal, unless he prevented the employed as a prerequisite for admission or entry into People v. Feliciano2016
commission of the punishable acts. the organization. Thus, the Information must be 1. D
eathorinjuriescausedbyfraternityrumblesarenot
quashed. treated as separate or distinct crimes, unlike deaths
or injuries as a resultofhazing.Theyarepunishable
Bayabos v. People2015 as ordinary crimes of murder, homicide, or physical
Villareal v. People2012 injuries under the RPC.
ailurebyschoolauthoritiestotakeanyactiontoprevent
F
the offenses as provided by the law exposes them to rior to the 1995 Anti-Hazing Law, there was to some
P 2. Th
e prosecution of fraternity-related violence,
criminal liability as accomplices in the criminal acts. extent a lacuna in the law; hazing was not clearly however, is harder than the prosecution of ordinary
Thus, theinstitutionanditsofficerscannotstandidlyby consideredanintentionalfelony.Andwhenthereisdoubt crimes. Most of the time, the evidence is merely
in the face of patently criminal acts committed within on the interpretation of criminal laws, all must be circumstantial. The reason is obvious: loyalty to the
their sphere of responsibility. resolved in favor of the accused.In dubio pro reo. fraternity dictates that brods do not turn on their
brods.Acrimecangounprosecutedforaslongasthe
irst,werejectthecontentionofrespondentsthatPMMA
F e absence of malicious intent does not automatically
Th
should not be considered anorganization.Itisincluded mean, however,thattheaccusedfraternitymembersare brotherhood remains silent.
in the term organization within the meaning of the law. ultimately devoid of criminal liability. Reckless
imprudence or negligence consists of a voluntary act
e alsodisagreewiththeSandiganbayanrulingthatthe
W
donewithoutmalice,fromwhichanimmediatepersonal rimes Against Personal Liberty and
C
quashal of the Information was warranted for failure to
harm, injury or material damageresultsbyreasonofan Security
H
allege that the purported acts were not covered by the
inexcusable lack of precaution or advertenceonthepart Title Nine
exemption relating to the duly recommended and
of the person committing it. In this case, the danger is
approved “testing and training procedure andpractices” Illegal Detention
visible and consciously appreciated by the actor. In
forprospectiveregularmembersoftheAFPandthePNP.
contrast,simpleimprudenceornegligencecomprisesan
This exemption is an affirmative defense in, not an 267 Kidnapping and serious illegal detention
act done without grave fault, from which an injury or
essential element of,thecrimeofaccomplicetohazing.
material damage ensues by reason of a mere lack of Penalty isRP to Death
It is an assertion that must be properly claimed by the
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page141of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
1) Offender is aprivate individual; 3) Act is illegal; 3. W
hen the victimisfemale,detentionisunderArt267.
Voluntary release is not mitigating in that article.
2) K
idnaps ordetainsanother, depriving the latter of 4) Without any of the circumstances in Art 267.
his liberty; Penalty lowered toPM min-medwhenoffender Kidnapping of minors
3) Act is illegal; a) v oluntarily releases captive within 3 days, when he 270 Kidnapping and failure to return a minor
4) Any of the following circumstance is present: was in the position to prolong detention;
1) Offender is entrusted with the custody of a minor;
a) lasts for more than 3 days; b) without having attained the purpose intended;and
2) D
eliberately fails to restore said minor to his
b) simulating public authority; c) before the institution of criminal proceedings.
parents or guardians.
c) a ny serious physical injuries are inflicted or 269 Unlawful arrest
threats to kill detainee are made; 271 Inducing a minor to abandon his home
1) Offender arrests or detains another;
d) d
etainee is a minor, female, or a public 1) Th
e minor is living in the home of his parents or
officer;OR 2) Purpose is to deliver him to the proper authorities; guardian or the person entrusted with is custody;
e) Person is kidnapped forransom. 3) N
ot authorized by law or there is no reasonable 2) Induces said minor to abandon such home.
ground therefor.
Maximum penalty ofDeath Abandonment and Exploitation
1) if the purpose is toextortmoney; NOTES RE ILLEGAL DETENTION bandonment of persons in danger and of one's
A
275
2) v ictim is killed or dies as a consequence;special 1. The essence of the crime of kidnapping is own victim
complex crime
a. theactual deprivation of the victim's liberty 1) F
ailing to render assistance to any person offender
3) victim is raped;special complex crime finds:
b. c oupled with an indubitable proof of intenton
4) victim is subjected to torture or dehumanizing acts. the part of the malefactor to effect such a) In anuninhabitedplace,
restraint on the offended party's liberty.
268 Slight illegal detention b) wounded or in danger of dying,
2. A
publicofficermusthavedutyunderthelawtodetain
1) Offender is a private individual; c) w
hilst he can render assistance without
persons,otherwisehemaybeliableforkidnappingand
detriment to himself,
2) K
idnaps or detains another, depriving the latter of not arbitrary detention.
his liberty; d) he fails to render such, and
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page142of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
e) s uch omission shall not constitute a more 2) It is uninhabited; 1) Makes a threat to commit a wrong;
serious offense. 2) Does not amount to a crime;
3) Prohibition to enter be manifest;
2) F
ailing to help or assist another whom offender 4) H
as not secured the permission of the owner or 3) Th
ere is demand for money or imposing any other
accidentally wounded or injured. caretaker. condition, even though not unlawful; and
3) F
ailing to deliver a child under 7 years whom 4) Offender has or has not attained his purpose.
offender found abandoned, to the authorities or to Threats and Coercion
285 Other light threats
his family, or by failing to take him to a safe place. 282 Grave threats
Acts Punished
276 Abandoning a minor 1) Where offender attained his purpose
1) (a) Threatening another with a weapon, or
1) Offender has custody of a child; a) Th
reatening another with the infliction
upon hisperson,honororpropertyor that ( b) by drawing such weapon in a quarrel, unless it
2) Who is under 7 years of age;
of his family of any wrong be in lawful self-defense;
3) Abandons such child;
b) amounting to a crime and 2) O
rally threatening another,in the heat of anger,with
4) Has no intent to kill when child is abandoned. some harm constituting a crime, without persisting
c) d
emanding money or imposing any other
in the idea involved in his threat;
Trespass condition, even though not unlawful, and
3) O
rally threatening another to do any harm not
280 Trespass to dwelling d) the offender attained his purpose.
constituting a felony.
2) Where offender did not attain his purpose;
1) Offender is a private person; 286 Grave coercions
3) Not subject to a condition
2) Enters the dwelling of another;
Acts punished
a) Th
reatening another of infliction upon his
3) Against the latter's will.
person, honor or property or that of his 1) P
reventing another, by means of violence, threats or
Qualified: By means ofviolenceorintimidation family of any wrong intimidation from doing something legal.
281 Other forms of trespass b) amounting to a crime and 2) C
ompelling another, by means of violence, threats
or intimidation, to do something against his will,
c) not subject to a condition.
1) O
ffender enters the closed premises or the fenced may it be right or wrong.
estate of another; 283 Light threats
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page143of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Qualifiedif the coercion is committed o r employee of the offender to purchase c oalitions of capital or labor, strike of laborers or
merchandise of any kind from him. lockout of employers.
1) in violation of the right of suffrage;
a) O
ffender is any person, agent or officer of
2) compel another to perform or People v. Mendoza2023
any association or corporation;
3) prevent another from performing any religious act. b) Employed laborers or employees; and eprosecutionestablishedbeyondreasonabledoubtthe
Th
Elements existence of all the elements ofKidnapping for Ransom.
c) F
orces or compels, directly or indirectly, or
1) A
person ispreventedfrom doing something legal, knowingly permits such be done to the F irst, accused-appellants' intent to deprive Carrie of her
orcompelledto do something against his will; employee of the offender to purchase liberty was evident from the moment she was forcibly
merchandise of any kind from him. taken at gunpoint.
2) E
ffected throughviolence,threatsorintimidation;
and 2) P
aying the wages due his laborer or employee by econd, the victim herself categoricallynarratedhowshe
S
means of tokens or objects other than the legal wasbroughttoAngono,Rizalanddetainedinanipahut
3) Th
e restraint shallnot be authorizedor not in the for four days. Duringthesaidperiod,Carriewasunable
tender, unless expressly requested by the employee.
exercise of a lawful right. to communicatewithherfamilyortogohome.Thiswas
a) O
ffender pays the wages due a laborer by
287 Light coercions corroborated by state witness Mendoza who personally
means of tokens or objects;
guarded and fed Carrie in the course of her detention.
1) Offender is acreditor; b) Not legal tender;
ird, the prosecution has successfully established that
Th
2) Seizes anything belonging to his debtor; c) Not expressly requested by the employee. the purpose of kidnapping Carrie was to extort money
3) B
y means of violence, or display of material force from her.
ormation, maintenance and prohibition of
F
producing intimidation; 2 89 combination of capital or labor through violence or
➔ I f no violence or intimidation,unjust threats
People v. Resurrecion2022 En Banc
vexation
1) O
ffender employs violence or threats, in such a e RTC, as affirmed by the CA and the SC, found the
Th
4) Purpose is to apply same to the payment of debt. degree as to compel or force the laborers or totality of the circumstantial evidence adduced by the
employers in the free and legal exercise of their prosecution sufficient to support accused-appellants'
288 Other similar coercions
industry or work. conviction of the crime charged, viz.:
1) F
orcing or compelling, directly or indirectly, or
2) Purpose is to organize, maintain or prevent Thefollowingcircumstantialevidenceindubitablyledthis
knowingly permitting such be done to the laborer
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page144of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c ourt to conclude that Spouses Huang were indeed ithplatenumberWKV-152,[park]besideElisa'scar,and
w orkidnappingtoexist,itisnotnecessarythattheoffended
F
kidnapped and detained: again tailed Elisa's car until Elisa dropped the ransom partybekeptwithinanenclosuretorestrictherfreedomof
along the southbound of SLEX; and locomotion. It is enoughthat,asintheinstantcase,she
F irst, Police Senior Inspector Cresencio Arganda, PO3
Maleo David Manzano and PCI Jonel Guadalupe of the was in any manner deprived of her liberty, unable to
F inally, Officer Guadalupe positively avowed he saw
Anti-Kidnapping Group Camp Crame, Quezon City accused Viñesa get the money along thebridgenearthe move - and get out - as she pleased.
categorically testified that on 10 August 2013, Jenny, Petron gas station of SLEX southbound. Therulenowis:Wherethepersonkidnappediskilledin
Elisa's sister, lodged a complaint forkidnappingattheir t hecourseofthedetention,regardlessofwhetherthekilling
office; was purposely sought or was merely an afterthought, the
People v. Cornista2020 kidnapping and murder or homicide can no longer be
econd, Officers Arganda, Manzano and Guadalupe also
S
averred that, after Jenny's complaint, they fetched Elisa I n the special complex crime ofKidnappingforRansom complexed under Art. 48, nor be treated as separate
from GMA Cavite where Elisa was released by the with Homicide, the person kidnapped is killed in the crimes,butshallbepunishedasaspecialcomplexcrime
kidnappers purposely to raise the ransom money for courseofthedetention,regardlessofwhetherthekilling under the last paragraph of Art. 267, as amended.
Jason's release. was purposely sought or was merely an afterthought.
ird,OfficersArganda,ManzanoandGuadalupefurther
Th ere, the prosecution was able to prove the foregoing
H People v. Anticamara2011
avowed and maintained they were with Elisa, at their elements.
office,whenshenegotiatedwiththekidnappersoverthe elastparagraphofArticle267oftheRPCprovidesthat
Th
1. Arturo was taken against his will. if the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of the
phone concerning the amount of the ransom.
2. endoza testified thatappellantsbroughtArturo
M detention, or is raped or subjected to torture or
F ourth, PO3 Manzano, the Investigator-on-case, averred dehumanizing acts, the maximum penalty shall be
to a small house in Angono, Rizal. He further
he was present when Elisa Huang prepared the ransom imposed. InPeoplev.Larrañaga,thisprovisiongivesrise
witnessed that Arturo's hands were tied at the
money,andidentifiedthelistoftheserialnumbersofthe to a specialcomplexcrime.Thus,Weholdthatappellant
back with a chain.
ransom bills used in the pay-off. Lando is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the special
3. ansom money was demanded for the releaseof
R
F ifth, Officers Arganda, Manzano and Guadalupe also complex crime of kidnapping and serious illegal
Arturo.
avowedtheycloselytailedandmonitoredElisa'scaralong detention with rape.
SLEXafterElisawasinstructedbythekidnapperstodrop 4. Arturo was killed in the course of the detention.
owever, the Court doesnotagreewiththeCAandtrial
H
the ransom. court's judgment finding appellant Al liable forRape.In
Sixth,thesameoperativessawthewhiteHondaCiviccar, People v. Suyu, We ruled that once conspiracy is
People v. Benedicto Ramos
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page145of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
e stablishedbetweenseveralaccusedinthecommissionof idnapping and Serious Illegal Detention to the special
K rticle267oftheRPCiftheyactintheirprivatecapacity.
A
the crime of robbery, they would all be equally culpable complex crime of Kidnapping for Ransom with Theburdenisontheaccusedtoprovethatheorsheacted
for the rape committed by anyone of them on the Homicide, which carries the penalty ofdeath. in furtherance of his or her official functions.
occasion of the robbery, unless anyone of them proves
I n this case, Ronalyn was clearly deprived ofherliberty.
that he endeavored to prevent the others from She was forcibly taken inside a vehicle by
committing rape. People v. Bandoquillo2016
accused-appellantandhiscohortsandwasdrivenaround
ereisnoevidencetoprovethatappellantAlwasaware
Th andoquillo is a private individual who, along with his
B Quezon City for at least five (5) hours.
of thesubsequenteventsthattranspiredafterthekilling cohorts, kidnapped Hung Yee Chua (Yee) and 5 minors.
of Sulpacio and the kidnapping of AAA. Appellant Al The abductors simulated public authority by
could not have prevented appellant Lando from raping misrepresenting themselves as PDEA agents when they eople v. Concepcion2018
P
forcibly took the victims. In kidnapping and serious rekidnapping absorbed in rape
AAA, because at the time of rape, he was no longer
associated with appellant Lando. illegal detention for ransom, the purpose of extorting ccused abducted the victim and then raped her.
A
ransom is a qualifying circumstance which must be Thereafter, he prevented her from leaving by placing
allegedintheInformationandprovedbytheprosecution electric wire around the room where she was in to
People v. Dionaldo2014 asthecrimeitselfbywordsandovertactsoftheaccused prevent anyone who might come to release her. The
eCourtis,however,constrainedtomodifytherulingof
Th before,duringandafterthekidnappinganddetentionof abductionofthevictimbytheaccusedisabsorbedinthe
the victim. In the case at bench, the Information didnot crimeofrapesinceitwasresortedtoinordertocommit
theRTCandtheCA,asthecrimetheaccused-appellants
have committed does not merely constitute Kidnapping contain an allegation that Bandoquillo and his cohorts the latter crime.
and Serious Illegal Detention, but that of the special intendedtoextortransomtoobtainthereleaseofthevictims.
e continued detentionofAAAaftertherapecannotbe
Th
Accordingly, Bandoquillo should be convicted only of
complex crime of Kidnapping for Ransom with deemedabsorbedinit.Thedetentionwasillegalandnot
Homicide. This is in view of the victim’s (i.e., Edwin's) simple kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
attended by the circumstances that would render it
death, which was (a) specifically charged in the serious illegal detention. Thus, this Court finds
Information,and(b)clearlyestablishedduringthetrialof accused-appellant guilty of the crime of slight illegal
People v. Borja2017
this case. detention.
publicofficerwhodetainsapersonforthepurposeof
A
urther taking into accountthefactthatthekidnapping
F
extorting ransom cannot be said to be acting in an
was committed for the purpose of extorting ransom,
official capacity. In People v. Santiano, this Court
I Crimes Against Property
accused-appellants’ conviction must be modified from
explained that public officials may be prosecuted under
Title Ten
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page146of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Anti-Fencing Law of 1979 NOTES buildings.
1. W
here the taking was lawful and the unlawful d) P
enalty based solely on value if carried out in
Bouncing Checks Law
misappropriationwassubsequentthereto,thecrimeis uninhabited buildings.
New Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016 estafa or malversation. But if intent from the very
5. I f robbery was effected by employing both violence
beginning was to gain from the prohibited material,
Motorcycle Crime Prevention Act against or intimidation of persons and forceuponthe
even with lawful taking, then it isrobbery. things, the latterwillbeabsorbedbytheformer.Thus,
Law on Arson
2. U
nlawful taking complete from the moment the offender thepropercrimetobechargedisunderArt294,notArt
gains possession ofthethingastorobberywithviolence 299.
Robbery against or intimidation of persons. The thing mustbe 6. R
A10883,theNewAnti-CarnappingActof2016,which
taken out of the building as to robbery with force upon lapsed into law on July 17, 2016, is the law applicable
293 Robbery, in general things. when property taken in robbery is a motor vehicle.
1) Elements of robbery in general 3. I norderfortheelementofviolenceorintimidationto
obbery with violence against or intimidation of
R
be appreciated, it must be present before the taking of 294
a) t here be (1)personal property,(2)belonging to persons
personal property is complete. Except, when the violence
another;
results in (a) homicide, (b) rape, (c) intentional Par 1. Robbery with homicide
b) there is (3)unlawful takingof that property; mutilation,(d)orseriousphysicalinjuriesunderpars1
1) R
obberywithhomicideistakeninitsgenericsense
c) such must be (4)with intent to gain; and and 2.
and absorbs all other crimes, i.e. serious physical
d) t here is (5)violence againstorintimidation of 4. Robbery at a glance injuries,contemporaneousthereto.Ifcommittedby
any person,orforce upon anything. a) I f there is violence against or intimidation of any a band, such becomes only a generic aggravating
person, always robbery. circumstance.
2) Classification of robbery
b) I n the first type of robbery, the value of robbed 2) O
ne of the following must be proven that the
a) W
ith violence against, or intimidation of
property is immaterial. Penalty depends on (1) the homicide was committed:
persons (Arts 294, 297, 298);
resultoftheviolenceused,and(2)ontheexistence a) to facilitate the robbery or escape of culprits;
b) B
y the use of force upon things (Arts 299, of intimidation.
302) b) to preserve the possession of the loot;
c) O
nthesecondtype,penaltyisbasedon(1)value,(2)
c) to prevent discovery; or
carrying of arms, if carried out in inhabited
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page147of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
d) to eliminate witnesses or suppress evidence. a) an uninhabited place, or d) Did not attempt to prevent assault.
Par 1. Robbery with rape b) by a band, or 298 Robbery by execution of deeds
1) The intent to gain must precede the rape. c) b
y attacking a moving train, street car, motor
1) Offenderintends to defraudanother;
2) C
ommitted when the robbery is accompanied by vehicle, or airship, or
2) C
ompels him to sign, execute, or deliverany public
rape. d) b
y entering the passengers' compartments in a
instrument or document;
3) The rape must be consummated. train, or
3) By means of violence or intimidation.
Pars 2-3. Robbery with serious physical injuries e) o n a street, road, highway, or alley, and with the use
of firearms. obbery in an inhabited house, public building, or
R
1) Th
e injuries were inflicted in the course of the 299
edifice devoted to public worship
robbery; and 296 Robbery by a band
2) Inflicted upon those not responsible for the crime. Elements of subdivision A
1) A
t least four armedmalefactors take part in
Par 4. Robbery with unnecessary violence and intimidation committing robbery. 1) Offenderentered
1) I f the violence or intimidation employed in the 2) W
hen any of the arms used isunlicensed, the a) an inhabited place, or
commission of the robbery penalty uponall robbersshall be themaximum b) public building, or
correspondingpenalty,without prejudice to the
2) s hall have been carried to a degree clearly c) edifice devoted to religious worship.
criminal liability of illegal possession of such firearms.
unnecessary for the commission of the crime, or
2) Theentranceeffected by:
3) A
ny member present shall be punished as principal
3) w
hen in the course of its execution, the offender
of any of the assaults, unless it be shown that he a) a n opening not intended for entrance or
shall have inflicted upon any person not responsible
attempted to prevent the same. egress;
for its commission any of the physical injuries
covered by subdivisions 3 and 4 of Article 263. 4) A
band member is liable for any assaults committed b) b
reakingany wall, roof, or floor or breaking
when the following concur: any door or window;
Par 5. Robbery with the use of violence and intimidation
a) He was a member; c) usingfalse keys, picklocks or similar tools;
➔ Simple robbery.
b) Present at the commission of robbery; d) u
sing anyfictitious nameor pretending the
obbery under subdivisions3, 4, 5ofArt 294qualifiedif
R exercise of public authority.
committed in: c) Others committed the assault;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page148of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
3) O
nce inside, takes personal property of another 1) Dependenciesmust be to gain.
with intent to gain. 304 Possession of picklocks or similar tools
a) Contiguous,
Elements of subdivision B b) h ave an interior entrance connected therewith,
1) Offender haspossession;
1) Offender is inside regardless of how he entered; and
2) Such are specially adapted to commit robbery; and
2) The unlawful taking done by c) form part of the whole.
3) Possession wasunlawful.
a) b
reaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any 2) O
rchards and lands used for cultivation,not
other kind of locked or sealed furniture or dependencies.
False keys
receptacle;OR
obbery in an uninhabited place or in a private
R 1 ) (a) Art 304; (b) Genuine keys stolen from owner; (c) Any
b) b
y taking such away to be broken or forced 302
building keys.
open outside.
300 Robbery in an uninhabited place and by a band
1) O
ffender enters an uninhabited or a private Brigandage
building.
306 Brigandage
1. Q
ualifies Art 299. Punished by themaximum
2) Any was present:
periodof the penalty therefor. Exists when
a) e ntrance was effected through an opening
2. Th
at the place be uninhabited, and committed by a 1) There are at least four armed men.
not intended for egress;
bandmust concur.
b) a wall, roof, floor, or outside door or window 2) Forming a band of robbers;
3. Th
e inhabited house, public building, edifice for was broken; 3) Purpose is to
religions worship must belocated in an
uninhabited place. c) f alse keys, picklocks, were used to effect a) commit robbery in the highway,
entrance;
4. A
rt 299 is qualified whenbothcircumstances b) kidnap for ransom, or
concur. In Robbery with violence against or d) a door, wardrobe, chest, was broken;
c) a ttain by means of force and violence any
intimidation of persons,eithermay qualify (Art e) a closed or sealed receptacle was removed, other purpose.
295). and be broken open elsewhere.
307 Aiding and abetting brigands
What is an inhabited house and their dependencies 3) Personal property of another was taken with intent
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page149of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
1) There is a band of brigands; 1) Taking of personal property;
ecessaryforsaidcircumstancetobepremeditated
n
2) Offender knows; inordertobetakenintoconsideration.Itspresence
2) belonging to another; in the commission of the crime is sufficient.
3) Does any: 3) done with intent to gain; 3. Th
eft by domestic servant alwaysqualified.Notso
a) aids, abets, protects 4) without consent of owner; for housemate. Not for laborer.
b) gives info on police movement; 5) b
e accomplishedwithoutviolence against or, 4. Th
eft by truckdriverorbyshepherdorbyonewho
c) a cquires or receives property taken by such intimidation of persons, or force upon things. hadaccesstotheplacewherethestolenpropertyis
brigands. kept is qualified theft.
310. Qualified Theftif
Theft
1) theft committed by adomestic servant; Usurpation
308 Theft
2) withgrave abuse of confidence; 312 Occupation of real property
Who are liable for theft 3) property stolen is a Acts punished
1) W
ith intent to gain, but without violence against or a) motor vehicle,
1) t aking possession of any real property of another by
intimidation of persons nor force upon things, take,
b) mail matter, means of violence against or intimidation of
personal property, of another, without the latter's
c) large cattle; persons.
consent.
4) consists of coconuts taken from plantation; 2) u
surping any real rights in property belonging to
2) H
aving found lost property, fail to deliver same to
another by means of VAIP.
the local authorities or its owner. 5) fish taken from fishpond or fishery;
Elements
3) A
fter having maliciously damaged the property of 6) o n the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon,
another, remove or make use of the fruits or object volcanic eruption, or any other calamity, vehicular 1) t akes possession of any real property or usurps any
of the damage caused by them. real rights thereof;
accident, civil disturbance.
4) E
nter an enclosed estate or a field where trespass is 2) belongs to another;
Qualified Theft
forbidden and without consent, hunt or fish upon 3) violence against or intimidation of persons is used;
the same or gather fruits, cereals or other forest or 1. Penalty istwo degrees higher.
4) with intent to gain.
farm products. 2. G
rave abuse of confidence is a mere circumstance
Elements which aggravates and qualifies the crime. It isnot 313 Altering boundaries or landmarks
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page150of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
1) Th
ere be boundary marks or monuments, or ossess power, influence, qualifications, property,credit,
p caused upon injured party.
estates; agency,businessorimaginarytransactions,orbymeans Elements of estafa with unfaithfulness (sub 1[a])
2) Offender alters same. of other similar deceits.
1) O
ffender has an onerous obligation to deliver
b) a ltering the quality, fineness or weight of anything
314 Fraudulent insolvency something of value;
pertaining to his art or business.
2) He alters its substance, quality or quantity;
1) O
ffender is adebtorwith due and demandable c) p
retending to have bribed any Government
obligation; employee. (maximum penalty) 3) Damage or prejudice is caused.
2) He absconds with his property; d) postdatingor issuing a bouncing check. Elements of estafa with abuse of confidence (sub 1[b])
3) To theprejudiceof his creditors. e) o btaining any foodoraccommodation,orcreditof 1) M
oney, goods, or other personal property be received in
such.
Swindling and Other Deceits trust, or on commission, or for administration, or under
( par 3) BY ANY OF THE FOLLOWING FRAUDULENT anyotherobligationinvolvingthedutytomakedelivery
315 Swindling orEstafa MEANS of, or to return.
Fraud committed by these means: a) i nducing another, by means of deceit, to sign a 2) Such has beenmisappropriated or converted;
( par 1) WITH UNFAITHFULNESS OR ABUSE OF document;
3) To the prejudice of another;
CONFIDENCE b) r esorting to some fraudulent practice to insure
4) Th
ere is demand from offended party (not required
a) a lteringthesubstance,quantity,orqualityofanything success in a gambling game; when there is evidence of misappropriation)
of value; c) r emoving,concealing,ordestroying,inwholeorin ➔ Three (3) ways of committing
b) m isappropriating o r converting any personal part,anycourtrecord,officefiles,document,orany
other papers. 1) misappropriatingor
property received in t rust, or denying to having
received same; Elements in general 2) convertingthe thing received; or
c) t aking undue advantage of the signature in blank, 1) Accuseddefraudedanother by 3) denyingthat the thing was received.
and by writing any document above such. 1. E
stafa by conversion. Pledging a thing which was
a) abuse of confidence, or
(par 2)BY FALSE PRETENSES receivedonlytobesoldoncommission.Itpresupposes
b) means ofdeceit; and that the thing has been devoted to a purpose or use
a) using fictitious names, or falsely pretending to
2) Damageorprejudicecapableofpecuniaryestimation different from that agreed upon.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page151of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
2. E
stafa by misappropriation. Appellant took the sum of 2) O
ffended party should have delivered it to the 2) D
one when theoffenderhadnofundsinthebank,
P8.3KoutofthefundsoftheManilaRailroadCompany, offender; orhisfundsdepositedthereinwerenotsufficientto
replacing it with his personal check. He directed the 3) A cover the amount.
documentiswrittenabovethesignaturewithout
cashier to hold the check untilendofmonth.Heused
authority;
the amount for his personal use. It was found out he lements of estafa by inducing anothertosignanydocument.
E
hadinsufficientfundstocoverthecheck,thoughlater, 4) Liability or damage is caused to another. (No 3[a])
he was able to replenishsaidaccount.Heisstillguilty
Elements of estafa by means of DECEIT (subs 2, 3) 1) O
ffender induced offended party to sign a
because the law does not distinguish between
document;
permanent and temporary misappropriations. 1) Th
ere must be a false pretense, fraudulent act, or
fraudulent means; 2) Deceit be employed;
3. I nestafa,damagetotheoffendedparty,notthegainof
the offender, is the important consideration. 2) M 3) Offended party personally signed;
ust be made prior to or simultaneously with the
4. D
emand is not legally required, but is necessary to commissionof the fraud; 4) Prejudice be caused.
showcircumstantialevidenceofmisappropriationafter 3) O
ffended party relied on it, or was inducedbyitto ere should be proof that defendant made statements
Th
failing to account upon demand. part with his property. tending to mislead the complainant as tothecharacterof
5. There is no estafa through negligence. the document executed by him.
4) There is damage.
6. E
stafa throughfalsificationofpublicdocuments(FPD) Three (3) ways of committing Art 315 No. 2[a] lements of estafa by removing, concealing, or destroying
E
is necessarily included in a charge of malversation documents (No 3[c])
1) usingfictitious name;
through FPD. 1) Th
erebecourtrecord,officefiles,documentsorany
2) f alsely pretending to possess: power, influence, other papers;
7. M
isappropriation of policemanoffirearmsreceivedis:
qualifications,property,credit,agency,businessor
estafa, when it is not involved in the commission of a 2) O
ffender removed, concealed or destroyed any of
imaginary transactions; or
crime, andmalversation, if it is involved. them;
3) throughsimilar deceits.
3) With intent to defraud another.
lementsofestafabytakingundueadvantageofthesignature
E lements of estafa by postdating a check orissuingacheckin
E
in blank (sub 1[c]) Element of damage or prejudice may consist in:
payment of an obligation. (No 2[d])
1) Th
e paper with the signatureoftheoffendedparty 1) O
ffended party being deprived of his money or
1) O
ffender postdated a check, or issued a check in
be in blank; property, as result of the defraudation;
payment of an obligation;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page152of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
2) Disturbance in property right; or 1) Thing beimmovable; or for labor not performed.
Par 6. By selling, mortgaging or encumbering real property or
3) Temporary prejudice. 2) Offender falsely represents to be the owner;
properties with which the offender guaranteed the
3) Executed an act of ownership; fulfillment of his obligation as surety.
NOTES RE ESTAFA
4) To the prejudice of owner or a third person. 1) Offender is asuretyin a bond;
1. D
isturbance in property rights. Though the typewriter
was later recovered after it was sold to another by Par 2. By disposing of real property as free from encumbrance, 2) He guaranteed with his real property/ies;
accused, complainant suffered disturbance of his although such be not recorded.
3) He encumbers said guaranty;
property right over said typewriter. 1) Thing disposed is real property;
4) Such encumbrance is
2. Th
e basis of penalty is the amount or value 2) O
ffender knew of the encumbrance, recorded or
misappropriated and not delivered or returned before not. a) without express authority from court,
theinstitutionofcriminalaction.Paymentsubsequent b) m
ade before the cancellation of his bond,
3) Th
ere is express representation that the property is
to the commission of estafa does not distinguish the OR
freefrom any encumbrance;
criminal liability.
4) There is damage to another. c) before being relieved from the bond.
3. T
emporary prejudice. Complainant boughtafilterfrom
Par 3. By wrongfully taking by the owner his personal property There must be damage caused under Art 316.
an agent throughacheck.Thefilterwasnotdelivered,
andfoundagenttobebogus.Hecalledbanktosuspend from its lawful possessor 317 Swindling a minor
payment. Thus, he could not disposeoftheamountin 1) Offender is the owner of personal property;
1) O
ffender takes advantage of the inexperience,
the check possessed by the accused bogus agent.
2) It is in the lawful possession of another; emotions, or feelings of a minor;
4. I f a person procures a loan through a falsified public
3) O
ffender wrongfully takes it from its lawful 2) Induces such minor
document,butsettlessaidloaninduetime,thereisno
possessor;
estafa, only falsification. a) to assume an obligation,
4) P
rejudice is caused upon the possessor or a third
5. There is a complex crime of theft and estafa. b) to give release,OR
person.
316 Other forms of swindling c) to execute a transfer of any property right;
Par 4. By executing any fictitious contract to the prejudice of
another 3) Consideration be
Par 1. By conveying, selling, encumbering, or mortgaging any
real property, pretending to be the owner of the same. Par 5. By accepting any compensation for services not rendered a) some loan of money,
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page153of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
b) credit,OR the occasion thereof or as an accompanying crime. an entrustee,
c) other personal property; e prosecution sufficiently established the elements of
Th 2. where the entrustor transfers possession
the crime of Robbery with Rape 3.
4) To the detriment of the minor. o f specific goods, among others, to which he or
s regards the charge of Grave Threats, the crime was
A she has ownership or absolute title thereto,
318 Other deceits consummatedassoonasthevictimheardBuezautterhis
4. t o the entrustee upon the latter's execution and
threatening remarks. Article 282 of the RPCholdsliable
1) D
efrauding or damaging another by any other delivery of a document called a trust receipt.
for Grave Threats anypersonwhoshallthreatenanother
deceit not mentioned in the preceding articles. I f the goods are not sold or otherwise disposed, the
withtheinflictionupontheperson,honor,orpropertyof
2) I nterpreting dreams, by making forecasts, telling the latter or of his family of any wrong amounting to a entrustee shall return the goods themselves. The law
fortunes, or by taking advantage of the credulity of crime.Itwasinconsequentialthatthethreatwasmadein punishesthetrustee'sfailuretoturnovertheproceedsof
the public in any other similar manner,for profitor thepresenceofanumberofpeoplesincetheoffensedoes the sale of the goods covered, or to return the goods
gain. not require that it be committed in private. themselves if not sold.
ursuanttotherulinginPeoplev.Tulagan,Buezaistobe
P nder Section 13 of the law, suchfailureshallconstitute
U
People v. Bueza2020 held criminally liable for Robbery with Rape defined thecrimeofEstafaunderArt315,par1(b)oftheRPC.The
under Article 294, Paragraph 1 of the RPC and of Grave offense of violation of the Trust Receipts Law is malum
obbery with Rape ispenalizedunderArticle294ofthe
R
Threats under Article 282 of the RPC. prohibitum:merefailuretoturnovertheproceedsofthe
RPC. The following elements must concur:
sale, or to return the goods themselves if not sold,
1. t hetakingofpersonalpropertyiscommittedwith amounts to the violation.
violence or intimidation against persons;
Chua v. Secretary of Justice2022 ere,thereisprobablecausetoholdpetitionersliablefor
H
2. the property taken belongs to another; violating the TrustReceiptsLawsincetheyfailedtoturn
e SOJ did not commit grave abuse of discretion in
Th
3. t he taking is characterized by intent to gain or overtheproceedsofthesaleofgoodsorreturnthegoods
ordering the filing of four counts of Estafa under the
animus lucrandi; and themselves.
RPC, in relation to the Trust Receipts Law, against
4. the Robbery is accompanied by Rape. petitioners. I n sum, the SOJ did not err or gravely abuse her
discretioninfindingprobablecausetochargepetitioners
I t contemplates a situation where the original intent of ection4oftheTrustReceiptsLawdefinesatrustreceipt
S
with Estafa in relation to the Trust Receipts Law.
the accused was to take, with intent to gain, personal transactionas
propertybelongingtoanotherandRapeiscommittedon 1. any transaction by andbetweenanentrusterand
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page154of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
People v. Liwanag2022 crucial element of taking with intent to gain. Doctrinal Rule
e records show that Horca actually used the money
Th eceit is defined as the false representation of a matter of fact
D
ase law holds that the same pieces of evidence that
C
covered by the checks for its intended purpose, i.e., to whetherbywordsorconduct,byfalseormisleadingallegations,
establish liability for Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale
purchasetheairlinetickets,albeitonlyfourwereinitially or by concealment of that which should have been disclosed
confirm culpability for Estafa.
delivered.Horcaexplainedthatwhileshewasabletobuy which deceives or is intendedtodeceiveanothersothatheshall
ere, Liwanag defrauded the four private complainants
H theticketsfortheSistersofProvidence,theremaining15 act upon it to his legal injury.
by making them believe that she has the capacity to tickets were notdeliveredtoSisterReynoldsbecausethe
etitionersarenottheownersofthesubjectpropertyyet
P
deploy them to Japan as factoryworkers,evenifshedid flight wascancelledsincetherewasastrikeduetoSwiss
they brazenly sold the property to Sps Dulos.
not have the authority or licenseforthepurpose.Allthe Air's bankruptcy.
victims suffered damages in the amount ofP40.5Keach e elements of Estafa by means of deceit as defined
Th
I tisalsonotestablishedfromtherecordsifHorcatookor under Article 315(2)(a) of the RPC are present in this case.
as the promised employment abroad never materialized.
received the money after Swiss Air reimbursed the
amount to the travel agency. Per Horca's account, when 1. irst, petitioners made false pretenses and
F
theflightwascancelled,SwissAirrefundedthemoneyto fraudulent misrepresentations to complainants:
Horca v. People2021
Expert Travel and not to her. 1.1. t hat they owned the subject property
nder Article 308 of the RPC, the crime of theft is
U which they could sell;
owever, her acquittal does not necessarily amount to
H
committed when the following elements concur:
her absolution from civil liability. The fact remains that 1.2. t hattheyareprocessingthereconstitution
1. that there be taking of personal property; Sister Reynolds and her congregation was prejudiced of the title;
2. that said property belongs to another; whentheypaidfortheticketsbutdidnotgetreimbursed
1.3. that they are the Isidro and Virginia Dulay;
when the flight was cancelled.
3. that the taking be done with intent to gain; 1.4. t hat Virginia and Elena are one and the
hile the Court acquits petitioner because reasonable
W
4. t hatthetakingbedonewithouttheconsentofthe same person; among others
doubt exists anent her guilt, Horca is adjudged to be
owner; and civilly accountable considering that preponderant 2. e remaining elements of the offense are
Th
5. t he taking be accomplished without the use of evidence exists to establish her liability. likewise present.
violence, intimidation, or force upon persons or 2.1. etitioners' false pretense of ownership
P
things. which could transfer valid title to the
Sps Dulay III v. People2021 subject property, was committed prior to
Here, the prosecution failed to sufficiently prove the
and simultaneouswiththecommissionof
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page155of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
the fraud. isappropriation or conversion of the proceeds of the
m andelaria's land. Despite full knowledge of such fact,
C
2.2. saleofGacayan'sproductscauseddamagetothelatterin Arriola still proceeded to represent himself as a duly
rivatecomplainants'relianceonthisfalse
P
pretense induced and impelled them to the totalamountofP8,275.Gacayandemandedpayment authorized seller of the said lot.
purchase the subjectpropertyandpaythe from petitioner under TRAs 0081 and 0083 which went
ase law instructs that the gravamen of the crime of
C
total amount of P707K. unheeded. Estafa is the employment of fraud or deceit to the
etitioners were aware of the falsity of their
P Thus, the prosecution had proved petitioner's guilt damage or prejudice of another. Clearly, Arriola's
representation to complainants that they are the beyond reasonable doubt for the crime ofestafa. actuations toward Del Rosario fit this description. The
registered owners IsidroandVirginiaDulayindicatedin return by the accused ofmoneybelongingtotheprivate
the title. This is precisely the crux of their deceit. complainant will not reverse a consummated act of
People v. Manalang2021 Estafa. Such action may even uphold a conviction.
ere, the elements of deceit and damage are present.
H ection 27, Rule 130 states that incriminalcases,except
S
Barlin v. People2021 Manalang, without any license or authority to do so, those involving quasi-offenses or criminal negligenceor
promised private complainants overseas employment, those allowed by law to be compromised, an offer of
ere, petitioner received merchandise from Gacayan as
H
then required them to undergo training and collected compromise by the accused may bereceivedinevidence
evidencedbyTRAs0081and0083signedandexecutedby
fees or payments from them, while continuallyassuring as an implied admission of guilt.
petitioner. However, contrary to the ruling of the lower
courts, petitioner could not be held liable for the other themthattheywouldbedeployedabroad,butfailedtodo rriola's initial attempts to reimburse Del Rosario
A
TRAs as they were notsignedbypetitionerbuteitherby so. Her representation induced the victims to part with through checks, coupled with the actual return of the
Castillo or Vargal. their money, resulting in damage. latter's money after the RTC issued its judgment of
J urisprudence is settledthataperson,forthesameacts, conviction,mayallbeconsideredasunequivocalgestures
s to TRAs 0081 and 0083, thedocumentsclearlystated
A
maybeconvictedseparatelyforIllegalRecruitmentunder to compromise and which can be measured against
that petitioner received in trust the merchandise from
RA 8042 (or the Labor Code), and Estafa under Article Arriola as his implied admission of guilt.
Gacayan.Contrarytopetitioner'scontention,sheentered
into a trust receipt agreement with Gacayan and not a 315(2)(a) of the RPC.
barter or exchange. Arson
etitioner failed to turn over the proceeds of the sale of
P 320 Destructive Arson
Arriola v. People2020
the products she procured from Gacayan under TRAs
ssessed with other established circumstances, Arriola's
A Penalty ofRP to Deathto any person who burns thefollowing
0081 and 0083 upon the latter's demand. Petitioner's
fraud is evident. Arriola had not been authorizedtosell
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page156of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
1) O
ne or more buildings, consequent to 1 single act of 2) Such act does not constitute arson; sisters-in-law, if living together.
burning, or as a result of simultaneous burnings or
3) Be done merely for the sake of damaging it.
committed on several or different occasions. Grana v. People2019
328. Special cases or Qualified malicious mischief
2) A
ny building of public or private ownership where e elements of Malicious Mischief have been duly
Th
people usually congregate, regardless of whether 1) To obstruct performance of public function. proven in this case, viz.:
offender knows that there are persons in said 2) Using any poisonous or corrosive substance; 1. etitioners admitted in their "kontra salaysay"
P
building at the time it is set on fire, and whether it that Teofilo deliberately destroyed the fence and
3) Spreading any infection or contagion among cattle.
is inhabited or not. its cement foundation, andmadediggingsinthe
4) C
ausing damage to property of the National
3) Train, ship, vessel, airship, plane; subject property;
Museum, Library, or to any archive or registry,
4) B
uilding, factory, warehouses, devoted to the waterworks, road, promenade, or any other thing 2. e destruction did notconstitutearsonorother
Th
service of public utilities; used in common by the public. crime involving destruction; and
5) A
ny building burnt toconceal evidenceof another 3. e act of damaging another's property was
Th
332 Persons exempt from criminal liability
violation of law, to conceal bankruptcy or committed merely for the sake of damaging it.
defrauding creditors or to collect from insurance. Crimes involved
nderthethirdelement,assumingthatpetitionerTeofilo
U
6) A
rsenal, shipyard, storehouse, military power or a) Theft; ownedthepropertyincontroversy,heandhisco-accused
fireworks factory, ordinance, storehouse, archives, b) Estafa; were not justified in summarily destroying the
general museum of the Government; improvements built thereon by Bolbes. Petitioners'
c) Malicious mischief.
actions were made out of hatred, revenge or evil motive.
7) I n an inhabited place, any storehouse or factory of
Persons exempted
inflammable or explosive materials. e valueofthedamagecausetoprivatecomplainantby
Th
a) S
pouses, ascendants, descendants, or relatives by petitioners is only P7.5K. Consequently, pursuant to
Malicious Mischief affinity in the same line; Article 329 of the RPC, as amended by R.A. 10951,
petitioners' original sentence of a straight penalty of
b) W
idowedspousewithrespecttothepropertywhich
327 Malicious mischief imprisonment of four (4) months should be reduced to
belonged to the deceased spouse before the same
arresto menor or imprisonment of one (1) day to thirty
1) O
ffender deliberately caused damage to the passed into the possession of another.
(30) days.
property of another; c) Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page157of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
People v. Macabando2013 murderonly; lastly, c heck, the offender has no funds in the bank or
insufficient; and
e Information alleged that the appellantsetfiretohis
Th c) i f the objective is, likewise, to kill a particular
own house, and that the fire spread to other inhabited person, and infacttheoffenderhasalreadydone 3) the payee has beendefrauded.
houses. That the appellant’s act affected many families so, but fire is resorted to as a means tocoverup I n People v. Reyes, the Court ruled that for estafa under
willnotconvertthecrimetodestructivearson,sincethe the killing, then there are two separate and theaboveprovisiontoprosper,theissuanceofthecheck
appellant’s act does not appear to be heinous or distinct crimes committed — homicide/murder must have been the inducement for the other party to
represents a greater degree of perversity and andarson. part with his money or property.
viciousnesswhencomparedtothoseactspunishedunder
bayon is charged with the crime of arson because his
A e prosecution sufficiently demonstratedBatac'sdeceit
Th
Article 320 of the RPC. The established evidence only intent was merely to destroy his family's apartment when it established that the latter induced Frias into
showedthattheappellantintendedtoburnhisownhouse,but through the use of fire. The resulting deaths that buying thechecksatarediscountedratebyrepresenting
the conflagration spread to the neighboring houses.
occurred, therefore, should be absorbed by the crimeof tohimthatshehadenoughfundsinheraccounttocover
arson and only increases the imposable penalty to them.
reclusion perpetua to death.
People v. Abayon2016 eceit and damage are essential elements in Article 315
D
ere is no complex crime of arson with (multiple)
Th (2-d), but are not required in BP 22. Other differences
homicide. between the two also include the following:
atac v. People2018
B
re Estafa through false checks vis-a-vis BP 22 1) a drawer ofadishonoredcheckmaybeconvicted
I n cases where both burning and death occur, it is de
rigueurto ascertain the main objective of the malefactor: e CA affirmed the decision of the RTC finding Batac
Th under BP 22 even ifhehadissuedthesamefora
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Estafa defined under preexisting obligation, while under Article 315
a) i fthemainobjectiveistheburningofthebuilding (2-d), such circumstance negates criminal
or edifice, but death results by reason or on the Article 315, paragraph 2(d) committed against Frias.
Jurisprudence has consistently held that such estafa liability;
o ccasionofarson,thecrimeissimplyarson,and
consists of the following elements: 2) s pecific and different penalties are imposed in
the resulting homicide is absorbed;
1) t he offender has postdated or issued a check in each of the two offenses;
b) i f,ontheotherhand,themainobjectiveistokilla
paymentofanobligationcontractedatthetimeof 3) e stafa is essentially a crime against property,
particular person who may be in a building or
the postdating or issuance; while violation of BP 22 is principally a crime
edifice, when fire is resorted to as the means to
2) at the time of postdating or issuance of said against public interest as it does injury to the
accomplish such goal the crime committed is
entire banking system;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page158of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
k eepthemoneyforthemselves.Healsoappropriatedthe consent and with intent to gain.
4) v iolationsofArticle315aremalainse,whilethose
of BP 22 aremala prohibita. money for himself by buying various items.
oth the RTC and CA found that Ramos convincingly
B
equestionofwhethercriminalappropriationoffound
Th testifiedthathesawAlbotraenterDiego'shouse,grabhis
property can be committed by a person other than the bag, and hurriedly leave with said bag. Diego and
Pante v. People2021 one by whom the property is first found has been Mercado, both of whom witnessed the incident,
discussed and answered in the affirmative in People v. corroborated Ramos' testimony.
Doctrinal Rule
Avila. A "finder" underArticle308,par.2(1)oftheRPCis
eallegedpoliceoperationagainstIllegalGamblingwas
Th
"finder" under Article 308, par. 2(1) of the RPC is not only
A not only limited to the actual finder of thelostproperty notsatisfactorilyestablishedandcouldnotstandagainst
limitedtotheactualfinderofthelostpropertysincethegistofthe since the gist of the offense is the furtive taking and the prosecution's evidence. While Albotra claims thathe
offenseisthefurtivetakingandmisappropriationoftheproperty misappropriation of the property found.
filed a case for illegal gambling againstapersonbutthe
found.
I nstead of returning the money, Pante convinced his same was dismissed, no proof was adduced in this
ante is guilt beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
P co-accusedminorsnottoreturnthemoneyandtodivide regard.Moreover,hedidnotproducethebagandmasiao
Theft.UnderArticle308,par.2(1)oftheRPC,Theftisalso itamongthemselves.Therationaleforthe"finderinlaw" tipsheallegedlyconfiscatedfromQuintin,whicharethe
committed by one's failure to deliver lost property toits concept is precisely to protect the owner of the lost corpus delicti of the crime committed by Quintin.
owner or local authorities. Here, it is essential to prove: propertyintheeventthelostpropertyistransferredfrom
1. the finding of lost property; one individual to another and to prevent the "finder in
law" from escaping liability by claiming that he wasnot eople v. Cahilig2014
P
2. t hefailureofthefindertodeliverthesametothe re Qualified Theft
the actual finder thereof but was merely entrusted
local authorities or its owner.
custody thereof by someone who had no intention to e elements of Qualified Theft, committed with grave
Th
ere, it was proven that Word lost his bundled money
H appropriate the same. abuse of confidence, are as follows:
after alighting from his carinfrontofhisresidenceand
us, petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the
Th 1. Taking of personal property;
forgetting that he had placed them in between his legs.
crime of Theft.
Allthreeaccusedadmittedthatitwastheaccused-minor 2. That the said property belongs to another;
who found the bundle of money in front of the bakery,
3. That the said taking be done with intent to gain;
which they later divided among themselves.
Albotra v. People2020 4. That it be done without the owner’s consent;
espiteknowingthatthemoneydidnotrightfullybelong
D
ere, the prosecution satisfactorily proved that Albotra
H 5. That it be accomplished without the use of
to them, Pante encouraged the two minor accused to
took the bag belonging to Ramos without the latter's
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page159of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
v iolence or intimidation against persons, nor of
e prosecution was able to prove all the elements for
Th a) abuse of confidence(Par 1) or
force upon things; Qualified Theft.
b) means ofdeceit(Par 2).
6. That it be done with grave abuse of confidence.
n the first and second elements. — Dueñas took and
O eceit is not an essential requisite of estafa by abuse of
D
ahiligtookmoneyfromWPESLAIanditsdepositorsby
C receivedtheproceedsofthesalebutdidnotturnoverthe confidence; the breach of confidence takes the place of
takingadvantageofherpositionascashier.Herintentto same to Automall. fraud or deceit, which is a usual element in the other
gain is clear in the use of a carefully planned and
nthethirdelement,heinsteadusedtheproceedstobuy
O estafas.Inthiscase,thechargeagainstthepetitionerand
deliberately executed scheme to commit the theft. a Toyota car. her subsequent conviction was for estafa committed by
raveabuseofconfidence,asanelementofQualifiedTheft,
G abuse of confidence. Thus, it was not necessary for the
n the fourth element, Dueñas' intent to gain is
O
“must be the result of the relation by reason of presumed from hisactoftakingtheproceedsofthesale prosecutiontoprovedeceitasthiswasnotanelementof
dependence, guardianship, or vigilance, between the of the Honda Civic and hisfailuretoturnoverthesame
the estafa that the petitioner was charged with.
appellantandtheoffendedpartythatmightcreateahigh
to Automall without the latter's consent.
degree of confidence between them which the appellant
abused.” nthefifthelement,Dueñaswasabletoobtainthesame
O Espino v. People2013
without the use of violence or intimidation against
e crime charged was estafa under Art 315, par 1(b).
Th
person, or force upon things.
However, the crime the accused was convicted of was
Dueñas, Jr. v. People2023 n the sixth element,Dueñaswasthesalesandtrade-in
O estafa under par2(a).
manager of Automall, which is involved in selling
ueñas,asAutomall'sSalesManager,hastheauthorityto
D Estafa under paragraph 2(a) is swindling by meansof
imported and secondhand cars. Specifically, he was
sell traded in cars, specifically,theHondaCivic;thus,as false pretense. In this case, there was no use of a
entrustedwiththeappraisalofthecarsthatareintended
pointed out by the CA, the recitals in the Information ctitious name, or a false pretense of power, influence,
fi
to be traded in with Honda Makati, and its subsequent
showthatthesubjectofDueñas'indictmentforQualified qualifications, property, credit, agency, or business. The
sale to the secondhand market.
Theftweretheproceedsofthesaleofsaidmotorvehicle,and Court deems it wiser to give the offense itstrue,formal
not the Honda Civic itself. SinceDueñaswasaccusedof ame – that of estafa through abuse of confidence
n
the unlawful taking of said proceeds andnottheHonda under paragraph1(b).
Brokmann v. People2012
Civic itself, the CA correctly considered Dueñas'
rokmann was convicted of the crime of estafa, under
B irst,personalpropertyintheformofthecheckswas
F
indictment as one for Qualified Theft, rather than for
received by the offender in trust or on commission,
Carnapping. Art 315, par 1(b). The offense of estafa, in general, is
with the duty to deliver it to Mr. Banaag.
committed either by
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page160of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
elivery of, or to retain the same". No such allegation
d under the first is thereby avoided. The novation theory
econd, the accused rediscounted the checks to his
S
aunt-in-law. appears in the above information. Consequently, we ay perhaps apply prior to the filing of the criminal
m
agree with appellant that he can not be convicted information in court by the state prosecutors. Butafter
ird, this rediscounting resulted in the wrongful
Th thereunder of the crime of estafa. thejusticeauthoritieshavetakencognizanceofthecrime
encashment of the checks by someone who was not
andinstitutedactionincourt,theoffendedpartymayno
thepayeeandthereforenotlawfullyauthorizedtodo
longer divest the prosecution of its power to exact the
so. People v. Maglaya criminal liability, as distinguished from the civil. The
inally, this wrongful encashment prejudiced KN
F nderthefactsproven,appellantisguiltyofthecrimeof
U crime being an offense against the state, only the latter
Inc., which lost the proceeds of the check. theft. It is true that the machines specified in the can renounce it.
us, the Information inthiscasemaybeinterpretedas
Th information were delivered to him by his prospective
charging the accused with both estafa under paragraph customers, but the physical possession thus secured by
himdidnotvestinhimthejuridicalpossessionnecessary Lito Corpuz v. People2014 En Banc
1(b) and estafa under paragraph 2(a).
for the crime of estafa. o specific type of proof is required toshowthatthere
N
lthoughappellanthadtakenadvantageofhispositionin
A wasdemand.Demandneednotevenbeformal;itmaybe
Guzman v. CA verbal.Thespecificword“demand”neednotevenbeused
committingthecrimeaforementioned,Wedonotbelieve
sappellantconvertedtohisownuseproceedsofsalesof
A he had acted withgraveabuseofconfidenceandcanbe to show that it has indeed been made upon the person
merchandisedeliveredtohimasagent,whichhereceived convicted of qualified theft, because his employer had charged, since evenamerequeryastothewhereabouts
intrustforandunderobligationtodeliverandturnover nevergivenhimthepossessionofthemachinesinvolved of the money [in this case, property], would be
to his principal, he is guilty of the crime of estafa as in the present case or allowedhimtotakeholdofthem, tantamount to a demand.
definedbyArticle315,paragraph1,subparagraph(e).The and it does not appear that the former had any special eprosecutionwasabletoprovetheexistenceofallthe
Th
next questioniswhetherthepresentinformationforqualified confidence in him. elementsoftheEstafaunderArticle315par(1)(b).Private
theft alleges sufficient facts to sustain a conviction for estafa. complainantgavepetitionerthepiecesofjewelryintrust,
n essential element of the crime of estafa is that the
A or on commission basis with an obligation to sell or
People v. Nery return the same within sixty (60) days, if unsold. There
money or goods misappropriated or converted by the
accused to the prejudice of anotherwasreceivedbyhim e accused in the present case insists that there is no
Th wasmisappropriationwhenpetitionerfailedtoremitthe
"in trust or on commission, or for administration, or prohibitioninourlawtopreventthepartiestoacontract proceedsofthosepiecesofjewelrysold,orifnosaletook
under any other obligation involving the duty to make to novate it so that any incipient criminal liability place,failedtoreturnthesamepiecesofjewelrywithinor
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page161of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a fter theagreedperioddespitedemandfromtheprivate o n the occasion of a robbery, the accused maybeprosecutedfor utilation, or usurpation of authority, is committed by
m
complainant, to the prejudice of the latter. and convicted of robbery under paragraph five. It seems reason or on the occasion of the crime. Likewise
obvious that intimidation is not encompassed under immaterial is the fact that thevictimofhomicideisone
paragraphsonetofoursincenoactualphysicalviolenceis of the robbers; the felony would still be robbery with
People v. Fernandez 2014 inflicted; evidentlythen,itcanonlyfallunderparagraph homicide. Once a homicide is committed by or on the
e point out that conviction under the Labor Code for
W five. occasion of therobbery,thefelonycommittedisrobbery
illegalrecruitmentdoesnotprecludepunishmentunder with homicide. All the felonies committed by reason of
the RPC for the crime of estafa. orontheoccasionoftherobberyareintegratedintoone
eople v. Domasig2018
P and indivisible felony of robbery with homicide. The
eappellant’sactoffalselypretendingtopossesspower
Th re Robbery with homicide
word "homicide" is used in its generic sense. Homicide,
and qualifications to deploy the complainants to
convictionofrobberywithhomiciderequirescertitude
A thus, includes murder, parricide, and infanticide.
Hongkong,evenifhedidnothavetheauthorityorlicense
thattherobberyisthemainpurpose,andtheobjectiveof
for the purpose, undoubtedly constitutes estafa under
the malefactor andthekillingismerelyincidentaltothe
Article 315(2)(a). The elements of deceit anddamageare
robbery. The intent to rob must precede the taking of People v. Labuguen2020
clearly present; the appellant’s false pretenses were the
human life but the killing may occur before, during or obbery with homicide exists when a homicide is
R
very cause that induced the complainants to part with
after the robbery. What is crucial for a conviction for the
their money. committed either by reason, or on occasion, of the
crimeofrobberywithhomicideisfortheprosecutiontofirmly
robbery.
establish the offender's intent to take personal property
before the killing, regardless of the time when the conviction needs certainty that the robbery is the
A
blaza v. People2018
A central purpose and objective of the malefactor and the
re Robbery homicide is actually carried out.
killing is merely incidental to the robbery. The intent to
aragraphsonetofourofArticle294indisputablyinvolve
P robmustprecedethetakingofhumanlifebutthekilling
the use of violence against persons. The actual physical eople v. Layug2017
P may occur before, during or after the robbery.
force inflicted results in death, rape, mutilation or the re Robbery with homicide
owever, the offense should have been designated as
H
physicalinjuriesthereinenumerated.Thesimplerobbery
I t is immaterialthatthedeathwouldsupervenebymere robberywithhomicidealone,regardlessofthenumberof
under paragraph five may cover physical injuries not
accident;orthatthevictimofhomicideisotherthanthe homicides or injuries committed. These other felonies
includedinparagraphstwotofour.Thus,whenlessserious
victim of robbery,orthattwoormorepersonsarekilled have, at the most and underappropriatecircumstances,
orslightphysicalinjuriesareinflictedupontheoffendedparty
or that aside from the homicide, rape, intentional been considered merely as generic aggravating
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page162of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c ircumstances which can be offset by mitigating isrepresentations thus employed, private
m
ES. The essence of this kind of Estafa is the
Y
circumstances. complainants invested their hard-earned money
appropriation or conversion of money or property
in Multitel; and
received to the prejudice of the entity towhomareturn
should be made. To misappropriate for one's own use d) B
aladjay and her co-accused defrauded the
People v. Mejares2018re Theft includesnotonlyconversiontoone'spersonaladvantage, private complainants, obviously to the latter's
eSChasbeenconsistentinholdingthatintenttogain
Th but also every attempt to dispose of the property of prejudice.
or animus lucrandi is an internal act that is presumed another without right. In proving the element of
from the unlawful taking by the offender of the thing conversion or misappropriation, a legal presumption of
s ubjectofasportation.Thus,actualgainisirrelevantas misappropriationariseswhentheaccusedfailstodeliver Debuque v. Nilson2021
the important consideration is the intent to gain. the proceeds of the saleortoreturntheitemstobesold
ere,thereisNOexistingsyndicateinwhichRamonand
H
and fails to give an account of their whereabouts.
e value ofpersonalpropertyinqualifiedtheftmustbe
Th the other accused had any participation. Atty. Debuque
proven during trial. Since thepenaltyincasesoftheftis acted on his own, without the participation or
dependentonthevalueofstolenpersonalproperties,itis involvement of Ramon or the other accused. It was not
People v. Baladjay2017re Syndicated Estafa
critical to ensure that the penalty is based on the value shown that Ramon performed any overt act in
provenduringtrial,andnotmerelyontheInformationor learly, all the elements of Syndicated Estafa obtain in
C consonance with Atty. Debuque's intent to defraud
uncorroborated testimonies presented by the this case, considering that: Nilson.
prosecution. a) m
ore than five (5) persons are involved in e DOJ Secretary, in his August 23, 2007 Resolution,
Th
Multitel's grand fraudulent scheme, including correctly found probable cause for Estafa only against
Baladjay and her co-accused - who employed him. However, as stated, this criminal case for Estafa
heng v. People2016
C deceit, false pretenses andrepresentationstothe may not be initiated anymore due to his death.
re Estafa by misappropriation or conversion
private complainants regarding a supposed
J ewelries were delivered to the accused bytheownerfor lucrative investment opportunitywithMultitelin
her tosellthemandremittheproceedstothelatter.The order to solicit money from them; People v. Aquino2018re Civil Fraud
accusedfailedtoremittheproceedstotheowner.Instead
b) t he said falsepretensesandrepresentationswere ot all proposals to invest in certain business ventures
N
she issued her checks to pay for the jewelries but the
made prior to or simultaneous with the are tainted with fraud. To be sure, an actionable fraud
checksbounceduponbeingpresentedforpaymentinthe
commission of fraud; arises when the accused hasknowledgethattheventure
bank.Is the accused liable for estafa?
c) relying on the false promises and proposed would not reasonably yield the promised
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page163of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
r esults, and yet, despite such knowledge, deliberately 2) F
ence includes any person, firm, association Presumption of Fencing
continues with the misrepresentation. corporation or partnership or other organization
ere possession of any good, article, item, object, or
M
s case law instructs, "the gravamen of the crime of
A who/which commits the act of fencing.
anythingofvaluewhichhasbeenthesubjectofrobbery
Estafa is the employment of fraud or deceit to the 3) L
iabilityofOfficialsofJuridicalPersons.—Ifthefence or thievery shall beprima facieevidence of fencing.
damage or prejudice ofanother.Whenfraudpertainsto is a partnership, firm, corporation or association,
themeansofcommittingacrimeortheclassesofcrimes the president or the manager oranyofficerthereof Exception
under Estafa; otherwise, if fraud merely causes loss or whoknowsorshouldhaveknownthecommissionof
injury to another, without being an element of a crime, With Clearance or Permit to Sell
the offense shall be liable.
thenitmayonlybeclassifiedascivilfraudfromwhichan e clearance stated in Sec.6ofPD1612isonlyrequiredif
Th
action for damagesmay arise. Elements several conditions are met:
(based from the 2016 case of Lim v. People) 1. fi
rst, that the person,store,establishmentorentity
1. A crime of robbery or theft has been committed; isinthebusinessofbuyingandsellingofanygood,
Anti-Fencing Law of 1979 article, item, object, or anything of value;
1 2. Th
e accused, whoisNOTaprincipaloraccomplice
P.D. No. 1612, Secs. 2 and 5-6 in the commission of thecrimeofrobberyortheft, 2. s econd, that such thing of value was obtained from
1) Fencingis the act of any person who, buys, receives, possesses, keeps,acquires,conceals, an unlicensed dealer or supplier thereof; and
sellsordisposes,orbuysandsells,orinanymanner 3. t hird,thatsuchthingofvalueistobeofferedforsale
a) with intent to gain for himself or for another,
dealsinanyarticle,item,objectoranythingofvalue, to the public.
b) s hall buy, receive, possess, keep, acquire, which has been derived from the proceeds of the
conceal, sell or dispose of, or shall buy and said crime; Masil v. People2022
sell, or in any other manner deal in any
3. Th
e accused knows or should have known that the e prosecution established the requisite quantum of
Th
article, item, object or anything of value
said article, item, object has beenderivedfromthe evidence in proving beyond reasonable doubt all the
c) which he knows, or should be known to him, proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft; and elements of the offense of Fencing.
d) t o have been derived from the proceeds of 4. Th
ereisonthepartoftheaccused,intenttogainfor F irst, the jeepney vehicle owned by Nimfa's sister was
the crime of robbery or theft. himself or for another. stolenbyitsdriverwho,inaseparatecase,wasconvicted
of Qualified Theft. Later, the police officers saw the lost
jeepney being dismantledorcannibalizedbypetitioner's
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page164of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c o-accused, Wilfredo. Through the confession of c riminal intent. Dimat knew that the Nissan Safari he
oprima facie evidence or caseshallariseintheabsence
N
Wilfredo, the police officers went to the junk shop of of the required facts on which the same must operate. bought was not properly documented. He said that
petitioner where they saw and recovered some of the The prosecution cannot, and should not, merelydepend Tolentino showed him its old certificate of registration
dismantled parts of the jeepney. and official receipt. But this certainly could not be true
on the operation of the presumption of fencing to
because, the vehicle having been carnapped, Tolentino
econd, petitioner never denied the factthatthemissing
S establish moral certainty for convicting the accused.
parts of the lost jeepney were recovered from his junk had no documents to show.
ere, the prosecution has failed to establish beyond
H
shop. reasonabledoubttheidentityofthebicycleinissue. The
ird, circumstances exist to forewarn a reasonable
Th evidence at hand did not establishthatthebicyclegiven Lim v. People2016
vigilant buyer that the object of the sale may have been by petitioner to Magno is the same bicycle stolen from
e prosecution failed to establish that theft had been
Th
derived from the proceeds of robbery or theft. Mendoza.Withoutestablishingbeyondreasonabledoubt
committed. WhiletheCAcorrectlyruledthatconviction
Lamentably for petitioner, he failed to adduce evidence that the item which has been the subject of theft is the
oftheprincipalinthecrimeoftheftisnotnecessaryfor
that in buying from Wilfredo, he asked for any proofof same object in the possession of petitioner, the
anaccusedtobefoundguiltyofthecrimeoffencing,we
ownership of the jeepney parts. Had petitionerdoneso, presumption under Section 5 of PD 1612 would not
disagree with its ruling that the prosecutionsufficiently
his experience from the business would have given him operate.
proved the DPWH's ownership of the Komatsu Grader.
doubt as to the legitimate ownership or source thereof.
urther, the prosecution failed to prove the remaining
F Thus, it cannot be said that the first element of fencing
F inally, fencing is malum prohibitum. The law does not elements offencing.Hence,theacquittalofpetitioneris had been established.
require proof of purchase of the stolen articles, asmere in order.
ven assuming arguendo that theft hadbeencommitted,
E
possession thereof is enough to give rise to a
the third element of fencing is wanting in this case.On
presumption of fencing.
the presumption that fencing had been committed as
Dimat v. People2012
providedbySec.5ofPD1612,werulethatpetitionerwas
imatwasfoundguiltyofviolatingtheAnti-FencingLaw
D able to overcome the same uponhispresentationofthe
Lopez y Anatacio v. People2021
for selling to Sonia Delgado for gain the Nissan Safari Affidavit ofOwnershipwhichhesecuredfromPetronilo
anadisputablepresumptionbethesolebasis,thecornerstone,
C that was earlier carnapped from Mantequilla. Banosing.
ofaconvictionbeyondreasonabledoubtforthecrimeoffencing?
imatclaimslackofcriminalintentashismaindefense.
D I t appears that both the RTC and the CA ruled that
Without proper factual foundation, the presumption of
ButPD1612isaspeciallawand,therefore,itsviolationis petitioner should have first secured a Clearance or a
fencingmustbeupendedinfavorofthepresumptionof
regarded as malum prohibitum, requiring no proof of permit from the police. However, said provision is
innocenceenjoyed by the accused.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page165of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
i napplicable to the present case. Nowhere was it c heck in full upon its presentment, and was
b) W
hen drawer pays the amount or makes
establishedthatpetitionerwasengagedinthebusinessof subsequently dishonored; arrangement within 5 banking days after receiving
buy and sell. 2) F
ailing to keep sufficient funds or to maintain a notice of dishonor.
⭐
NB: This case modifies the Dimat ruling in that an credit to cover the full amount of the check if
c) No proof that notice was received by drawer.
accessoryofthetheftorrobberymaybeheldliableunder presented withinaperiodof90daysfromthedate
the Anti-Fencing Law. appearing thereon. NOTES RE BP 22
Elements of Sec 1 par 1 1. Gravamen is theissuance of a check.
Uypitching v. Quiamco 1) A person makes or draws and issues any check; 2. Th
e elements of estafa and BP22aredistinct.One
2) To apply on account or for value; couldbeheldliableforestafaandviolationofBP22
uiamco was approached by Gabalan to settle the civil
Q
3) K
nows at the time of issue that he does not have without double jeopardy.
aspect of a case by leaving with Quiamco a motorcycle
anditsphotocopiedCR.Itturnedoutthatthemotorcycle sufficient funds; 3. I f the drawer stopped payment due to a valid
was bought on installment from RUSI by Gabalan who reason, i.e. wrong name of payee, then he is not
4) S
ubsequently dishonored, or would have been
defaulted in his payments, and the object of a chattel dishonored had not the drawer, without any valid liable.
ortgage foreclosure. Is there fencing? NO, the
m reason, ordered the bank to stop payment. 4. B
ut if he had no valid reason todoso,violationof
motorcycle was not the object of theft. BP 22 has been consummated.
Elements of Sec 1 par 2
1) A
person has sufficient funds when he makes or 5. Written notice of dishonor is essential.
Bouncing Checks Law draws and issues a check; 6. A
bsence of proof ofnoticeandgivingher5daysto
2 B.P. Blg. 22, Secs. 1-3 and 5; A.C. No. 12-2000; A.C. make necessary arrangements to replenish funds
2) F
ails to keep such funds or maintain a credit to
No. 13-2001 destroys the presumption that she had knowledge
cover the full amount if presented within 90 days;
of the sufficiency of funds.
3) Subsequently dishonored.
May be violated in 2 ways: 7. Th
eburdenthenshiftstoprosecutiontoprovesuch
xceptionsto the presumption of knowledge of insufficient
E knowledge; otherwise, drawer cannot be liable.
1) M
aking or drawing and issuing anychecktoapply
funds
on account or for value, knowing at the time of 8. N
otice of dishonor to corporation is not notice of
issue that he does not have sufficient funds in or a) C
heck is presentedafter 90 daysfrom the date ofthe dishonor to officer who issued the check. Thus,
creditwiththedraweebankforthepaymentofsuch check; constructivenoticetothecorporationisnotenough
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page166of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
to satisfy due process. Gosiaco v. Ching and Casta c losure of G7 Bank by the Monetary Board, the
9. P appointment of PDIC as receiver and its takeover of G7
enaltyisIMPof30d-1yORfineofnotlessthanbut 1. W
hen a corporate officer issues aworthlesscheckin
not more than double the amount of the check, Bank, and the filing by PDICofapetitionforassistance
the corporate name he may be held personallyliable
in the liquidation of G7 Bank, had the similar effect of
which in no case shall exceed P200K, OR BOTH. for violating a penal statute.
suspending or staying the demandability of the loan
10. Rule of preference in imposing penalties I ntherecentcaseofBautistav.AutoPlusTradersInc., obligation of G7 Bank to SB Corp.withtheconcomitant
emphasizes discretion over thejudgetodetermine the Court ruled decisively that the civil liability of a cessationoftheformer'sobligationtopayinteresttothe
whether a FINE suffices the penalty, or whether corporateofficerinaB.P.Blg.22caseisextinguished latter upon G7 Bank's closure.
IMPRISONMENT is also in order. with the criminal liability. The rule of stare decisis
erefore, applying Gidwani by analogy, at the time SB
Th
11. A drawerwhowasacquittedorconvictedunderthe precludes the Court to discharge Ching of any civil
Corp. presented the subject checks for
RPC for estafa may also be prosecuted under BP 22. liabilityarisingfromtheB.P.Blg.22caseagainsther,
deposit/encashment in October 2008, it had no right to
on account of heracquittal in the criminal charge.
demand payment because theunderlyingobligationwas
Rosa Lim v. People 2. N
owhere in B.P.Blg.22isitprovidedthatajuridical notyetdueanddemandablefromCuandhecouldnotbe
personmaybeimpleadedasanaccusedordefendant held liableforthecivilobligationsofG7Bankcoveredby
.P.No.22,Section2createsapresumptionjuristantum
B
in the prosecution for violations of that law, even in the subject dishonored checks on account of the
that the second element prima facie exists when thefirst
the litigation of the civil aspect thereof. Monetary Board's closure of G7 Bank and the takeover
and third elements of the offense are present. If not
rebutted, it suffices to sustain a conviction. .P. Blg. 22 imposes a distinct civil liability on the
B thereof by PDIC.
signatoryofthecheckwhichisdistinctfromthecivil
e gravamen of B.P. No. 22 is the act of making and
Th
liability of the corporation for the amount
issuingaworthlesscheckoronethatisdishonoredupon rodeth v. People2017
B
represented from the check.
its presentment for payment. And the accused failed to re BP 22 as a continuing crime
satisfytheamountofthecheckormakearrangementfor
iolationofB.P.Blg.22casesiscategorizedastransitory
V
its payment within five (5) banking days from notice of
Cu v. Small Business Guaranty2017 or continuing crimes. A criminal caseforviolationofB.P.
dishonor. The act is malum prohibitum, pernicious and
I n Gidwani, there was an SEC order of suspension of Blg. 22 therefore may befiledinanyoftheplaceswhere
inimical to public welfare. Why and to whom the check
payments after a petition to that effect was filed,which any of its elements occurred — in particular, the place
was issued isirrelevantin determining culpability.
had the effect of suspending the collection of the loan where the check is drawn, issued, delivered, or
obligationofthedebtortherein.Inthepresentcases,the dishonored (Yalong v. People) or where the check was
depositedorpresentedfor encashment.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page167of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Art 315(2)(d) BP 22 c) t ractors, trailers and traction engines of all
ilipinas Shell v. Duque2017
P kinds used exclusively for agricultural
evidence of deceit e vidence of knowledge of purposes.
re Liability of corporate officers in BP 22 cases
drawer of insufficiency of
hether or not respondents, as corporate officers, may still be
W funds railers having any number of wheels, when
T
heldcivillyliabledespitetheiracquittalfromthecriminalcharge propelledorintendedtobepropelledbyattachment
of violation of BP 22. Payment is NOT a defense ayment is a defense if
P to a motor vehicle, shall be classified as a separate
made before the filing of motor vehicle with no power rating.
O.InthecaseofGosiacov.Ching,thisCourtenunciated
N
information
the rule that a corporate officer who issues a bouncing 2) C
arnapping is thetaking,withintenttogain,ofa
corporate check can onlybeheldcivillyliablewhenheis motor vehiclebelonging to another
convicted. a) without the latter's consent,OR
New Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016
BP 22 vs. Estafa through issuance of false checks 3 R.A. No. 10883, Secs. 2(e), 3 and 4; R.A. No. 11235, b) b
ymeansofviolenceagainstorintimidation
Secs. 4, 7, 9 and 11-13 of persons,OR
Art 315(2)(d) BP 22
c) by using force upon things.
1) Motor vehiclerefers to any vehicle
Malum in se Malum prohibitum 3) Any person charged with carnapping or
a) p
ropelledbyanypowerotherthanmuscular
Deceitis an element Deceit isNOTan element power a) w
hen the crime ofcarnappingiscommitted
bycriminalgroups,gangsorsyndicatesorby
I f check issued in payment Th ere is a violation b) using thepublic highways,
means of violence or intimidation of any
of a pre-existing obligation, regardless of the purpose of except person or persons or forced upon things; or
NO violation issuance
a) r oad rollers, trolley cars, street sweepers, b) w
hen the owner, driver, passenger or
e drawer is given3 days
Th The drawer is given5 days sprinklers, lawn mowers, bulldozers, occupantofthecarnappedvehicleiskilledor
from receipt of demand graders, forklifts, amphibian trucks, and raped in the course of the carnapping
letter or notice of dishonor cranes if not used on public highways;
s hall be denied bail when the evidence of guilt is
to pay the amount due b) v ehicles which run only on rails or tracks; strong.
and
ailure to pay within said
F ailure to pay within said
F 4) C
oncealment of Carnapping. —
Any person who
period isprima facie period isprima facie conceals carnapping shall b e punished with
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page168of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
i mprisonmentofsix(6)yearsuptotwelve(12)years crime of carnapping. Motorcycle Crime Prevention Act
and a fine equal to the amount of the acquisition 4
hilethenatureofappellant’spossessionofthetaxiwas
W R.A. No. 11235, Secs. 4, 7, 9 and 11-13
cost of the motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, or
any other part involved in the violation. initially lawful as he was hired as a taxi driver and was
1. R
egistration by the Owner. — The owner of a
entrustedpossessionthereof,hisactofnotreturningitto
motorcycle
People v. Bustinera its owner, which is contrary to company practice and
againsttheowner’sconsenttransformedthecharacterof a. s hall register his or her motorcycle withthe
ustinera was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
B the possession into an unlawful one. Appellant himself LTO within five (5) days from such
qualifiedtheftfortheunlawfultakingofaDaewooRacer admits that he was aware that hispossessionofthetaxi acquisition of ownership;
GTE Taxi.
was no longer with Cipriano’s consent as the latter was b. s hall also immediately report any sale or
eunlawfultakingofmotorvehiclesisnowcoveredby
Th already demanding its return. disposition of his or her motorcycle to the
the anti-carnapping law and not by the provisions on LTO.
qualifiedtheftorrobbery.Whiletheanti-carnappinglaw
2. Failure shall subject the owner to a penalty of
penalizes the unlawful taking of motor vehicles, it eople v. Patistes2018
P
exceptsfrom its coverage certain vehicles also seePeople v. Cariño2018 a. i mprisonment of arresto mayor to prision
correccional,OR
1. r oadrollers, trolleys, street-sweepers, sprinklers, Patistes was convicted for the crime ofcarnapping.
lawnmowers,amphibiantrucksandcranesifnot b. a fineofnotlessthanTwentythousandpesos
I ntent to gain or animus lucrandi is an internal act,
used on public highways, (P20,000.00) but not more than Fifty
presumedfromtheunlawfultakingofthemotorvehicle.
thousand pesos (P50,000.00),OR
2. vehicles which run only on rails and tracks, and Actualgainisirrelevantastheimportantconsiderationis
theintenttogain.Theterm"gain"isnotmerelylimitedto c. both.
3. t ractors, trailers and tractor engines of all kinds
pecuniary benefit but also includes the benefit whichin 3. I f a motorcycle that is not yet registered with the
and used exclusively for agricultural purposes.
any other sensemaybederivedorexpectedfromtheact LTO is used in connection with an offense
y implication, the theft or robbery of the foregoing
B which is performed. Thus, the mere use of the thing punishable under the RPC or SPLs, the maximum
vehicles would be covered by Article 310 of the RPC and which was taken without the owner's consent penalty of the relevant offense shallbeimposedon
the provisions on robbery. constitutes gain. the offenders.
e designation in the information of the offense
Th
4. D
riving Without a Number PlateorReadableNumber
committed by appellant as one for qualified theft
Plate. — is prohibited. The driver of a motorcycle
notwithstanding, appellant may still be convicted of the
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page169of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
ithout a number plate or readable number plate
w
c. r egardless of the stage of commission 11. H
owever, if the lost, damaged, or stolen number
shall be punished by
whether attempted, frustrated, or plate or readable plate is used in the commission
a. prisión correccional, or consummated, with an offense penalized under the RPC or SPLs,
the failure of the owner to report within three (3)
b. a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos d. t he owner, driver, backrider or passenger
(P50,000.00) but not more than One who participated in the same shall be daysthatthemotorcycleislost,damaged,orstolen,
shall subject the owner to a penalty of
hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00). punished by prision correccional to prision
imprisonment of arresto mayor to prision
5. U mayor.
seofaMotorcycleintheCommissionofaCrime.—If correccional.
a motorcycle is used 7. I f aseizedmotorcycleisusedinthecommissionof
12. Erasing, Tampering, Forging, Imitating, Covering or
a. i n the commission of acrimeconstitutinga acrime,themaximumpenaltyoftherelevantcrime
or offense shall be imposed. Concealing a Number Plate orReadableNumberPlate
grave felonyunder the RPC, or and Intentional Use Thereof.— shall be punished by
8. I f death or serious physical injuries, as defined
b. in the escape from the scene of such crime, a. prison mayor, or
under the RPC, results from the unlawful use of a
c. r egardless of the stage of commission, motorcycle in the commission of a crime, the b. a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos
whether attempted, frustrated, or penalty ofreclusion perpetuashall be imposed. (P50,000.00) but not more than One
consummated, hundred pesos (P100,000.00), or
9. L
oss of Number Plate orReadableNumberPlate.—If
d. t he owner, driver, backrider or passenger the number plate or readable number plate of a c. both.
who participated in the same shall be motorcycleislost,damaged,orstolen,theownerof
punished by reclusion temporal to reclusion 13. If a person knowingly sells or buys an erased,
such motorcycle shall immediately report thesame tampered, altered,forgedorimitatednumberplate
perpetua. to the LTO and the PNPthroughtheJointPNPand
or readable number plate, both such buyer and
6. If a motorcycle is used LTO Operations and Control Center, and request a
seller shall be punishedbyprision mayor.
replacement number plate.
a. i n the commission of acrimeconstitutinga 14. However,ifthepersonwhosellsorbuysthenumber
less grave felony or light felony under the 10. Failureoftheownertoreportthesameshallsubject plateprovesthatheorshehasnoknowledgethatit
RPC or any other crime, or theownertoafineofnotlessthanTwentythousand was erased, tampered, altered, forged or imitated,
pesos (P20,000.00) but not more than Fifty
b. in the escape from the scene of such crime, he or she shall be punished byarresto mayor.
thousand pesos (P50,000.00).
15. Use of a Stolen Number Plate or Readable Number
Plate.— shall be punished by
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page170of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a. prision mayor, or c rop, grain field, orchard, bamboo grove or Arson is present when:
forest;
b. a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos 1. there is intentional burning; and
e. Rice, sugar, cane mills, or mill central;
(P50,000.00) but not more than One 2. hatisintentionallyburnedisaninhabitedhouse
w
hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00), or f. R
ailway or bus station, airport, wharf or or dwelling.
c. both at the discretion of the court. warehouse.
ere, accused-appellant deliberately set fire to their
H
5. Special aggravating circumstances. MAX housewhichresultedinthedeathsofitstwoinhabitants.
Law on Arson a. Intent to gain; Her acts before, during, and after the fire established
5
P.D. No. 1613, Secs. 1-7 beyondreasonabledoubtherguiltofcommittingtheacts
b. For the benefit of another;
alleged in the Information.
1. A
rsonis the malicious destruction of property by c. M
otivated by spite or hate towards owner or
fire. e following combination of circumstances pointed to
Th
occupant;
the logical conclusion that Mae commenced and caused
2. Kinds of arson: d. By a syndicate (at least 3 persons). the fire as to support a judgment of conviction beyond
a. Simple arson; reasonable doubt against her:
NOTES RE ARSON
b. Destructive arson; 1. t12:00inthemorning,MaewenthomefromSM
A
1. A
ttempted arson. Placing the rags soaked in gasoline Mall of Asia;
c. Other cases of arson.
beside the wooden wall of the building and lighting a
3. S
imple arson. Burning or setting fire to the property 2. She arrived at their house at 1:20 am;
match.
of another, or his own under circumstances which 3. he instructed Grace togetherchild,Leila,from
S
2. F
rustratedarson.Theragsweresetonfire,butwereput
expose to danger the life or property of another.PM. the room of Ameerah and Sarah;
out before any part of the building was burned.
4. Other cases of arson.Punished byRT-RP 4. he bought four (4) liters of gasoline from
S
3. If main objective is burning, but death results,arson.
a. Any government building; Optimus Shell at 2:59 am;
4. I fpurposeistokillapersoninthebuilding,andsetting
b. Inhabited house or dwelling; 5. he and herchildrodeatricyclegoinghomeand
S
it on fire was the means resorted,murder.
picked up something at Optimus Shell;
c. I ndustrial establishment, shipyard, oil well, 5. I fkillinghasbeencommitted,thenthebuildingisburnt
mine shaft, platform or tunnel; 6. hen she alighted from the tricycle, the driver
W
to cover it up,murder/homicide AND arson.
noticed a liquid substance on the floor of his
d. Plantation, farm, pasture land, growing
People v. Al-Saad2021 tricycle and when he wiped it, it smelled of gas;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page171of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
e stablishments.Ifasaconsequenceofthecommissionof accused-appellant must be held guilty of Simple Arson.
7. At around 3:20 am, Morallos saw her come back;
any of the acts penalized under Art. 320, death should
8. Morallos noticed Mae was hiding something; result, the mandatory penalty of death shall be imposed.
9. She instructed Grace to buy pandesal at 3:00 am; People v. Buebos
ntheotherhand,PD1613remainsthegoverninglawfor
O
10. he was admittedly at the guardhousewhenthe
S Simple Arson. If special aggravating circumstances are e legal basisofthetrialcourtinconvictingpetitioners
Th
fire was ongoing; present, the penalty under Sec. 3 shallbeimposedinits of arson is Section 3[2] of P.D.No.1613.Theelementsof
maximum period: this form of arson are:
11. icianoretrievedtheCCTVofthegasstationand
M
it showed Mae together with Leila purchasing a) If committed with intent to gain; a) there is intentional burning
gasoline. b) If committed for the benefit of another; b) of aninhabitedhouse or dwelling.
I nfine,accused-appellant'sguiltfortheoffenseofArson c) I f the offender is motivated by spite or hatred dmittedly, there is a confluence of the foregoing
A
with Homicide has been proven beyond reasonable towards the owner or occupant of the property elementshere.However,theinformationfailedtoallege
doubt. burned; and, that what was intentionally burned was an inhabited
house or dwelling. That is fatal. In fine, petitionerscan
d) I fcommittedbyasyndicate,orgroupofthree(3)
be convicted only of simple arson, under Section 1[1] of
People v. Soriano or more persons.
P.D. No. 1613, punishable byprision mayor.
I f by reason, or on the occasion of Simple Arson death
Arsonis themalicious burning of property.
results,thepenaltyofreclusionperpetuatodeathshallbe
1) Destructive Arson (Art. 320) and imposed.
2) other cases of arson (PD 1613). J Crimes Against Chastity
ere,theapplicableprovisionoflawshouldbeSec.3,par.
H Title Eleven
is classification is based on the kind, character and
Th 2, of PD 1613, which imposes a penalty of reclusion
location ofthepropertyburned,regardlessofthevalue of t emporaltoreclusionperpetuafor othercasesofarson
the damage caused. as the properties burned by accused are specifically 333 Adultery
described ashouses,contemplatinginhabitedhousesor
rticle 320 of the RPC, aab RA 7659, contemplates the
A 1) There is amarried woman;
dwellings under the aforesaid law. The 3rd special
maliciousburningofstructures,bothpublicandprivate,
aggravating circumstance cannot be appreciated in the 2) S
he has sexual intercourse with a man not her
hotels, buildings, edifices, trains, vessels, aircraft,
present case where itappearsthathewasactingmoreon husband;
factoriesandothermilitary,governmentorcommercial
impulse, heat of anger or risen temper. Thus, 3) As to theparamour, that he knows the woman is
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page172of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
married. NOTES is RT medas per RA 7610)or isdemented.
1. Scandalis produced when: Seduction and Abduction
NOTES
a) t hemanandhismistressliveinthesameroomofa
1. W
heretheoffendedpartyinanadulterycaseobtainsa 337 Qualified seduction
house,
divorce in his country before theadulteryproceedings
b) they appear together in public, and 1) O
f aminor, 16 and over but under 18, by any person
arecommenced,henolongerhastherighttoinstitute
in public authority, priest, home-servant, domestic,
proceedings against the offender. (Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera) c) p
erformactsinsightofthecommunitywhichgives
guardian, teacher, or any person who, in any
2. It is not necessary that there be avalidmarriage. rise to criticism and general protest among the
capacity, shall be entrusted with the education or
neighbors. This is best proven by people in the
3. Direct proof of carnal knowledge is notnecessary. custody of the minor;
vicinity.
4. E
achsexualintercourseconstitutesacrimeofadultery. 2) O
f a sister by her brother, or descendant by
2. W
hen spies are employed, there is no evidence of
It isnot a continuing offense. ascendant.
scandalous circumstances.
Elements
334 Concubinage
336 Acts of lasciviousness
1) Offended party is16 and over, butunder 18;
Acts Punished 1) O
ffender commits any act of lasciviousness or 2) Offender has carnal knowledge with offended party;
1) Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling; lewdness;
3) Th
ere is abuse of authority, confidence or
2) H
aving sexual intercourse, under scandalous 2) S
uch act is committed against any person of either relationship on the part of the offender.
circumstances, with a woman who is not his wife; sex;
338 Simple seduction
3) Cohabiting with her in any other place. 3) It is done:
1) Offended party is16 and over, butunder 18;
Elements a) by usingforce or intimidation;
2) Offender has carnal knowledge with offended party;
1) There is amarriedman; b) w
hen the offended party isdeprived of
reasonor otherwiseunconscious; 3) By means ofdeceit.
2) He committed any of the acts punished;
3) A
s to theconcubine, that she knows the man to be c) b
y means offraudulent machinationor 339 Acts of lasciviousness with consent
grave abuse of authority;
married.
d) when the offended party isbelow 12 (penalty 1) Offender commits acts of lasciviousness;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page173of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
2) U
pon a woman who is a virgin or single or widow of 1. Th
ere can only be one complex crime of forcible 3. Pursuant to RA 8353, Rape may be prosecutedde oficio.
good reputation, over 12 but under 18, or a sister or abductionwithrape.Thus,thesucceedingrapesshould 4. I n adultery and concubinage, criminalproceedingcan
descendant regardless of reputation or age. each be countedseparatelyagainst the accused.
not be instituted without including both the guilty
3) Th
rough abuse ofauthority, confidence, 2. Th
ere is no complex crime of forcible abduction with parties,iftheyarebothalive,nor,inanycase,ifheshall
relationship, or deceit. attemptedrape,asthelatterisdeemedabsorbedbythe have consented or pardoned the offenders.(Sec5Rule
former. There is only forcible abduction. 110, Art 344)
340 Corruption of minors
343 Consented abduction 5. W
hen complexed with another crime, can be
1) O
ffender promotes or facilitate the prostitution or prosecutedde oficio.
corruption of persons under age; 1) Offended party must be avirgin;
Rules on Pardon
2) Such is to satisfy the lust ofanother. 2) Over 12, under 18;
1. I t is a bar to prosecution for adultery and
341 White slave trade 3) T
aking away must be with consent after solicitation concubinage.Itmaybeexpressedorimplied.Must
or cajolery from offender; come before the institution of the criminal action
Acts penalized andbothoffenders must be pardoned.
4) With lewd designs.
1) Engagingin the business of prostitution; 2. E
xpress pardon is a bar to p
rosecution f or
rosecution of the crimes of adultery, concubinage, seduction,
P
2) Profitingfrom it; abduction, and acts of lasciviousness seduction, abduction, rape o r acts o f
lasciviousness. (par 3)
3) Enlistingthe services of women for such purpose. 1. A
dultery and concubinage must be prosecuted upon
complaint signed by the offended spouse. 3. P
ardonmustfirstbegrantedbytheoffendedparty.
342 Forcible abduction Only when she is incapacitated, or dead, can the
2. S
eduction, abduction, rape or acts of lasciviousness
1) P
erson abducted is any woman, regardless of age, parents, grandparents, guardians take herplacein
must be prosecuted upon complaint signed by -
civil status or reputation; pardoningtheoffender.Pardonbytheparent,must
a) offended party, be accompanied with that of the girl and vice-versa.
2) It is against her will;
b) her parents, 4. M
arriage between the parties benefits all accused.
3) With lewd designs. This does not apply when there are multiple
c) grandparents, or
principals by direct participation.
d) l egal guardians in the order in which they are
NOTES 5. Forrape, marriage only benefits theprincipal.
named above.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page174of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Civil liability of persons guilty of crimes against chastity 5) A
ny other person whocooperatesasanaccomplice b) Offender conceals or abandons him;
with abuse of authority or confidential relationship.
a) To indemnify the offended woman. c) H
as the intent to cause the loss of civil status of
b) T such child.
oacknowledgetheoffspring,unlessthelawshould
prevent him from doing so. rimes Against the Civil Status of
C 2. Th
e unlawful sale of achildbyitsfatherisnotacrime
c) In every case to support the offspring. Persons
K under Art 347.
Title Twelve 348 Usurpation of civil status
1. O
nlyindemnityispossibleinadulteryorconcubinage.
Children born from such offenses may not be
1. Th
e crime is committed when a person represents
recognized and are born from the offenders
imulation of births, substitution of one child for
S himself to be another and assumes the filiation or
themselves. Thus, they may not be granted support.
347 another, and concealment or abandonment of a the parental or conjugal rights of such another
2. A
rt2219oftheCivilCodeprovidesthatmoraldamages legitimate child person.
may be recovered in seduction, abduction, rape, or
Acts punished 2. C
ivil status includes one's public station, or the
other lascivious acts, as well as adultery and
rights, duties, capacities and incapacities which
concubinage. The parents of the female seduced, 1) Simulation of births.
determine a person to a given class.
abducted, raped or abused may also recover moral
2) Substitution of one child for another.
damages. 3. Th
us, usurpation of profession may be punished
3) C
oncealing or abandoning any legitimate child with under Art 348.
3. I ftherearemultipleoffendersinrape,allmustsupport intent to cause such child to lose its civil status.
the offspring. 4. Th
ere must be intent to enjoy the rights arising
a) There is a legitimate child; from the civil status of another.
4. Onlyindemnityis allowed in rape of amarriedwoman.
b) Offender conceals or abandons him; 5. The purpose of defraudingqualifiesthe crime.
ersons who cooperate as accomplices but are punished as
P
principals c) H
as the intent to cause the loss of civil status
349 Bigamy
of such child.
1) Ascendants;
1) Offender has been legally married.
2) Guardians; NOTES
2) M
arriage has not been legally dissolved or, in case
3) Curators; 1. Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child, requisites: his or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse could
4) Teachers; and a) There is a legitimate child; not yet be presumed dead.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page175of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t hat said marriage is not without legal effects. Among
3) Contracts a second or subsequent marriage. 3. Th
ereisnodoublejeopardyifconcubinageisfiledafter
bigamy. these legal consequences is incurring criminal liability
4) Such second marriage is deemed valid. for bigamy.
4. I faccusedcontractedasecondmarriagethatisvoidfor
350 Marriage contracted against provisions of laws
lack of marriage license, but he knowsofthismissing
1) Offender contracted marriage. requisite, then he is liable under Art 350, and not Art Bangayan v. Bangayan2013
349.
2) He knew at the time that — or bigamy toexist,thesecondorsubsequentmarriage
F
must have all the essentialrequisitesforvalidityexcept
a) t he requirements of the law were not Mercado v. Tan
complied with; or for the existence ofapriormarriage.Inthiscase,there
judicial declarationofnullityofapreviousmarriageis
A was really no subsequent marriage. Benjamin and Sally
b) t he marriage was in disregard of a legal necessary before a subsequent one can be legally just signed a purported marriage contract without a
impediment. contracted. One who enters into a subsequentmarriage marriage license. The supposed marriage was not
352 Performance of illegal marriage ceremony without firstobtainingsuchjudicialdeclarationisguilty recorded with the local civil registrar and the National
f bigamy.Thisprincipleapplieseveniftheearlierunion
o Statistics Office. In short, the marriage between
1) Offender is a priest or minister, or civil authority. is characterized by statute as “void.” BenjaminandSallydidnotexist.Theylivedtogetherand
2) He is authorized to solemnize marriages. representedthemselvesashusbandandwifewithoutthe
at he subsequently obtained a judicial declaration of
Th
benefit of marriage.
3) He performs anillegalmarriage ceremony. the nullity of the first marriage was immaterial. To
repeat, the crime had already been consummated by
NOTES then.
Santiago v. People 2015
1. V
alidity of second marriage is a prejudicial question. e crime ofbigamydoesnotnecessarilyentailthejoint
Th
Judgment of annulment of second marriageprecludes Montañez v. Cipriano2012 liability of two persons who marry each other while the
the verdict of guilt. previousmarriageofoneofthemisvalidandsubsisting.
I n Tenebro v. CA, we declared that although the judicial
2. Th
e second spouse is notnecessarilyliableforbigamy. As explained inNepomuceno:
declaration of the nullityofamarriageonthegroundof
But,ifsuchspouseknewofthefirstmarriage,he/sheis I n the crime of bigamy, both the first and second
psychological incapacity retroacts to the date of the
an accomplice. One who vouched for the capacity of spouses may be the offended parties depending on
celebration of the marriage insofar as the vinculum
either is also an accomplice. the circumstances, as when the second spouse
betweenthespousesisconcerned,itissignificanttonote
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page176of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
arried the accused without being aware of his
m marriage is merely considered as voidable. s ubsequent judicial declaration of nullity of Pulido and
previous marriage. Only if the second spouse had Arcon'smarriage,theprosecutionfailedtoprovethatthe
e Court NOW categorically rules that a void ab initio
Th
knowledge of the previous undissolved marriage of marriageisavaliddefenseintheprosecutionforbigamy crimeofbigamyiscommitted.Therefore,theacquittalof
the accusedcouldshebeincludedintheinformation Pulido from the bigamy charge is warranted.
even without a judicial declaration of absolute nullity.
as a co-accused.
us, a judicial declaration of absolute nullity of either
Th
iven that petitioner knew of the first marriage, this
G thefirstandsecondmarriagesobtainedbytheaccusedis
Court concurs with the ruling that she was validly
considered a valid defense in bigamy. L Crimes Against Honor
charged with bigamy. However, we disagree with the Title Thirteen
lower courts’ imposition of the principal penalty on her. ulido interposed the defense that the subsequent
P
judicialdeclarationofnullityofhisfirstmarriageshould 353 Libel
er punishment as a principal to the crime is wrong.
H exculpate him from criminal liability for bigamy.
Archilla holds that the second spouse, if indicted in the Elements of defamation
e subsequent declarationofthenullityofthefirstand
Th
crime of bigamy, is liable only as anaccomplice. 1) Th
ere must be animputation of a crime, or of avice
second marriages constitute a valid defense in bigamy.
or defect, real or imaginary, or anyact, omission,
I tmustbeborneinmindthattherequirementofArticle statusorcircumstance.
⭐ Pulido v. People2021 En Banc
40 is merely for purposes of remarriage and does not
2) The imputation is madepublicly.
affecttheaccused'srighttocollaterallyattackthevalidity
Doctrinal Rule
ofthe'voidabinitiomarriageincriminalprosecutionfor 3) Malicious.
Thepartiesarenotrequiredtoobtainajudicialdeclarationof bigamy. 4) D
irected to a natural or juridical person, or one who
a bsolute nullity of a void ab initio first and subsequent is dead.
learly, when the first marriage is void ab initio,oneof
C
marriages in order to raise it as a defense in a bigamy case. the essential elements of bigamy is absent, i.e. a prior 5) M
usttend tocausethe dishonor, discredit or
owever, if the first marriage is merely voidable, the accused
H validmarriage.Whenthefirstmarriageisvoidabinitio, contempt of the person defamed.
cannot interpose an annulment decree as a defense in the the accused cannot be held liable for bigamy as the
criminalprosecutionforbigamysincethevoidablefirstmarriage judicial declaration of its nullity is not tantamount to NOTES
isconsideredvalidandsubsistingwhenthesecondmarriagewas annulment nor dissolution but merelyadeclarationofa
contracted.Thecrimeofbigamy,therefore,isconsummatedwhen status or condition that no such marriage exists. Defamation, defined
thesecondmarriagewascelebratedduringthesubsistenceofthe a) W
hichincludeslibelandslander,meanstheoffense
ackinganessentialelementofthecrimeofbigamy,i.e.,
L
voidable first marriage. The same rule applies if the second a prior valid marriage, as per Certification and the ofinjuringaperson'scharacter,fameorreputation
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page177of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
through false and malicious statements. ublication. There is no crime if the defamatory
p
b) justifiable motive, and
b) I t tends to diminish theesteem,respect,goodwill imputation is not published.
c) it is true in case the law allows proof of the truth.
orconfidenceintheplaintiffortoexcitederogatory 3RD ELEMENT: Malice
feelings or opinions about him. 2. Not presumed inprivileged communications:
a) M
alice in fact -expressmalice,actuatedbyadesire
c) I t is the generic term to libel and slander, the toimpeachthereputation,integrityandhonestyof a) p
rivate communication made by any person to
formerbeinginwritten,whilethelatterintheoral the offended. another in the performance of any legal, moral, or
form. social duty.
b) M
alice in law - presumed from a defamatory
1ST ELEMENT: Imputation imputation (Art 354 par 1). Proof of malice not b) f air and true report, made in good faith, without
required. Presumption does not ariseinprivileged any comments or remarks
a) C riminal Act - May be implied from the acts and
communication. i) o f any judicial, legislative, or other official
statements of the accused. Imputation ofcriminal
intention,notlibelous.Anexpressionofopinionby 4TH ELEMENT: Directed at a person, dead or alive. proceedings which are not of confidential
one affected by the act of another and based on nature or
I dentification of the offended party is required,anda
actual fact is not libelous. Such must be made thirdpersoncouldidentifyhimassubjectofthelibelous ii) o f any statement, report orspeechdeliveredin
however, in the performance of a legal, moral or said proceedings, or
publication. It is essential that the victim be
social duty. identifiable, although not necessarily named. If the iii) o f any otheractperformedbypublicofficersin
b) Vice or defect- such as lascivious or immoral habits. article is impersonal, does not single out individuals, the exercise of their functions.
this element iswanting.
c) A ctoromission -e.g.offendedpartyusedtoborrow c) f aircommentaries onmattersofpublicinterestmay
money without intention to pay. 5TH ELEMENT: Cause dishonor, discredit, contempt still be considered actionable if actual malice is
d) C ondition,statusorcircumstance -callingapersona ere are as many offenses as there are persons
Th proven. (Borjal v. CA)
bastard or leper;mangkukulam. defamed. 3. P
rosecution must prove malice in fact in privileged
2ND ELEMENT: Publicity — is thecommunicationofthe PRESUMPTION OF MALICE communication. May be absolute, and conditional or
defamatory matter to some third person or persons. qualified.
1. M
alice in law presumed from every defamatory
Delivering the article to the typesetter is sufficient a) s aid to be absolute if it is not actionable even if the
imputationevenifitistrue.Canberebuttedifaccused
publication. Sending a sealed letterisnotpublication. author acted in bad faith.
can show
If it is unsealed or not shown to be sealed, there is
a) good intention, i. members of Congress in the discharge oftheir
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page178of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
functions. charge to be true. b) a ny of the offended parties actually resides at the
ii. o fficial communication made by public officer 7. I fthereisprobablecauseforbeliefintheirtruthfulness time of the commission of the offense.
in the performance of his duties. andthechargeismadeingoodfaith,privilegeapplies. 3. W
here one of the offended parties is a public officer,
Must be made under an honest sense of duty; a
iii. a llegations and statements in judicial venue may be had at his place of designation.
proceedings. self-seeking motive is destructive.
4. O
ffended party must file complaint for defamation
b) i t is conditionally privileged if it is not actionable Paragraph 2: Fair and true report imputingacrimewhichcannotbeprosecuteddeoficio.
unlessmade in bad faith. 8. D
octrine of Fair Comment, when the discreditable (Art 344)
Paragraph 1: Performance of duty imputation is directed against a public person in his 5. Libel imputing vice or defectcanbe prosecuteddeoficio
public capacity, it is not necessarily actionable.
4. Requisites: PROOF OF TRUTH
PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR LIBEL
a) P erson who made the communication has a legal, 1. Admissible in any of the following:
moralandsocialdutytomakesuch,or,atleast,had a) W
ho publishes, exhibits or causes the publication
or exhibition of any defamation in writing or a) W
hen imputation constitutes a crime whether
an interest to be upheld. offended party is a private person or a public officer.
similar means.
b) S uch is addressed to an officer or a board, or b) E
b) Author or editor of a book or pamphlet. ven if imputation is not constitutive of a crime,
superior having some interest or duty in the matter. but against a Government employee related to the
c) E
ditor or business manager of a daily newspaper
c) Done in good faith without malice in fact. discharge of his official duties.
magazine or serial publication.
5. W
henacopyofaprivilegedcommunicationissenttoa 2. I fdefendantprovesthetruthofhisimputation,heshall
newspaper publication, the privilegeisdestroyed.Itis d) O
wner of the printing plant which publishes a be acquitted. Proof of his good motive and justifiable
a matter of defense and must be established by the libelous article, with his consent and all other endsarenolongernecessary.Probablecauseforbeliefin
accused. Except, if contained in an appropriate persons who in any way participate in or have
the truth of the statement issufficient.
pleading in a court proceeding, the privilege becomes connection with its publication.
3. Three requisites of defense:
at once apparent. 1. Th
eprimerequisiteoflibelisnotthecomposingofthe
article but itspublication. a) i f it appears that the matter charged as libelous is
6. Defense overcome if it is shown that true;
a) defendant acted with malice in fact, or 2. Venue is determined where
b) it was published with good motives;
a) the libelous article is printed and first published; or
b) there is no reasonable ground for believing the
c) and for justifiable ends.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page179of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
4. R
etraction may mitigate damages. The retraction dialect, may not be slander. eed, and acts of lasciviousness is irritation or
d
annoyance.
should contain an admission of the falsity of the 2. Th
eslanderneednotbeheardbyoffendedparty,butby
libelous publication and evince a desire to repair a other people, as the reputationoftheformerhasbeen Incriminatory Machinations
wrong occasioned thereby. besmirched.
363 Incriminating innocent persons
5. H
onest mistake is not a complete defense but serves 359 Slander by deed
only to mitigate. 1) Offender performs an act;
1) P
erforms any act not included in any other crime
LIBELOUS REMARKS 2) B
y such he directly incriminates or imputes to an
against honor;
1. O
n privileged matters, if made withmaliceinfact,do innocent person the commission of a crime;
2) In the presence of other person/s;
not exempt the author and editor. 3) Such act is not perjurious.
3) C
asts dishonor, discredit or contempt upon the
2. Th
ere is liability when facts are distorted, or remarks 364 Intriguing against honor
offended party.
are added thereon.
1) C
ommitted by any person who shall make an
358 Slander or oral defamation NOTES
intrigue which has for its principal purpose to
1. G
ravitymaydependonthesocialstandingofoffended blemish the honor or reputation of another.
Two kinds:
party, circumstances, the occasion, etc.
a) Simple slander; and 2) I t may consist of some trickery, ingenious, crafty
2. S
lapping is slander by deediftheintentionistocause and secret plot.
b) Grave slander. shame and humiliation.
Gravity is determined through: 3. K
issing a girl in public and touching her breasts Pader v. People
a) Expressions used; withoutlewddesignbutonlytocastdishonoruponthe
Paderwasconvictedof graveoraldefamation.InReyes
girl, is slander by deed and not acts of lasciviousness.
b) Personal relations between parties; v .People,weruledthattheexpression“putanginamo”is
4. Th
e nature and effects of the maltreatmentdetermine a common enough utterance in the dialect that is often
c) C
ircumstances, such as social standing and
the crime committed. If offended party suffered from employed, not really to slander but rather to express
position of offended party.
shame andhumiliationcausedbythemaltreatment,it angerordispleasure.Here,theintentionwastoshowhis
is slander by deed. feelings of resentment and not necessarily to insult the
NOTES
5. Common denominator in unjust vexation, slander by latter. Being a candidate running for vice mayor,
1. The word "puta", being a common expression in the
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page180of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
o ccasionalgesturesandwordsofdisapprovalordislikeof t o a public officialmaybeactionable,itmusteitherbea ur libel laws mustnotbebroadlyconstruedastodeter
O
his person are not uncommon. Rogelio Pader is guilty false allegation of fact or a comment based on a false comments on public affairs and the conduct of public
only ofslight oral defamation. supposition. Ifthecommentisanexpressionofopinion, officials. Unless the prosecution proves that the
based on establishedfacts,thenitisimmaterialthatthe defamatory statements were made with actual
opinion happens to be mistaken, as long as it might malice—that is, "withknowledgethatitwasfalseorwith
Borjal v. CA reasonably be inferred from the facts. reckless disregard of whether it was false or not"—a
ualifiedly privileged communications containing
Q criminalcaseforlibelinvolvingapublicofficer'sexercise
ew York Times v. Sullivan held that honest criticisms on
N
defamatoryimputationsareNOTactionableunlessfound the conduct of public officials and public figures are of official functions cannot prosper.
to have been made without good intentionorjustifiable insulated from libel judgments. The guarantees of aliceexistswhentheprosecutionprovesthattheauthor
M
motive. The enumeration under Art. 354 is NOT an freedom of speech and pressprohibitapublicofficialor made the defamatorystatementknowingitwasfalse,or
exclusive list of qualifiedly privileged communications public figure from recoveringdamagesforadefamatory even if true, there is no showing of good intention and
since fair commentaries on matters of public interest are falsehoodrelatingtohisofficialconductunlessheproves justifiable motive.
likewise privileged. thatthestatementwasmadewithactualmalice,i.e.,with
I nUnitedStatesv.Cañete,theCourtruledthatpublications knowledge that it was falseorwithrecklessdisregardof
whether it was false or not. Daquer v. People2021
which are privileged for reasons of public policy are
protected by the constitutional guaranty of freedom of yersProductionPty.,Ltd.v.Capulongdefinedpublicfigure
A e Court has imposed a higher standard for criminal
Th
speech. asapersonwho,byhisaccomplishments,fame,modeof libelwherethecomplainantisapublicfigure,particularly
living, orbyadoptingaprofessionorcallingwhichgives a public officer. Actual malice—knowledge that the
air commentaries on matters of public interest are
F
the public a legitimate interest in his doings, hisaffairs defamatory statement was false, or with reckless
privileged and constituteavaliddefenseinanactionfor
libel or slander. The doctrine of fair comment means and his character, has become a ‘public personage.’ disregard as to its falsity—must be proved. It is the
burdenoftheprosecutiontoproveactualmalice,notthe
that while in general every discreditable imputation ebate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust
D
publicly made is deemed false, because every man is defense's to disprove.
and wide open, and that it may well include vehement,
presumedinnocentuntilhisguiltisjudiciallyproved,and causticandsometimesunpleasantlysharpattacksonthe hen the allegedly libelous statement pertains to a
W
everyfalseimputationisdeemedmalicious,nevertheless, government and public officials. matterofpublicinterest,moresowhenthesubjectofthe
when the discreditable imputation is directed against a statement is a public officer, the prosecution must
public person in his public capacity, it is not necessarily satisfactorily prove that the petitioner either knew that
actionable. In order that such discreditable imputation Tulfo v. People2021
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page181of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t he statement was false, or that he acted with reckless here the libelous article is printed and first
w imputation qualifies asprivileged communication.
disregard as to whether or not the statement is true. published.
I nthecasesatbar,althoughtheopenletterwasprimarily
2. I f the offended party is a private individual, the addressed to thenPresidentAquino,thecommunication
criminal action may also be filed in the Court of thereofwasnotlimitedtoheralone.Itwasalsopublished
Guingguing v. People
First Instance of the province where he actually inseveralnewspapersofgeneralcirculationandwasthus
rt. 354 of the RPC, as applied to public figures
A resided at the time of the commission of the madeknowntothegeneralpublic.Thus,thestatements
complainingofcriminallibel,mustbeconstruedinlight offense. madebyBrillanteduringthepressconferenceandinthe
of the constitutional guarantee of free expression, and open letterdo not qualify as privileged communication.
3. I f the offended party is a public officer whose
this Court’s precedentsupholdingthestandardofactual
office is in Manila at thetimeofthecommission I t is likewise settledthatasingledefamatorystatement,
malice with the necessary implication that a statement
oftheoffense,theactionmaybefiledintheCourt if published severaltimes,givesrisetoasmanyoffenses
regarding a public figure if true is NOT libelous. The
of First Instance ofManila. as there are publications. This is the “multiple
provision itself allows for such leeway, accepting as a
publicationrule”whichisfollowedinourjurisdiction,as
defense "good intention and justifiable motive." The 4. I f the offended party is a public officer holding
officeoutsideofManila,theactionmaybefiledin explained inSoriano v. IAC.
exerciseoffreeexpression,anditsconcordantassurance
of commentary on public affairs and public figures, the Court ofFirstInstanceoftheprovinceorcity
certainly qualify as "justifiable motive," if not "good where he held office at the time of the
Fortich v. CA
intention." commission of the offense.
othingintheevidenceonrecordwouldsuggestthatthe
N
key elements of publicity are present in the case before
Chavez v. CA Brilliante v. CA us.
gbayani supplies a comprehensive restatement of the
A e determination of Brillante’s culpability for libel
Th irstly,theassailedletterwasobviouslypartandparcelof
F
rules of venue in actionsforcriminallibel,followingthe hinges on the question of whether his statements were the initial investigationsurroundingthenon-remittance
amendment. The rules on venue in Article 360 may be made withmalice. of collections by petitioner. Secondly, petitioner was
restated thus: unable to prove that the letter was circulated or
rticle 354 states, as a general rule, that every
A
publicized, much less readbyofficersofthecorporation
1. W
hethertheoffendedpartyisapublicofficialora defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious,
other than those involved in the investigation or those
privateperson,thecriminalactionmaybefiledin eveniftrue,ifnogoodintentionandjustifiablemotiveis
shown. As an exception to the rule, the presumption of directly supervising the petitioner's work.
the Court ofFirstInstanceoftheprovinceorcity
malice is done away with when the defamatory
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page182of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Magno v. People uidelines for the Imposition of Penalties
G 5. S
hould only a fine be imposed and the accused be
oloresMagnowasfoundguiltyoftwo(2)countsoflibel.
D in Libel Cases unable to pay the fine, there is no legal obstacle to
A.C. No. 08-2008 the application of the RPC provision on subsidiary
Publication, inthelawoflibel,meansthemakingofthe
imprisonment.
defamatory matter, after it has been written, known to
1. A
rule of preference emerges for the imposition of
someone other than the person to whom it has been
fine only rather than imprisonment in libel cases. People v. Soliman2023 En Banc
written. If the statement is sent straight toapersonfor
whom it is written there is no publication of it. 2. Th
us, all courts and judges concerned should take court may sentence an accused found guilty of online
A
note of the foregoing rule of preference on the libel to payment of fine only, rather than imprisonment.
I n People v. Silvela, the Court ruled that sending an
matter of the imposition of penalties for thecrime
unsealed libelous letter totheoffendedpartyconstitutes e RPC recognizes that the penalty of fine may be
Th
of libel.
publication. In the present case,thereisnodisputethat imposed as a single or alternative penalty for libel, as
the unsealed envelope containing the libelous letter was 3. H
owever, the Circular does not r emove evidentintheRPC’splainuseofthedisjunctiveword‘or’
handed by Dolores to Evelyn Arcartado. Inasmuch as imprisonment as an alternative penalty for the between the term of imprisonment and fine, suchword
Cerelito voluntarily disclosed the contents of Dolores' crime libel under Article 355 of the RPC. signaling disassociation or independence between the
libelous letter toEvelyn,theactofpublicationcannotbe 4. J udgesmay,intheexerciseofsounddiscretion,and two words. Thus, for traditional libel, a fine can be
ascribed to Dolores insofar as Evelyn is concerned. taking into consideration the peculiar imposed in lieu of imprisonment.
However, it could not be said that there was no circumstances of each case, determine s for online libel, the Court found that the People
A
publication with respect to Cerelito's wife, Fe.Whilethe erroneously assumed that only imprisonment may be
a. w
hethertheimpositionofafinealonewould
letter in question was addressed to "Mr. Cerelito & Fe increased or decreased by degrees under the RPC, and
best serve the interests of justice or
Alejandro,"theinvectivescontainedthereinweredirected that thus, imprisonment is the mandatory penalty for
against Cerelito only. Fe, the wife, is, incontext,athird b. w
hether forbearing toimposeimprisonment
online libel.
person to whom the publication was made. would
e imposition of penalty for libel/online libel, courts
Th
I n all, we find all the elements of libel to have been i. epreciate the seriousness of the
d
should bear in mind the principles laid down in AC
sufficiently established. offense,
08-2008. Here, Soliman was animated by anger andhis
ii. work violence on the social order, or perception that Asec. Carpio was provoking him by his
iii. o therwise be contrary to the allegedly intentional delay in releasing Soliman’s
imperative of justice. clearance.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page183of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
ence,therewasnograveabuseofdiscretiononthepart
H Medical negligence 4. Illustrations of inexcusable lack of precaution
of the RTC in imposing on Soliman a penalty of fine only. 1) Th
ere must be proof of breach of duty on the part of a) O
vertaking notwithstanding there was no roomto
the surgeon; pass, resulting to collision with a car approaching
2) C
ausal connection of such breach and the resulting from the opposite direction.
M Quasi-offenses death or injury of patient. b) O
verspeeding, overloading. Two of the passengers
Title Fourteen
standingontherightrunningboardofthecardied
Imprudence and Negligence
365 Reckless imprudence when his car collided with another.
Par 1. Reckless imprudence resulting in grave, less c) D
isregarding traffic sign to slow down as he was
1) Offender does or fails to do an act;
grave or light felony; about to traverse a school zone.
2) Voluntary;
Par 2. Simple imprudence or negligence resulting in d) I twasincumbentuponaccusedtoreducehisspeed
3) Without malice; grave or less serious felony ; to allow the car ahead of him to safely negotiatea
4) Material damage results; Par 3. Reckless imprudence or simple imprudence or left turn at the intersection.
5) Th
ere is inexcusable lack of precaution taking into negligence causing damage to property (Fine); 5. Rules onovertaking:
consideration the Par 4. Simple imprudence or negligence resulting in a) Always drive on the right side of the road;
a) employment or occupation, light felony.
b) O
vertake only if the highway is clearly visible and
b) d
egree of intelligence, physical condition, free from oncoming vehicle.
and 1. Th
e technically correct waytoallegequasi-crimesisto
c) O
vertaking while approaching a curve in the
statethattheircommissionresultsindamage,eitherto
c) o ther circumstances regarding persons, highway,wherethedriver'sviewisobstructedisnot
person or property.
time and place. allowed.
2. I mprudence indicates deficiency of action, failure in
Simple imprudence d) O
newhoovertakesischargedwithahighdegreeof
precaution, and can be avoided by takingthenecessary
care and diligence to avoid collision.
precautiononce they are foreseen.
1) There is lack of precaution on the part of offender;
6. Doctrine of last chanceis to the effect that:
3. N
egligence indicates deficiency ofperception,failurein
2) Th
e damage impending to be caused is not
advertence, and can be avoided by paying proper a) both parties are negligent;
immediate or the danger is not clearly manifest.
attention anddue diligencein foreseeing them. b) the negligentactofoneisappreciablylaterintime
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page184of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
than that of the other; or a dvanced state of the profession at the time of s houldproceedfromaSINGLEchargeregardlessofthe
c) when it is impossible to determine who's at fault; treatment or the present state of medical science. number or severity of the consequences. In imposing
12. For a reasonable conclusion of medical negligence: penalties, the judge will do no more than apply the
d) t heonewhohadthelastclearopportunitytoavoid
penalties under Article 365 for eachconsequencealleged
the impending harm and failed to do so is a) t heremustbeproofofbreachofdutyonthepartof
and proven. In short, there shall be no splitting of
chargeable. the surgeon;
chargesunderArticle365,andonlyoneinformationshall
7. Emergency doctrineapplies only b) c ausal connection of suchbreachandtheresulting be filed in the same first level court.
a) w death or injury of patient. (proximate cause)
here the situation which arises to confront the
actor issuddenandunexpected, and
Ivler v. Modesto2010 Esteban v. People2017
b) s uch as to deprive him of all opportunity for
eckless Imprudence is a Single
R stebanwasconvictedofRecklessImprudenceResulting
E
deliberation.
Crime in Homicide.
8. Th
e emergency doctrine may not be applied
uizonrejectedFaller'sconceptualizationofquasi-crimes
Q e records of the case point to the fact that the
Th
simultaneouslywiththedoctrineoflastchance.Thus,if
by holding that quasi-crimes under Article 365 are petitioner who was then driving an Isuzu pick-up in a
the case be that of the former, then the latter is
distinct species of crimes and not merely methods of zigzagmannerandwastryingtoovertakeajeepwhichhe
inapplicable.
committing crimes.Indeed,theQuizonianconceptionof was tailing up, suddenly encroached the opposite lane,
9. Th
efailure torenderassistance onthespotconstitutesa quasi-crimes undergirded a related branch of thereby colliding against the tricycle which caused the
qualifying circumstance. Penalty will be one degree jurisprudence applying the Double Jeopardy Clause to death of Manuel and serious physical injuries to Felix.
higher. quasi-offenses, barring second prosecutions for a
e MCTC did not err in convicting petitioner of three
Th
10. Theoperatordoesnotowetothetrespasserthedutyof quasi-offense alleging one resulting act after a prior
separatequasi-offensesofrecklessimprudenceresulting
ordinary or reasonable care but merely the duty to convictionoracquittalofaquasi-offensealleginganother
in homicide, reckless imprudence resulting in serious
refrain from wantonly or willfully causing injury to resulting act but arising from the same reckless act or
physical injuries, and reckless imprudence resulting in
him. omission upon which the second prosecution was based.
damage to property, and in imposing three separate
11. I nexcusable lack of precaution in medical practice is rticle 48 Does not Apply to Acts
A penalties therefor.
Penalized Under Article 365 of the
determinedaccordingtothestandardofcareobserved
Revised Penal Code
by other members of the profession in good standing
rticle 48 is incongruent to the notion of quasi-crimes
A Sevilla v. People2014
under similar circumstances bearing in mind the
underArticle365.Hence,prosecutionsunderArticle365
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page185of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
e proper designation of the felony should be reckless
Th nti-Violence Against Women and their
A or decline the government's terms for its use.
imprudence resulting to falsification of public Children Act of 2004 ection 9.3 of the 2013 IRR of RA 10591 is
S
documents and not falsification of public documents unconstitutional. It is declared void for violating Article
through reckless imprudence. omprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
C
2002 III, Section 2 of the Constitution on the right against
ere is no dispute that a variance exists between the
Th unreasonablesearchesandseizures.SigningtheConsent
offense alleged against Sevilla and that proved by the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 ofVoluntaryPresentationforInspectionappearinginthe
prosecution. Reckless imprudence resulting to pecial Protection of Children Against
S pro forma application form for firearm registration is
falsification of public documents is an offense that is Abuse, Exploitation, and Discrimination likewise declared void and of no force and effect.
necessarily included in the willful act of falsification of Act I n Chavez, the Courtheldthatthereisnovestedrightin
publicdocuments,thelatterbeingthegreateroffense.As thecontinuedownershipandpossessionoffirearms.Like
Safe Spaces Act
such, he can be convicted of reckless imprudence any other license, the license to possess a firearm is
resulting to falsification of public documents n Act Providing for Stronger Protection
A "neither a property nor a property right." As a mere
notwithstanding that the Information only charged the Against Rape and Sexual Exploitation
"permit or privilege to do what otherwise would be
willful act of falsification of public documents. and Abuse, Increasing the Age for
unlawful," it does not act as "a contract between the
Determining the Commission of
Statutory Rape authority granting it and the person to whom it is
granted."
IV Special Penal Laws Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act
Kinds of firearms
omprehensive Firearms and
C omprehensive Firearms and
C
Loose firearmrefers to
Ammunition Regulation Act Ammunition Regulation Act
A
R.A. No. 10591, Secs. 3 and 28-41 1. an unregistered firearm,
nti-Online Sexual Abuse or
A
Exploitation of Children (OSAEC) and 2. an obliterated or altered firearm,
Anti-Child Sexual Abuse or Exploitation 3. firearm which has been lost or stolen,
Materials (CSAEM) Act Acosta v. Ochoa2019 En Banc
4. illegally manufactured firearms,
nti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of
A ere is no constitutional righttobeararms.Neitheris
Th
2009 theownershiporpossessionofafirearmapropertyright. 5. r egistered firearms in the possession of an
Personsintendingtouseafirearmcanonlyeitheraccept individual other than the licensee and
Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page186of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
6. t hose with revoked licenses in accordance with the
ualified persons
Q epenaltyofone(1)degreehigherthanthatprovidedshall
Th
rules and regulations. permitted to carry firearms be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfullypossess
any firearm under any or combination of the following
Firearmswithexpiredregistrationoroneinthepossession outside of residence
conditions:
o f a person with expired license is NOT covered in the e following professionals are considered to be in
Th
definition. imminent danger due to the nature of their profession, 1) L
oaded with ammunition orinsertedwithaloaded
Firearms covered are classified as: occupation or business: magazine;
1. S a) Members of the Philippine Bar; 2) F
itted or mounted with laser oranygadgetusedto
mall arms refer to firearms intended to be or
guide the shooter to hit the target such as thermal
primarily designed for individualuseorthatwhich b) Certified Public Accountants;
weapon sight (TWS) and the like;
is generally considered tomeanaweaponintended
c) Accredited Media Practitioners;
tobefiredfromthehandorshoulder,whicharenot 3) F
itted or mounted with sniper scopes, firearm
capable of fullyautomaticburstsofdischarge,such d) Cashiers, Bank Tellers; muffler or firearmsilencer;
asHandgun,Rifle,Shotgun. e) Priests, Ministers, Rabbi, Imams; 4) Accompanied with an extra barrel; and
2. Light weaponsare: f) Physicians and Nurses; 5) C
onverted to be capable of firing full automatic
a. C lass-A Light weapons which refer to g) Engineers; bursts.
self-loading pistols, rifles and carbines,
submachine guns, assault rifles and light
h) B
usinessmen,whobythenatureoftheirbusinessor ffect of firearm violation
E
machine guns not exceeding caliber 7.62MM
undertaking, are exposed to high risk of being committed together with
which have fully automatic mode; and
targets of criminal elements; another crime
i) Elected incumbent and former officials; and 1. Th
e use of a loose firearm, when inherent in the
b. C lass-B Light weapons which refer to weapons
commissionofacrimepunishableundertheRPCor
designed for use by two (2) or more persons j) A
ctive and retired military and law enforcement
other special laws, shall be considered as an
serving as a crew, or rifles and machine guns personnel.
aggravatingcircumstance:
exceeding caliber 7.62MM. Penalties
a. I f the maximum penalty for the crime is
egardless ofclassification,possessionofloosefirearmisa
R lowerthanthatundertheFirearmsLaw, the
crime cognizable with theRTC. penaltyforillegalpossessionoffirearmshall
be imposed;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page187of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
b. I f the maximum penalty for the crime is O. Mere possession of unlicensed firearms is already
N I n the crime of illegal possession of firearms,the corpus
equal, the penalty of prision mayor in its punishable by statute as a crime. Hence, the owner, delicti is the accused's lack of license or permit to possessor
minimum period shall be imposed in manager or operator of the security agencythatobtains carrythefirearm,aspossessionitselfisnotprohibitedby
additionto the penalty for the crime. unlicensed firearms and issues the same to security law. To establish the corpus delicti, the prosecution has
2. I f the violation of this Act is in furtherance of, or guards in its employ is undeniably criminally liable. In theburdenofprovingthatthefirearmexistsandthatthe
incident to, or in connection with the crime of any event, there is likewise nothing in R.A. 7166 that accused who owned or possessed it does not have the
rebellionorinsurrection,orattemptedcoupd’etat, expressly penalizes the mere failure to secure written corresponding license or permit to possess or carry the
such violation shall beabsorbed. authority from the COMELEC as required in Section 32 same.However,eveniftheexistenceofthefirearmmust
thereof.Suchfailuretosecureanauthorizationmuststill be established, the firearm itself need not bepresented
3. I f the crime is committed by the person without
be accompanied by other operative acts, such as the as evidence for it may beestablishedbytestimony,even
using the loose firearm, the violation of this Act
bearing, carrying or transporting of firearms in public without the presentation of the said firearm.
shall be considered as a distinct and separate
places during the election period.
offense.
ll told, petitioner should be absolved of any criminal
A
Use of an Imitation Firearm Reyes y Collano v. People2023 En Banc
liability, consistent with the doctrine of nullum crimen,
1. A n imitation firearm used in the commission of a nulla poena sine lege — there is no crimewhenthereis ere, the prosecution was able to establish beyond
H
crimeshallbeconsideredarealfirearmasdefinedin no law punishing it. reasonable doubt all the elements ofthecrimeofIllegal
this Act and the person who committed the crime Possession of Firearms and Ammunition as it was
shall be punished in accordance with this Act: proven that:
People v. Olarte2019
2. P rovided,Thatinjuriescausedontheoccasionofthe a) p
etitionerwasinpossessionofanimprovisedgun
conduct of competitions, sports, games, or any e essential elements intheprosecutionforthecrimeof
Th loaded with ammunition; and
recreation activities involving imitation firearms illegal possession of firearms, whichincludeexplosives,
b) t he Certification issued by the Firearms and
shall not be punishable under this Act. ammunitions, or incendiary devices, are: ExplosivesOfficeofthePhilippineNationalPolice
a) the existence of subject firearm, and revealed that Reyes was not alicensed/registered
Rimando v. COMELEC
b) t hefactthattheaccusedwhopossessedorowned firearm holder of any kind or caliber.
hethertheheadoftheagencywhofailedtosecureapermitfor
W
thesamedoesnothavethecorrespondinglicense eapplicationofthechainofcustodyruleunderSection
Th
exemptionfromtheCommissionisguiltyofanelectionoffenseor
for it. 21 of RA 9165 has not been extended tootherobjectsseized.
not.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page188of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
eople v. Olarte held that if the proffered evidence is
P for it. roving the second element of lack of license in Illegal
p
unique, readily identifiable, and relatively resistant to Possession of Firearms cases are:
I f the firearm is loadedwithammunition,thepenaltyis
change, that foundation need only consist of testimony increased one degree higher. a) t he certification issued by the Firearms and
byawitnesswithknowledgethattheevidenceiswhatthe
Explosives Office of the PNP;
proponent claims. nder contention is the second element of lack of
U
license.Petitioner's own judicial admission ofhislackof b) t he testimony of a representative from the
ere, the subject firearm and ammunition in this case
H license to carry a firearm is sufficient to establish the Firearms and Explosives Office of the PNP; or
wereobjectsmadeunique;itisnotamorphousandtheir
second element of the crime. c) judicial admission of the accused or counsel.
forms were relatively resistant to change, unlike illegal
drugs. Thus, a testimony showing the handling of the o be clear, there is no exact way of proving the second
T
firearm and ammunition from the moment of their element of Illegal Possession of Firearms. What matters is
confiscation until they were turned over to the crime that the courts, including this Court, areconvincedthat People v. Alcira2022
laboratory for examination and safekeeping, and their the element is proven beyond reasonable doubt
e Court upholds the uniform findings of theRTCand
Th
later identification to the court, will suffice, which the regardless of the kind of evidence offered to prove it.
the CA about the absence of any irregularity in the
prosecution was able to establish in this case. Notably,RA10591andcaselawdonotprovideforspecific
conduct of the buy-bust operation which led to the
modes to prove the element of lack of license to carry a
seizure of the dangerous drugs and the unlicensed
firearm. As proof of the second element, the Court
firearm. Hence, it cannot be said that the seized drugs
Castil v. People2022 usually accepts the presentationofacertificationissued
and unlicensed firearm were the result of an
bytheFirearmsandExplosivesOfficeofthePNPshowing
ON petitioner'sconvictionofthecrimeofIllegalPossessionof
W unreasonablesearch.Consideringthattheseareseparate
thattheaccusedisnotalicensedorregisteredholderofa
Firearms is proper. crimes committedbyaccused-appellant,theseshouldbe
firearm,orthetestimonytothateffectofarepresentative
separately examined based on the respective elements
ES. Petitioner's conviction of the crime of Illegal
Y therefrom.
needed to be proven by the prosecution in order to
Possession of Firearms is proper. Section 28 penalizes sitisnotlimitedtotheaforesaidnegativecertification
A overcome the presumption of innocence.
unlawful possession of a firearm. The elements of the or testimony, the Court also accepts the judicial
offense are: efailureoftheprosecutiontoprovetheintegrityofthe
Th
admission oftheaccusedorhiscounselthattheaccused
dangerous drugs does not amount to a failure to prove
a) the existence of the subject firearm; and isnotaholderofalicenseatthetimeofthecommission
the crime of illegal possession of firearm of
of the offense.
b) t hefactthattheaccusedwhopossessedorowned accused-appellant.Asthesourcebywhichtheitemswere
thesamedoesnothavethecorrespondinglicense Thus, as it currently stands, the acceptable ways of recovered is not irregular, the acquittal for one charge
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page189of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
asedonadefectinaninherentcharacteristicofacrime
b a) a personregardlessofagewhoispresented, 4) C
hild sexual abuse or exploitation material or
cannotserveasabartotheprosecutionofanothercrime. depicted or portrayed as a child as defined childsexualabusematerial(CSAEM/CSAM) refers
The crime of illegal possession of firearms can thus herein; and to
proceed independently of the crime of illegal sale and
b) c omputer-generated, digitally or manually a) a ny representation, whether offline, or by,
possession of dangerous drugs.
crafted images or graphics of apersonwho through or with theuseofICT,bymeansof
e corpus delicti in the crime of illegal possession of
Th isrepresentedorwhoismadetoappeartobe visual, video, audio, written, or any
firearmsistheaccused'slackoflicenseorpermittopossess a child as defined herein. combination thereof, by electronic,
orcarrythefirearm,aspossessionitselfisnotprohibited mechanical,digital,optical,magneticorany
3) Child sexual abuserefers to
by law. other means,
a) a ny form of communication through any
platform or format, or b) o f a child engaged or involved in real or
simulated sexualactivities,ordepictingacts
nti-Online Sexual Abuse or
A b) a ny physicalinteractionbetweenachildand ofsexualabuseorexploitationofachildasa
Exploitation of Children (OSAEC) any person sexual object.
and Anti-Child Sexual Abuse or
B c) when the child is being used I t shall also include materials that focus on the
Exploitation Materials (CSAEM) Act i) f oranyactoractivityinducingsexual genitalia or other private body parts of a child.
R.A. No. 11930 , Secs. 3 - 8, 1 1 - 13, 14, 20, 22 and 25 stimulation or 5) C
hild sexual exploitation refers to any of the
ii) f orthepurposeofsexualgratification following acts even if consent appearstohavebeen
Definition of Terms or granted by the child:
1) C hild referstoapersonbeloweighteen(18)yearsof iii) i npursuitofthedesiretohavecarnal a) C
hild sexual abuse with consideration
age OR over, but is unable to fully take care of knowledge of the child, whether monetary or nonmonetary
himself/herself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, consideration, favor, or benefit in exchange
d) regardless of
exploitation ordiscriminationbecauseofaphysical for the opportunity toperformsuchabusive
or mental disability or condition. i) t he gender of the perpetrator or the or exploitative act;
victim, or
2) A child shall also refer to: b) A
ctual sexual intercourse with a child or
ii) the consent of the victim. children with or without consideration;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page190of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
e xploitationiscombinedwithanonlinecomponent.
c) E mploying fraud, machination, undue f) U
seofanyobjectorinstrumentforlascivious
This can also include, but is not limited to,
influence, intimidation, threat or deception acts; or
by any person to commit sexual abuse ofor a) t he production, dissemination and g) Any other analogous circumstance;
sexual intercourse with a child or children; or possession of CSAEM;
9) S
exualizationofachildreferstotheactofusing
d) A nyothersimilaroranalogousactsrelatedto b) o nline grooming of children for sexual a child as an object for the sexual desire or
child abuse, cruelty or exploitation or to be purposes; sexual extortion of children, satisfaction of another, even if there is no actual
responsible for other conditions prejudicial
c) sharing image-based sexual abuse; sexual intercourse or no private partofthebodyof
to the development of the child the child has been shown.
d) commercial sexual exploitation of children;
6) I mage-basedsexualabuse(ISA)referstoaformof
e) e xploitation of children through online Unlawful or Prohibited Acts
technology-facilitated sexual violence. The term
prostitution; and a) T
o hire, employ, use, persuade, induce, extort,
describes a pattern of behavior involving the
engage,orcoerceachildtoperformorparticipatein
nonconsensual creation, distribution, or threats to f) l ive-streaming of sexual abuse, with or
whatever way in the creation or production of any
distribute nude or sexual images. It includes a without the consent of the victim.
form of OSAEC and CSAEM;
diversity of behaviors including, but not limited to,
8) S
exualactivity includesthefollowingacts,whether
a) “sextortion scams”, actually performed or simulated; b) T
oproduce,direct,manufacture,facilitate,orcreate
any form of CSAEM, or participate in the
b) t he use of artificial intelligence to construct a) S
exual intercourse or lascivious act,
production, direction, manufacture, facilitation or
“deepfake” pornographic videos, including contact involving the genitalia,
creation of the same;
c) t hreatstodistributephotographsandvideos; oral stimulation of the genitals or oral
and stimulation of the anus, whether between c) T
ooffer,sell,distribute,advertise,promote,export,
persons of the same or opposite sex; or import, by any means, any form of CSAEM;
d) t he taking or sharing of sexual assault
imagery; b) Masturbation; d) T
o knowingly publish, transmit and broadcast, by
c) Sadistic or masochistic abuse; any means, any form of CSAEM;
7) O
nline sexual abuse or exploitation of children
(OSAEC)referstotheuseofICTasameanstoabuse d) L
ascivious exhibition of the genitals, e) T
o permit or influence the child to engage,
and/or exploit children sexually, which includes buttocks, breasts, pubic area and anus; participate or assist in any form of CSAEM;
cases in which offline child abuse and/or
e) Bestiality;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page191of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
f) T o produce, direct, create, hire, employ or pay a relude to violations under this Act shall also be
p Other Important Provisions
facilitator to stream or livestream acts of child penalized; 1. E
ffect of Consent of the Victim. — The consentofthe
sexual abuse or exploitation; victim is NOT material orrelevantandshallnotbe
n) T
o sexualize children bypresentingthemasobjects
g) T o stream or live-stream acts of, or any form of, of sexual fantasy, or making them conversational available as a defense in the prosecution of the
child sexual abuse and exploitation; subjects of sexual fantasies, inanyonlineordigital unlawful acts.
platform; 2. Syndicated and Large-Scale Violations.—
h) T o recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, provide, or
receiveachildortoinduceorinfluencethesame,for o) To engage in pandering as defined under this Act; a. A
ny violation of this Act shall be deemed to
the purpose of violating this Act; have been committed by a syndicate if
p) T
owillfullysubscribe,join,donateto,orsupportan carried out BY a group of three (3) or more
i) T o introduce or match a child to aforeignnational internet site that hosts OSAEC or thestreamingor persons conspiring or confederating with
ortoanypersonforthepurpose'ofcommittingany live-streaming of child sexual abuse and one another.
of the offenses under this Act; exploitation;
b. I f the crime wascommittedAGAINSTthree
j) F or film distributors, theaters and ICT services by q) T
oadvertise,publish,print,broadcastordistribute, (3)ormorepersons,itshallbeconsideredas
themselves or in cooperationwithotherentities,to or cause the advertisement, publication, printing, large-scaleviolation.
distribute any form of CSAEM or to facilitate the broadcasting or distribution by any means of any
3. Protection of a Good Samaritan.— Any person who
commission of any of the offenses under this Act; brochure, flyer, or any material that promotes
OSAEC and child sexual abuse or exploitation; a. h
as the responsibility of reporting cases
k) T o knowingly benefit from, financial or otherwise, under this Act,
the commission of any of the offenses of this Act; r) T
o possess any form of CSAEM: Provided, That
b. blocking an internet address,
possession of three (3) or more CSAEMs is prima
l) T oprovideavenueforthecommissionofprohibited
c. removing a website or domain,
facie evidence of the intent to sell, distribute,
actsunderthissectionsuchasdens,privaterooms,
publish or broadcast; d. t aking down of shared videos, pictures, or
cubicles, cinemas, houses, private homes, or other
establishments; s) To willfully access any form of CSAEM; and messages for the services provided by an
internet intermediary, and
m) To engage in the luring or grooming of a child: t) To conspire to commit any of the prohibited acts.
e. p
roviding information forthepurposeofan
Provided, That grooming taking place offline as a
investigation or prosecution of a case
involving acts of OSAEC
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page192of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c onstitute an offense at theplaceofcommission,if
s hall not be held civilly, criminally or 8. A
pplicability of Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act, as
administratively liable:Provided, That the actionwas: the offense, being a continuing offense, was either
Amended. — In cases where the offenderisachild,
a. done in good faith; a. commenced in the Philippines; or theprosecutionoftheoffenseshallbeinaccordance
withtheJuvenileJusticeandWelfareActof2006,as
b. n b. committed in another country:
ecessarytopreventaccessordissemination amended, and the child shall be accorded the
of CSAEMs; and rovided,Thatinthecaseofthelatter,thesuspector
P appropriate treatment and services under the said
accused is law.
c. r eported within twenty-four (24) hours from
the act of blocking an internet address, a. a Filipino citizen, 9. I n cases of self-generated CSAMs, the child
removing a website or domain, or taking b. a permanent resident of the Philippines, and producing the sexualized materialsshallbeconsidered
down of shared video, picture or messages. as a victim and not as anoffender.Thechildvictim
c. h
as committed the act against a citizen of
4. Safe Harbor Exception.— shall be accorded the necessary treatment and
the Philippines.
services under this Act and in existing laws.
a. A ccess, possession and recording of any 6. N
oprosecutionmaybecommencedagainstaperson
CSAEM of any person for the purpose of 10. Affidavit of Desistance. — Cases involving OSAEC
under this section if a foreign government, in
complying with the duties under this Act; and CSAEM shall not be dismissed based on the
accordance with jurisdiction recognized by the
affidavit of desistance executed by the victims or
b. the reporting to government authorities; Philippines, has prosecuted or is prosecuting such
their parents or legal guardians. Publicandprivate
person for the conduct constituting such offense,
c. l egitimate investigation and administration prosecutors are directed to vigorously oppose and
except upon the approval of the Secretary of Justice.
of the criminal justice system; and manifest objections to motions for dismissal. Any
d. l egitimate policy, scholarly and academic 7. V
enue. — Acriminalactionarisingfromaviolation act that unduly pressures the complainant to
purposes with requisite ethical clearance, of this Act shall be filed executeanaffidavitofdesistanceshallbepunishable
a. where the offense was committed, under this Act.
s hall not be subject to any civil, criminal, or
administrative liability. b. where any of its elements occurred,OR
Cadajas v. People2021 En Banc
5. E
xtra-Territorial Jurisdiction. — The State shall c. w
herethechildisfoundoractuallyresidesat
ne canbeconvictedforcommittingchildpornography
O
exercise jurisdiction over any act defined and the time of the commission of the offense:
upon proof of the following:
penalizedunderthisAct,evenifcommittedoutside
rovided,Thatthecourtwherethecriminalactionis
P
the Philippines and whether ornotsuchactoracts 1) victim is a child;
first filed shall acquire jurisdiction to theexclusion
of the other courts.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page193of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
r easonable doubt that petitioner induced or coerced the c overage or recordings ofsuchsexualactorsimilar
2) v ictim was induced or coerced to perform in the
minor victim to perform in the creation of child activitythroughVCD/DVD,internet,cellularphones
creation or production of any form of child and similar means or device without the written
pornography; and pornography and that the same was done through a
computer system. consent of the person/s involved, notwithstanding
3) c hildpornographywasperformedthroughvisual, that consent to record or take photo or video
audio or written combination thereof by coverage of same was given by such person's.
electronic, mechanical, digital, optical, magnetic
nti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act
A 5) P
rivate area of a person means the naked or
or any other means.
of 2009
C undergarmentcladgenitals,publicarea,buttocksor
ere, the prosecution was able to prove these facts by
H female breast of an individual.
R.A. No. 9995, Secs. 3-7
proofbeyondreasonabledoubt.AAAwasonly14yearsold 6) U
nder circumstances in which a person has a
at the time of the incident. Petitioner induced AAA to 1) B
roadcast means to make public, by any means, a
reasonable expectation of privacy means believe
send him photos of her private parts through Facebook visual image with the intent that it be viewed by a
that he/she could disrobe in privacy, withoutbeing
Messenger. Without petitioner's inducement, she would person or persons.
concerned that an image or a private area of the
not have been compelled to actually undress and send 2) C
apture with respect to an image, means to person was being captured; or circumstances in
petitioner, photos of her private parts. videotape, photograph, film, record by any means, which a reasonable person would believe that a
us, contrary to petitioner's contention, his act of
Th or broadcast. privateareaofthepersonwouldnotbevisibletothe
inducing AAA to send photos of her breasts and vagina 3) F
emale breast means any portion of the female public, regardless of whether that person is in a
constituteschildpornographyandexplicitsexualactivity breast. public or private place.
underSections4(a),3(b)and(c)(5)ofR.A.No.9775.While
4) P
hoto or video voyeurism means the act of taking Prohibited Acts
there was no showing that petitioner intended to sell
AAA's photos tootherpeople,thisdidnotexoneratehim photo or video coverage of a person or group of 1) Prohibited Acts
personsperformingsexualactoranysimilaractivity
from liability under the said provision. a) T
akephotoorvideoofasexualactorcapture
or of capturing an image of the private area of a
violationofSection4(c)(2)ofR.A.No.10175,inrelation
A image of private area of a person without
person or persons without the latter's consent,
toSections4(a),3(b)and(c)(5)ofR.A.No.9775fallsunder consent;
under circumstances in which such person/s
theclassofoffensesknownasmalainse,wherecriminal has/have a reasonableexpectationofprivacy,orthe b) Copy or reproduce, or
intent must be proven by proof beyond reasonable doubt. act of selling, copying, reproducing, broadcasting, c) Sell or distribute, or
Here, the prosecution was able to establish beyond sharing, showing or exhibiting the photo or video
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page194of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
d) P ublish or broadcast, or cause same such Inadmissibility of Evidence b) f or the purpose of exploitation which
photo orvideo,inmeansofprint,broadcast nyrecord,photoorvideo,orcopythereof,obtainedor
A includes at a minimum, the exploitation or
media, or through VCD/DVD, internet, secured by any person in violation of the preceding the prostitution of others, or
cellphone, or other devices. sections shall not be admissible in evidence in any
3) t he engagement of others for the production or
judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative or administrative
2) Th
e prohibition under paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) distribution, or both,
hearing or investigation.
shall apply notwithstandingthatconsenttorecordor
a) o fmaterialsthatdepictchildsexualabuseor
take photo or videocoverageofthesamewasgiven
nti-Trafficking in Persons Act of
A exploitation, or
by such person/s.
2003 4) o ther forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or
3) E xemption. — Any peace officer who is authorized D
.A. No. 9208, Secs. 4-6, as amended by R.A. No.
R services, slavery, servitude, or
by a written order of the courttousetherecordor 10364; R.A. No. 11862
any copy as evidence in any civil, criminal 5) the removal or sale of organs.
investigation or trial of the crimeofphotoorvideo Trafficking in Personsrefers to 6) t he recruitment, transportation, transfer,
voyeurism is not liable. Such written order shall 1) t he recruitment, obtaining, hiring, providing, harboring, adoption or receipt of a child for the
only be issued offering, transportation, transfer, maintaining, purpose of exploitation or when the adoption is
a) upon written application and harboring, or receipt of persons induced by any form of consideration for
exploitative purposes.
b) t he examination underoathoftheapplicant a) w
ith or without the victim’s consent or
and his witnesses, and knowledge,
Acts of Trafficking in Persons
c) u pon showing that there are reasonable b) within or across national borders
1) T
o recruit, obtain, hire, provide, offer, transport,
grounds to believe that photo or video c) b
y means of threat, or useofforce,orother transfer, maintain, harbor, or receive a person by
voyeurismhasbeencommittedorisaboutto forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, any means,
be committed, and deception, abuse of power or of position,
i ncluding those doneunderthepretextofdomestic
d) t hat the evidence to be obtainedisessential d) t aking advantage of the vulnerability of the or overseas employment or training or
to the convictionofanypersonfor,ortothe person, or apprenticeship,
solution or prevention of such.
2) the giving or receiving of payments or benefits f orthepurposeofprostitution,pornography,sexual
a) t o achieve the consent of a person having abuse or exploitation, production, creation, or
control over another person,
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page195of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
istribution of CSAEM or CSAM, forced labor,
d
f or purposes of prostitution, pornography, sexual f or purposes of forced labor, slavery, debt bondage
slavery, involuntary servitude, or debt bondage;
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary and involuntary servitude,
2) T o introduce or match for money, profit, or servitude or debt bondage;
i ncluding a scheme, plan, or pattern intended to
material, economic or other consideration, any
7) T
oadoptorfacilitatetheadoptionofpersonswithor cause the person either:
person or any Filipino to a foreign national, for
without consideration a) T
marriage obelievethatifthepersondidnotperform
f orthepurposeofprostitution,pornography,sexual such labor or services, he or she or another
f or the purpose of acquiring, buying, offering, exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary personwouldsufferseriousharmorphysical
selling or trading him/her servitude or debt bondage, or restraint; or
t o engage in prostitution, p
ornography, sexual t o facilitate illegal child adoptions or child b) T
o abuse or threaten the use of law or the
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary laundering, or for other exploitative purposes; legal processes;
servitude or debt bondage;
8) T
o recruit, hire, adopt, transport, transfer, obtain, 11) T
o recruit, transport, harbor, obtain, transfer,
3) To offer or contract marriage, real or simulated, harbor,maintain,provide,offer,receive,orabducta maintain, hire, offer, provide, adopt, or receive a
f or the purpose of acquiring, buying, offering, person, child
selling, or trading them
f orthepurposeofremovalorsaleof organsofsaid forpurposesof exploitation or trading them,
t o engage in prostitution, pornography, sexual person; i ncludingtheactofbuyingorsellingachild,orboth
exploitation, forced labor or slavery, involuntary for any consideration or for barter for purposes of
9) T
o recruit, transport, obtain, transfer, harbor,
servitude or debt bondage;
maintain, offer, hire, provide, receive, or adopt a exploitation.
4) T o undertake or organize tours and travel plans child raffickingforpurposesofexploitationofchildrenshall
T
consisting of tourism packages or activities include:
t o engage in armed activities or participate in
f orthepurposeofutilizingandofferingpersonsfor activities in the context of an armed conflictinthe a) A
ll forms of slavery or practices similar to
prostitution, pornography or sexual exploitation; Philippines or abroad; slavery,involuntaryservitude,debtbondage,
5) T o maintain or hire a person to engage in 10) To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, obtain, and forced labor, including recruitment of
prostitution or pornography; maintain,offer,hire,provide,orreceiveapersonby children for use in armed conflict;
6) T o adopt persons by any form of consideration for means defined in Section 3 of this Act
exploitative purposes or to facilitate the same
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page196of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
b) Th
e use, procuring or offering of a childfor b) any similar establishment; or f or purposes of facilitating the acquisition of
prostitution,fortheproductionofCSAEMor c) any vehicle or carrier by land, sea, and air; or clearances and necessary exit documents from
CSAM, or for pornographic performances; government agencies that are mandatedtoprovide
d) a ny of their computer system or computer pre-departure registration and services for
c) Th
e use, procuring or offering of a childfor hardware, other computer-related devices,
the production and trafficking of drugs; and departing persons
or
d) Th for thepurposeof promoting trafficking in persons;
e use, procuring or offering of a childfor e) any of their digital platform and application,
illegal activitiesorworkwhich,byitsnature 5) T
o facilitate, assist, or help in the exit andentryof
or the circumstances in which it is carried for thepurposeof promoting trafficking in persons; persons from/to the country at international and
out, is likely to harm their health, safety or 2) T
o produce,printandissue,ordistributeunissued, local airports, territorial boundaries and seaports,
morals; tampered, or fake passports, birth certificates, knowing they are not in possession of required
12) To organize, provide financial support, or direct affidavitsofdelayedregistrationofbirths,foundling traveldocuments,orareinpossessionoftampered,
otherpersonstocommittheoffensesdefinedasacts certificates, travel clearances, counseling fake, or fraudulently acquired travel documents,
of trafficking under this Act; and certificates, registration stickers, overseas for thepurposeof promoting trafficking in persons;
employment certificates or other certificates ofany
13) To recruit, transport, obtain, transfer, harbor, government agency which issues these certificates, 6) T
oconfiscate,conceal,ordestroythepassport,travel
maintain, offer, hire, provide, receive, or adopt a decals, and such other markers as proof of documents,orpersonaldocumentsorbelongingsof
child for deployment abroad as migrant worker. compliance with government regulatory and trafficked persons in furtherance of trafficking or
hen the victim is a child, the means to commit these
W pre-departure requirements t opreventthemfromleavingthecountryorseeking
unlawful acts shall not be necessary. for thepurposeof promoting trafficking in persons;
redress from the government or appropriate
agencies;
I n the case of overseas domestic work, a ‘child’ means a 3) T
oadvertise,publish,print,broadcastordistribute,
personbelow twenty-four (24) years old. or cause the advertisement, publication, printing, 7) T
o knowingly benefit from, financial or otherwise,
broadcasting or distribution by any means, ormakeuseof,thelabororservicesofapersonheld
Acts that Promote Trafficking in Persons includingtheuseofinformationtechnologyandthe
toaconditionofinvoluntaryservitude,forcedlabor,
internet, of any brochure, flyer, or any propaganda or slavery.
1) T o knowingly lease or sublease, use, or allow to be
used material thatpromotestrafficking in persons; 8) T
otamperwith,destroy,orcausethedestructionof
4) T evidence, or
a) any house, building, tourism enterprise, or o assist in the conduct of misrepresentation or
fraud
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page197of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t oinfluenceorattempttoinfluencewitnesses,inan allow their facilities to be used I t is enough that there is a deliberate attempt to
investigation or prosecution of a case under this Act; for thepurposeof promoting trafficking in persons; cause the introduction or encounter.
9) T o destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate or possess, 13) For financial intermediaries, including banks and
orattempttodestroy,conceal,remove,confiscateor
Qualified Trafficking in Persons
credit card companies and money transfer or
possess, remittance centers, 1) When the trafficked person is achild:
a ny actual or purported passport or other travel, to knowingly or by gross negligence rovided, That acts of online sexual abuse and
P
immigrationorworkingpermitordocument,orany exploitation of children shall be without prejudice to
other actual or purported government a llow their services, online platform and
appropriate investigation and prosecution under
identification, of any person applications, among others, to be used
other related laws;
i nordertopreventorrestrict,orattempttoprevent for thepurposeof promoting trafficking in persons;
2) W
hen the adoption is effected through the
or restrict, without lawful authority, the person’s 14) To knowingly or by gross negligence "Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995" and said
liberty to move or travel adoption is for the purpose of prostitution,
facilitate, assist, or help in the entry into the country
i n order to maintain the labor or services of that pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor,
of persons who are convicted sex offenders
person; slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
hether at international and local airports,
w
10) To utilize his or her office to impede the 3) W
hen the crime is committed byasyndicate,orin
territorial boundaries, and seaports
investigation, prosecution or execution of lawful large scale.
orders in a case under this Act. f orthepurposeofpromotingtraffickinginpersons;
rafficking is deemed committed by a syndicate if
T
or
11) For internet intermediaries carried out by a group ofthree(3)ormorepersons
15) To arrange, facilitate, expedite, or cause the conspiring or confederating with one another.
to knowingly or by gross negligence
introduction or encounter of persons who are
I t is deemed committedinlargescaleifcommitted
allow their internet infrastructure to be used suspected or convicted sex offenders in any
againstthree(3)ormorepersons,individuallyoras
for thepurposeof promoting trafficking in persons; jurisdiction, to a child.
a group;
12) For internet cafes, kiosks, and hotspots, including eactualintroductionorencounterneednotoccur
Th
4) When the offender is
establishments offering Wi-Fiaccessservicestothe to be liable under this provision.
a. a spouse, an ascendant, parent, sibling,
public,
guardian or
to knowingly or by gross negligence
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page198of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
b. a person who exercises authority over the 11) W
hen the trafficked person belongs to an
trafficked person or indigenouscommunityorreligiousminorityandis Maestrado v. People2022
when the offense is committed by considered a member of the same;
ON the CA erred in affirming petitioner's conviction for
W
c. a public officer or employee; 12) When the trafficked person is aPWD;
AttemptedTrafficking in Persons.
5) W 13) When the crime has resulted inpregnancy;
henthetraffickedpersonisrecruitedtoengagein O. Petitioner and the other accused were charged of
N
prostitutionwithanymemberofthemilitaryorlaw 14) When the trafficked person suffered mental or conspiring, confederating, and mutually helping one
enforcement agencies; emotional disorder as a result of being victim of another in committing the crime of Attempted
6) W trafficking; or Trafficking in Persons underSection4-A,paragraphs(d)
hen the offender is a member of the military or
law enforcement agencies; 15) Whentheactiscommittedbyorthroughtheuseof and (e) of RA 9208, as amended by RA 10364.
7) W ICTor anycomputersystem. o secure a conviction for Attempted Trafficking in
T
hen by reason or on occasion of the act of
trafficking in persons, the offended party Persons under Section 4-A, paragraph (d), the
People v. Valencia2021 prosecution must establish the following elements:
a. dies, becomes insane, suffers mutilation or
I n cases involving trafficking in persons, a warrantless 1. the victim is a child; and
b. is afflicted with HIV or the AIDS; arrest following an entrapment operation is justified.
2. t he simulation of birth was for the purpose of
8) W hen the offender, commits one or more acts of Entrapmentfacilitatestheinflagrantearrestofoffenders
selling the child
trafficking under Section 4 over aperiodofatleast and the rescue of trafficked victims. Corroborating
sixty (60) days, whether those days are continuous testimoniesofthearrestingofficerandthevictimsuffice s for Attempted Trafficking in Persons under Section
A
or not; to sustain conviction. 4-A, paragraph (e), the prosecution must prove the
following elements:
9) W hen the offender, or through another, directs or ere,
H the prosecution established that
manages theactionsofavictimincarryingoutthe accused-appellants were arrested in flagrante delicto 1. the victim is a child; and
exploitative purpose of trafficking; when they peddled the women to the confidential asset 2. t he child is solicited and custody overhim/heris
who was accompanied by undercover police. acquired through any means from among
10) When the crime is committed during a crisis,
Accused-appellants transacted with the asset, as the hospitals, clinics, nurseries, daycare centers,
disaster, public health concern, pandemic, a
poseur-client, to sexually exploit the victims. The refugee or evacuation centers, and low-income
humanitarian conflict, or emergency situation, or
corroborating testimonies of PO3 Mendoza and victims families for the purpose of selling the child.
henthetraffickedpersonisasurvivorofadisaster
w AAA and HHH attest to this.
or a human-induced conflict; For Section 4-A, paragraph(d)onsimulationofbirthfor
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page199of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t he purpose of selling the child, first, it was proven that o fSection4(a),insteadofSection4(c)ofRepublicActNo.
erily, for the crime of trafficking in persons to be
V
AAA was under 18 yearsoldwhentheallegedcrimecase 9208. The Information sufficiently averred that:
consummated,itisimmaterialthatsexualintercourseor
committed. Her Certificate of Live Birth shows that she 1) p
etitioner committed an act of qualified lascivious acts had not taken place and that the victim
was born on 10 September 2014. Moreover, AAA's traffickinginpersonsbyofferingAAAtoDavidfor consented thereto. The mere transaction consummates
photograph, which was presented before the RTC and
sex or exploitation; the crime.
attached in therecordofthecase,manifestlyshowsthat
AAA is indeed a minor. 2) the act was done for a fee; and us, this Court sustains the conviction of Celis of the
Th
3) f orprostitution,sexualexploitation,forcedlabor, crimes charged.
econd, the prosecution witness Gadgode of the LCR
S
categorically narrated Locker, Stone, and Alvarez's slavery, involuntary servitude, or debt bondage.
concerted act of registering and simulating AAA's birth People v. XXX2606392023
with Locker as her mother and Alvarez as the midwife.
People v. Celis2023 e Court sustains the conviction of accused-appellant
Th
stothepresenceoftheelementsforviolationofSection
A
for the crime of Qualified Trafficking in Persons,
4-A,paragraph(e)onacquiringcustodyofachildforthe eelementsofQualifiedTraffickinginPersonswereall
Th
particularlyunderSec.4(a)and(e)inrelationtoSec.6(a)
purpose ofsellinghim/her,first,itwasestablishedabove duly established herein.
of RA 9208, as amended by RA 10364.
thatAAAisachild.Second,theprosecutionwitnessSPO4 F irst, CelisrecruitedAAA262197etal.byinvitingthemto
Salubre positively identified petitioner in open court as a party, with the promise of a good time and the Here, it was particularly established that
thepersonincustodyofAAAwhenthepoliceauthorities possibility of earning. He transported them to Turtles 1) a ccused-appellant approached the agents and
rescuedherandthatshewaspartofacollectiveeffortto KTVonboardtwotaxicabsandofferedthemtoagroupof asked them if they were looking for women to
allow Locker to bring AAA, the baby she bought from 10 men. have sex with in exchangeforP1,000.00foreach
BBB, to the United States of America. girl[51] and evenaskedtheagentstochoosewho,
econd, Celis deceived AAA262197 et al. and took
S
ssuch,petitioner'sconvictionforAttemptedTrafficking
A advantageoftheirvulnerabilityduetotheirage,orsocial among the girls he brought to them, they will hire;
in Persons under Section 4-A, paragraphs (d) and (e) of or economic circumstances. 2) a ccused-appellant offered DDD's services to a
RA 9208, as amended by RA 10364 must be upheld. "guest" and then instructed her to look for more
nent the third element, it has been sufficiently
A
established that Celis's act of trafficking is for the girls to give to the "guests;" and
purposeofhavingAAA262197etal.engagedbyanotherin 3) a ll of the complainants confirmed that
Santiago, Jr. v. People2019
sexual intercourseorlasciviousconductandotherforms accused-appellantlookedfor"guests"whowillpay
Thetrialcourtcorrectlyconvictedpetitionerforviolation of sexual exploitation. for sexual services and that they must give
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page200of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
a ccused-appellant P200.00 to P300.00 from the People v. BBB and XXX2022 t oo, allowedXXXtohavesexualintercoursewithAAAto
money that they will receive from the "guests." consummate their marriage.
ll the elements of qualified trafficking in persons are
A
or failure oftheprosecutiontodischargetheburdenof
F present. F inally. One week after the marriage, appellant assisted
proving the age of the offended parties, the qualifying AAAintheCFOtogetapassportsothatshecouldbewith
F irst. Based on AAA's Certificate of Live Birth, she was
circumstance under Sec. 6 (a) of RA 9208 cannot be XXX.ToensurethatAAAwouldobtainapassportdespite
only 13 years old at the timeherspuriousmarriagewith
appreciatedinthiscase.Nonetheless,sincethecrimewas her minority, appellant submitted a falsified marriage
XXX took place. Appellant also admitted that she is the
committed in large scale or against four persons, the certificate showing that AAA was already of age.
mother of AAA.
qualifyingcircumstanceunderSec.6(c)ofRA9208must
be applied and the appropriate penalties must be econd. Appellant committed several acts showing her
S
imposed. intention to force and deceive her own daughter, AAA, People v. Tabieros2021
into marrying XXX for the purpose of sexual
exploitation. Appellant knew since the beginning that e trafficked victim's testimony that she was sexually
Th
XXX was already sexually abusing AAA, but she did exploitedis"materialtothecauseoftheprosecution."[53]
People v. Arraz2022Lopez, M., J.
Here, AAA clearly recalled her suffering and positively
nothing.Infact,sheeventriggerediteachtime.Thetrial
J errie repeatedly compelled AAA252353 to take off her courtevenpointedoutthatasearlyasnine(9)toten(10) identified accused-appellant as the bar's cashier who
clothes. At times, Jerrie took AAA252353's clothes off years old, appellant already allowed XXX to lick AAA's would instruct her to go with the supposed clients.
himself with the assistance of Mark and paraded
vagina on the pretext that he neededtocurehisprotein AA's clear recollection of events and positive
A
AAA252353's naked bodyinfrontofthecomputerforthe
deficiency. identification of accused-appellant was corroborated by
enjoyment of foreigners who patronized pornography. thetestimoniesofPSICruz,andrepresentativesfromthe
There were also instances when Jerrie forced AAA252353 ird. Appellant took advantage of AAA's minority and
Th
vulnerability when she coerced her to submit to the Department of Justice and the Department of Social
to perform sexual acts on him, had intercourse with Welfare and Development who conducted the
AAA252353 against her will, alone or with another man, sexual desires of XXX as a form of payment for his
entrapment. They recalled the steps they had taken to
while foreign clients watched through web cameras. financial support to the family.
verify the report of AAA's mother, and how they
Fromtheforegoing,theprosecutionwasabletoestablish F ourth. The abuses went on for several years since AAA eventuallyrescuedher.Itissettledthatdenialfailswhen
thatJerriecommittedtwocountsoftraffickinginpersons wasonlynine(9)yearsolduntilshereachedtheageof14 the prosecution positively ascertains the
against AAA252353 qualified by the fact that the crime whenappellantsawthepossibilityofmarryingheroffto accused-appellant's identity.
was committedfor over 60 days. XXX.
Fifth. Not satisfied with the marriage alone, appellant,
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page201of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
People v. XXX2022 money; and r oom,tobesubjectedtolasciviousacts,andtoengagein
3. sexual intercourse, all for a fee.
eople v. Casio identified the elements of Trafficking in
P e purpose of such acts was for AAA and the
Th
Persons, as follows: other minor females to engage in sexual stothefailureoftheprosecutiontopresenttheoriginal
A
intercourse ortorendersexualservicestoseveral or certified true copy of AAA's birth certificate, People v.
1. eACTof"recruitment,transportation,transfer
Th
men in exchange for money. Pruna laid downtheguidelinesinappreciatingageasan
or harboring, or receipt of persons with or
element of the crime orasaqualifyingcircumstance.In
withoutthevictim'sconsentorknowledge,within stothechargeofRape,XXXclaimedthatthepresence
A
of force, threat, or intimidation is lacking since AAA the absence of a certificate of live birth, authentic
or across national borders;"
disclosedinherswornstatementthatsheneededmoney document, or the testimony of the victim's mother or
2. e MEANS used which include"threatoruseof
Th relatives concerning the victim's age, the complainant's
and willingly went with BBB after finding out that the
force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, testimony will suffice provided that it is expressly and
latterearnedmoneybyprostitutingherself.However,the
fraud, deception, abuse of power or of position, clearlyadmittedbytheaccused.Itistheprosecutionthat
prosecution sufficiently established that he had carnal
taking advantage of the vulnerability of the has the burden of provingtheageoftheoffendedparty.
knowledge of AAA through force and intimidation by
person,or,thegivingorreceivingofpaymentsor The failure of the accused to object to the testimonial
pulling her and pinning her down, and inserting his
benefitstoachievetheconsentofapersonhaving evidence regarding age shall not be taken against him.
penis into her vagina, against her will and without her
control over another;" and The trial court should always make a categoricalfinding
consent.
3. ePURPOSEoftraffickingisexploitationwhich
Th as to the age of the victim.
I nsum,theCourtfindsnocogentreasontooverturnthe
includes"exploitationortheprostitutionofothers ranting that the prosecutionfailedtooffertheoriginal
G
findings of the RTC, as affirmed by the CA.
orotherformsofsexualexploitation,forcedlabor orcertifiedtruecopyofAAA'sbirthcertificate,thelatter's
or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or testimonyastoherage,i.e.,14yearsoldatthetimeofthe
sale of organs." incident, and XXX's express and clear admission of her
People v. XXX2022
Here, all the elements of the crime are present. age during the pre-trial in the stipulation of facts,
ere, the prosecution had duly established all the
H sufficientlyestablishedAAA'sminority.Thesestipulations
1. XX recruited or hired AAA by instructing her
X elements of Qualified Trafficking in Persons. are binding on the court because they are considered
andBBBtobringotherminorfemalesatthehotel
XXhiredorrecruitedAAAandDDD,FFF,andEEE,on
X judicial admissions within the contemplation of Section
and introducing them to different customers on
thepretextofbeingwaitressesinabarbutwereforcedto 4, Rule 129.
separate occasions;
entertain male customers, by accompanying and XX's conviction of Qualified Trafficking in Persons in
X
2. XX took advantage of AAA's vulnerability as a
X drinking alcohol with them in the bar or in a private view of AAA's minority, in violation of Section 4 (a), in
minor child and as someone who was in needof
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page202of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
relation with Sections 6 and 10, of RA 9208 is affirmed. 4. YYandXXXsimilarlyofferedthesexualservices
Y
ere,theelementsoftheoffenseoftraffickinginpersons
H
of AAA and other girls to customers. were sufficiently established by the testimonies of the
prosecution witnesses.
People v. XXX and YYY2021 ccused-appellants' bare denials were uncorroborated
A
and weak. Their roughly drawndefensehingedonAAA's 1. AA categorically stated that Bawalan instructed
A
e charge against and conviction of XXX and YYY fall
Th desistance as complainant. A recantation or an affidavit her to go with a poseur-customer after Bawalan
under Sec 4 (a and e) in relation to Sec6(aandf)ofRA of desistance is viewed with suspicion and reservation. received money from the latter.
9208. Sec 3(a) of RA 9208 clearly provides that the The Court looks with disfavor upon retractions of 2. AAalsostatedthatinthepreviousincidents,she
A
recruitment and receipt of a child for purposes of testimonies previously given in court. would be taken to the cemetery and motel, was
exploitation, even if it does not involvethemeanslisted videotaped naked, and had sexual intercourse
ere,thedirecttestimonyofAAAattestingthatXXXand
H
in the same provision, will be considered"Traffickingin with her customers.
YYY recruited and hired her for purposes of sexual
Persons."
exploitation and prostitution is corroborated by the 3. ccused-appellants took advantage of her
A
ere, the prosecution established beyond reasonable
H testimonies of BBB and PO3 Ong as well as pieces of vulnerability.
doubt that accused-appellants XXX andYYYcommitted physical evidence.Despitetheself-contradiction,several
hile the prosecution failed to prove the victim's
W
acts ofTraffickinginPersonsunderRA9208whichwere unrefuted points from AAA's testimony can be refracted: minority due to the absence of her birth certificate, it
qualified by the minority of one of the victims and the
1. her minority, however established that the crime was committed by a
status of XXX as a police officer.
groupofthreepersons,andbyanascendantandaperson
2. the sexual services she performed for customers,
1. AA was recruited by YYY and hired by XXX to
A exercising authority over the victim.
work in for the purpose of prostitutionorsexual 3. the utility of the VIP rooms, and
exploitation.AAAandotheryounggirlsdancedon 4. the bar fine arrangement.
stage and performed other sexually exploitative
astly, that the accused had no knowledge of AAA's
L nti-Violence Against Women and
A
acts to lure customers to go to the VIP rooms.
minorityisirrelevantbasedonPeoplev.Casiowhichruled their Children Act of 2004
E
2. tthetimeAAAwashireduntilherrescueduring
A that trafficking in personscanstillbecommittedevenif R.A. No. 9262, Secs. 3, 5, 8-16 and 24-27
the entrapmentoperation,shewasachild,below the victim gives consent.
18 years of age. Who can be victims of VAWC
3. XX was a police officer and likewise the
X 1. woman who is
owner-proprietor of the Bar. People v. Bawalan2021
a. offender’s wife,
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page203of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
b. former wife, or a 2. " S
exualviolence"referstoanactwhichissexualin b. d
eprivation or threat of deprivationoffinancial
2. woman with whom the offender nature, committedagainstawomanorherchild.It resourcesandtherighttotheuseandenjoyment
includes, but is not limited to: of the conjugal, community or property owned
a. has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or in common;
a. r ape, sexual harassment, acts of lasciviousness
b. has a common child with, or against c. destroying household property;
xxx;
3. Th
e woman’s child whether legitimate or d. c ontrollingthevictims'ownmoneyorproperties
b. a ctscausingorattemptingtocausethevictimto
illegitimate, within or without the family abode. or solely controlling the conjugal money or
engage in any sexual activity by force, threat of
force, physical or other harm or threat of properties.
Who can commit VAWC
physical or other harm or coercion;
1. V AWCmaylikewisebecommitted“againstawoman
cts of Violence Against Women
A
withwhomthepersonhasorhadasexualordating c. Prostituting the woman or child.
and Their Children
relationship.” 3. " P sychological violence" refers to acts or
e crime of violence against women and theirchildrenis
Th
2. Th
euseofthegender-neutralword“person”whohas omissions causing or likely to cause mental or
committed through any of the following acts:
or had a sexual or dating relationship with the emotional suffering of the victim such as but not
woman encompasseseven lesbian relationships. limited to intimidation, harassment, stalking, a) Causing physicalharm to the woman or her child;
damagetoproperty,publicridiculeorhumiliation, b) Th
reatening to cause the woman or her child
3. I tdoesnotprecludetheapplicationoftheprinciple
repeated verbal abuseandmarital infidelity. xxxx physicalharm;
of conspiracy under the RPC. Thus, in the case of
Go-Tan v. Spouses Tan, the parents-in-law of the 4. " E
conomic abuse" refers to acts that make or c) A
ttempting to cause the woman or her child
victim, were held to be proper respondents in the attempt to make a woman financially dependent physicalharm;
case. which includes, but is not limited to the following:
d) P
lacingthewomanorherchildinfearofimminent
a. w
ithdrawal of financial support or preventing physical harm;
Definition of Terms the victim from engaging in any legitimate
e) A
ttempting to compelorcompellingthewomanor
1. " P
hysical Violence" refers to acts that include profession, occupation, business or activity,
her child to
bodily or physical harm; exceptincaseswhereintheotherspouse/partner
objects on valid, serious and moral grounds as i) e ngage in conduct which the woman or her
defined in Article 73 of the Family Code; child has the right to desist from or
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page204of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
ii) esistfromconductwhichthewomanorher
d f) I nflicting or threateningtoinflictphysicalharmon i) C
ausing mental or emotional anguish, public
child has the right to engage in, or oneselfforthepurposeofcontrollingheractionsor ridicule or humiliation to the woman or her child,
decisions; including, but not limited to,
a ttemptingtorestrictorrestrictingthewoman'sor
herchild'sfreedomofmovementorconductbyforce g) C
ausing or attempting to cause the woman or her i) repeated verbal and emotional abuse, and
orthreatofforce,physicalorotherharmorthreatof childtoengageinanysexualactivitywhichdoesnot
ii) enial of financial support or custody of
d
physical or other harm, or intimidation directed constitute rape, by force or threatofforce,physical minor children of access to the woman's
against the woman or child. harm, or through intimidationdirectedagainstthe
child/children.
This shall include: woman or her child or her/his immediate family;
i) reatening to deprive or actuallydepriving
Th
h) E
ngaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless Prescriptive Periods
thewomanorherchildofcustodytoher/his conduct,personallyorthroughanother,thatalarms
1. 20 Years.— (A) to (F);
family; or causes substantial emotional or psychological
distress to the woman or her child. 2. 10 Years.— (G) to (I).
ii) epriving or threatening to deprive the
D
This shall include: Protection Orders
woman or her children of financial support
legally due her or her family, ordeliberately i) talkingorfollowingthewomanorherchild
S protection order is an order issued for the
1) A
providing the woman's children insufficient in public or private places; purpose of preventing further acts of violence
financial support; against a woman or her child and granting other
ii) eering in the window or lingering outside
P
iii) epriving or threatening to deprive the
D the residence of the woman or her child; necessary relief.
woman or her child of a legal right; iii) 2) Th
ereliefgrantedunderaprotectionorderservethe
nteringorremaininginthedwellingoron
E
iv) reventing the woman in engaging in any
P the property of the woman or her child purpose of
legitimate profession, occupation, business against her/his will; a) safeguarding the victim from further harm,
or activity or controlling the victim's own
iv) estroying the property and personal
D b) m
inimizing any disruption in the victim's
mon4ey or properties, or solely controlling
belongings or inflicting harm to animals or daily life, and
the conjugal or common money, or
petsof the woman or her child; and
properties; c) f acilitatingtheopportunityandabilityofthe
v) ngaging in any form of harassment or
E victim to independently regain control over
violence; her life.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page205of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
etitioner and anydesignatedfamily
p
3) Th
eprotectionordersthatmaybeissuedunderthis b) parents or guardians of the offended party;
Act are the or household member;
c) a scendants, descendants or collateral
a) barangay protection order (BPO), d) D
irecting lawful possession and use by relatives within the fourth civil degree of
petitioner of an automobile and other
b) temporary protection order (TPO) and consanguinity or affinity;
essential personal effects, regardless of
c) permanent protection order (PPO). ownership; d) o fficers or social workers of the DSWD or
social workers of LGUs;
4) Th
e protection orders that may be issued shall e) G
rantingatemporaryorpermanentcustody
include any, some or all of the following reliefs: of a child/children to the petitioner; e) p
olice officers, preferably those in chargeof
women and children's desks;
a) Prohibitionof the respondent from f) D
irectingtherespondenttoprovidesupport
to the woman and/or her childifentitledto f) Punong Barangay or Barangay Kagawad;
i) t hreatening to commit or
legal support. g) l awyer, counselor, therapist or healthcare
committing, personally or through
g) P
rohibition of the respondent from any use provider of the petitioner;
another, any of the acts of violence;
or possession of any firearm or deadly h) A
t least two (2) concerned responsible
ii) arassing, annoying, telephoning,
h
weaponandorderhimtosurrenderthesame citizensofthecityormunicipalitywherethe
contacting or otherwise
to the court; violence occurred and who has personal
communicating with the petitioner,
h) R
estitutionforactualdamagescausedbythe knowledgeof the offense committed.
directly or indirectly;
violence inflicted,including,butnotlimited 6) Where to Apply. —
b) R emoval and exclusion of the respondent
to, property damage, medical expenses,
from the residence of the petitioner; a) f or BPOs. — shall follow the rulesonvenue
childcare expenses and loss of income;
under Section 409 of the LGC of 1991;
c) Directing the respondent
i) D
irecting the DSWD or any appropriate
b) f or a TPO or PPO. — in the RTC, MTC,
i) t o stay away from petitioner and agency to provide petitioner may need; and
designated family or household MeTC. MCTC. MTCC with territorial
j) P
rovisionofsuchotherformsofreliefasthe jurisdictionovertheplaceofresidenceofthe
memberatadistancespecifiedbythe
court deems necessary. petitioner.
court, and
5) A
petitionforprotectionordermaybefiledbyanyof c) I f a family court exists in the place of
ii) t o stay away from the residence,
the following: residence of the petitioner, the application
school, place of employment, or any
specified place frequented by the a) the offended party; shall be filed with that court.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page206of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
7) Th
e application must be in writing, signed and 2. Th
e final acute episode preceding the killing of the 4-10-11-SC,ortheRuleonViolenceAgainstWomenand
0
verifiedunder oath by the applicant. It may be filed batterer must have produced in the battered Their Children. The statute categorically used the word
person’s mind an actual fear of an imminent harm "parents" which pertains tothefatherandthemotherof
a) as anindependentaction or
from her batterer and an honest belief that she thewomanorchildvictim.thestatutedidnotqualifyon
b) a s incidental relief in any civil or criminal needed to use force to save her life. who between the parents of the victim may apply for
case the subject matter or issues thereof protection orders. Ubilexnondistinguit,necnosdistinguere
partakes of any acts of violence. 3. A
t the time of the killing, the batterer must have
debemus. Here, the offended party is Rhuby, a minor
posed probable — not necessarily immediate and
8) All TPOs and PPOs issued shall be enforceable child, who allegedly experienced violence and abuse.
actual — grave harm to the woman, based on the
anywherein the Philippines. Thus,RandymayassistRhubyinfilingthepetitionasthe
history of violence. (People v. Genosa)
parent of the offended party.
Other Notes to Ponder
Battered Woman Syndrome as a Defense othersmaybeoffendersinthecontextofRANo.9262.
M
1. P
ublic Crime. — Violence against women and their The Court finds no substantial distinction between
has three phases
children shall be considered apublicoffensewhich fathers and mothers who abused their children that
1. Th
e tension-building phase — minor batterings, maybeprosecuteduponthefilingofacomplaintby warrants a different treatment or exemption from the
verbal or slight physical abuse occurs. The victim any citizen having personal knowledge of the law.
either pacifies the batterer or stays out of his way; circumstances involving the commission of the
2. A cute battering phase — characterized by brutality, crime.
destructiveness or death. The victim realizes that 2. P
rohibited Defense. — Being under the influence of AAA v. BBB2018
she cannot reason with him and resistance would alcohol, any illicit drug, oranyothermind-altering ay Philippine courts exercise jurisdiction over an offense
M
only exacerbate her condition; substance shallNOT be a defense. constituting psychological violence under RA 9262 committed
3. T ranquil period — batterer may show a tender and through marital infidelity, when the alleged illicit relationship
Knutson v. Sarmiento-Flores2022 En BancLopez, M.,J.
nurturing behavior. occurred or is occurring outside the country?
Requisites for BWS as a Defense ection 9(b)ofRANo.9262explicitlyallows"parentsor
S
YES. In Dinamling v. People, this Court already had
guardians of the offended party" to file a petition for
1. C ycleofviolence —“eachofthephasesofthecycle o ccasion to enumerate the elements of psychological
protection orders. The exact provision was incorporated
of violence must beproventohavecharacterizedat violenceunder Section 5(i) of R.A. No. 9262:
in Section 12 (b) of the Implementing Rules and
least two battering episodes” RegulationsofRANo.9262andSection8(b)ofA.M.No. 1) Th
eoffendedpartyisawomanand/orherchildor
children;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page207of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
rosecution under R.A. No. 9262 absolutely beyond the
p e law does not require proof that the victim became
Th
2) Th
ewomaniseitherthewifeorformerwifeofthe
reach of Philippine courts. psychologically ill due tothepsychologicalviolencedone
offender, or is a woman with whomtheoffender
has or had asexualordatingrelationship,orisa by her abuser. Rather, the law only requires emotional
woman with whom such offenderhasacommon anguish and mental suffering to be proven. To establish
child; Dabalos v. RTC2013 emotional anguish or mental suffering, jurisprudence
only requires that the testimony of the victim be
3) Th
e offender causes on the woman and/or child I n Ang v. Court of Appeals, the Court enumerated the
presented in court, as such experiences are personal to
mental or emotional anguish; and elements of the crime of violence against women
this party.
through harassment, to wit:
4) Th
e anguish is caused through acts of public
ridicule or humiliation, repeated verbal and 1. Th
e offender has or had a sexual or dating
emotional abuse, denial of financial support or relationship with the offended woman; elgar v. People2018
M
custody of minor children or access to the 2. Th
e offender, by himself or through another, re Denial of financial support
children or similar such acts or omissions. commits an act or series of acts of harassment sychological violence is the means employed by the
P
hat R.A. No. 9262 criminalizes is not the marital
W against the woman; and perpetrator, while mental or emotional anguish is the
infidelity per se but the psychological violence causing 3. Th
e harassment alarms or causes substantial effectcausedtoorthedamagesustainedbytheoffended
mental or emotional suffering on the wife. Marital emotional or psychological distress to her. party.Toestablishpsychologicalviolenceasanelementof
infidelity as cited in the law is only one of the various thecrime,itisnecessarytoshowproofofcommissionof
otably,whileitisrequiredthattheoffenderhasorhada
N
actsbywhichpsychologicalviolencemaybecommitted. anyoftheactsenumeratedinSection5(i)orsimilaracts.
sexual or dating relationship with the offended woman,
Thus, the mental or emotional suffering of the victim is an And to establish mental or emotional anguish, it is
for RA 9262 to beapplicable,itisnotindispensablethat
essential and distinct element in the commission of the necessary to present the testimonyofthevictimassuch
theactofviolencebeaconsequenceofsuchrelationship.
offense. experiences are personal to this party." Thus, incasesof
It is immaterial whether the relationshiphadceasedfor
support, it must be first shown that the accused's denial
hat may be gleaned fromSection7ofR.A.No.9262is
W aslongasthereissufficientevidenceshowingthepastor
thereof — which is, byitself,alreadyaformofeconomic
that the law contemplates that acts of violence against present existence of such relationship between the
abuse—furthercausedmentaloremotionalanguish tothe
women andtheirchildrenmaymanifestastransitoryor offender and the victim when the physical harm was
woman-victim and/or to their common child.
continuingcrimes.Eveniftheallegedextramaritalaffair committed.
causingtheoffendedwifementalandemotionalanguish
is committed abroad, the same does not place a
XXX v. People2021
Araza v. People2020
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page208of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
XXcommittedeconomicabuse.Economicabuseisone
X 2) S
ale, trade, administration,dispensation,delivery,
ere,XXXdeliberatelydeprivedhissonBBBoffinancial
H
of the acts of violence punished by RA 9262. It refersto supportforthelatter'ssustenance,clothing,medical,and distribution and transportation (STA3DT) of
acts that make or attempt to make a woman financially educational expenses. He was onlyabletogiveatotalof dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and
dependent. Specifically, Sec. 5, par. (e)(2) of RA 9262 aboutP10Kinaspanoffiveyears.Heiscapableofgiving essential chemicals;
penalizesthedeprivationoffinancialsupportlegallydue supportbasedonhisITRfortheyear2009whenhisgross 3) M
aintenance of a dangerous drug den, dive or
the woman or child, which is a continuing offense. compensation was P234K. As admitted by petitioner resort;
lltheelementsofaviolationofSec5(e)(2)ofRA9262are
A himself, he failed to provide support from 2005to2008
4) B
eing employees or visitors of a dangerous drug
present, as it was established that: after he got angry at AAA forthelatter'sfailuretobring
den, dive or resort;
1. BBB to him on Christmas day. However, it should be
XX andAAAweremarriedafterbeingpregnant
X
BBB's best interest that should prevail over the spouses' 5) M
anufacture of dangerous drugs and/or controlled
with BBB;
conflict with each other. precursors and essential chemicals;
2. XXX acknowledged BBB as his child;
ince RA 9262 is a special law, the act of deprivation of
S 6) I llegal chemical diversion of controlled precursors
3. he failed to provide sufficient support for BBB; financial support is considered malum prohibitum. and essential chemicals;
4. e withheld financial support for BBBduetothe
h Petitioner's argument of absence of malice or intent is 7) M
anufacture or deliveryofequipment,instrument,
ire he felt towards his wife; immaterialandtheonlyinquirytobemadeiswhetheror apparatus and other paraphernalia for dangerous
not XXX committed the act. drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential
5. e only provided financial support after the
h
complaint against him in the Prosecutor's Office chemicals;
was filed. 8) Possession of dangerous drugs;
omprehensive Dangerous Drugs
C
nder Article 195 (4) of the Family Code, a parent is
U 9) P
ossession of equipment, instrument, apparatus &
Act of 2002
obliged to support his child, comprising everything other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs;
F R.A. No. 9165, as amended by R.A. No. 10640, Secs.
indispensable forsustenance,dwellingclothing,medical
4 , 5, 6, 11-15, 21, 23-27, 29, 66, 68 and 98; A.M. 10) Possessionofdangerousdrugsduringparties,social
attendance, education, and transportation, in keeping
18-03-16-SC; IRR of R.A. No. 9165, Sec. 21 gatherings or meetings;
with the financial capacity of the family. The amount of
support shall be in proportion to the necessity of the 11) P
ossession of equipment, instrument, apparatus
Acts punished
recipient and the means of the person obliged to give andotherparaphernaliafordangerousdrugsduring
1) I mportation of dangerous drugs and/or controlled parties, social gatherings or meetings;
support.
precursors and essential chemicals;
12) Use of dangerous drugs;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page209of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
r eceipt by the seller of the marked money successfully e quipment, the same shall be submitted to the
13) Cultivation or culture of plants classified as
dangerous drugs or are sources thereof; consummatethebuy-busttransaction.Whatismaterialis PDEA Forensic Laboratory for a qualitative and
the proof thatthetransactionorsaleactuallytookplace, quantitative examination;
14) Failure to maintain and keep original records of
coupled with the presentation in courtoftheprohibited 3) A
certification of the forensic laboratory
transactions on dangerous drugs and/or controlled
drug, the corpus delicti, as evidence. examination results, which shall be done under
precursors and essential chemicals;
oath by the forensic laboratory examiner, shall be
15) Unnecessary prescription of dangerous drugs; Possession of dangerous drugs issued within twenty-four (24) hours after the
16) Unlawful prescription of dangerous drugs. 1) Actual or constructive possession; receipt of the subject item/s.
Chain of Custody Procedure
Sale of dangerous drugs 2) Unauthorized by law;
1) I dentitiesofthebuyerandseller,theobject,andthe 3) Free and conscious possession. 1) P
olice officer to place his marking on the plastic
consideration; and container containing the suspected substance.
Chain of custody
2) The delivery of the thing sold and the payment for it. 2) Turns over tosupervising officer.
1) Th
e apprehending team having initial custody and
3) Sends by courier to the policecrime labfor testing.
controlofthedrugsshall,immediatelyafterseizure
People v. Fernandez2014
and confiscation, physically inventory and 4) A
fter testing and verifying nature of substance,
e accused were charged not only with the sale of
Th photographthesameinthepresenceoftheaccused technicianputshisownmarkonnewcontainerand
cocaine but also with the delivery and distribution or the person/s from whom such items were seal.
thereof, which is committed by the mere deliveryofthe confiscatedand/orseized,orhis/herrepresentative EXC
prohibited drug. The consideration therefor is of no orcounsel,arepresentativefromthemediaandthe
oment. The law has defined “deliver” as “any act of
m 1. W
hat is imperative is the preservation of the
DO), and any elected public official who shall be
knowingly passing a dangerous drug to another, integrityandtheevidentialvalueoftheseizeditemsas
required to sign the copiesoftheinventoryandbe
personally or otherwise, and by any means, with or thesamewouldbeutilizedinthedetermination
given a copy thereof;
without consideration.” of the guilt or innocence of the accused.
2) W
ithin twenty-four (24) hours upon
2. P
rosecution must recognize and explain the
confiscation/seizure of dangerous drugs, plant
lapse or lapses in the prescribed procedure.
sources of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors
People v. Jaime de Motor2019 (s aving mechanism under Sec 21[a])
and essential chemicals, as well as
Thedeliveryoftheillicitdrugtotheposeur-buyerandthe instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory
People v. Hernandez2022
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page210of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
o ensure the integrity of the seized drugs, the
T olicecrimelaboratoryfortesting.Casilangalsoheldthat
p c ontaminated, changed, or altered while in PO2
prosecution must account for each link in the chain of there was substantial compliance with the second link Comia's custody.
custody, as follows: considering that the prosecution was able to record the 2. bsent the testimony of PO2 Comia, the person
A
movementoftheseizeditemateachstage,fromthetime
1. t he seizure and marking, if practicable, of the who supposedly received the illegal drugs from
illegal drug recovered from the accused by the of seizure to its receipt by the forensic laboratory. PO1Villarino,makesthethirdlinkinthechainof
apprehending officer; ere, while there was no turnover to the investigating
H custody flawed.
officer, the movement of the seized items was duly
2. t he turn-over of the seized illegal drug to the 3. nent the fourth link, there was a missing link
A
recorded and the identities of the persons who had
investigating officer; from thepointwhenthedrugswereinthehands
custody thereof as well as the date and time when of PCI Huelgas,tothepointwhenthesamewere
3. t he turn-over by the investigating officer of the transfer wasmadewereappropriatelyestablished.People submitted to the court.
illegal drug totheforensicchemistforlaboratory v. Macaspac likewise decreed that the failure of the
examination; and apprehending officer to turn over the seized item to an 4. us, it was not convincingly shownwhetherthe
Th
investigator if the apprehending officer remained in specimens submitted to the court werethesame
4. t he turn-over and submission of the illegal drug
custody of the sameuntiltheevidencewassubmittedto plastic sachets of shabu that were actually
from the forensic chemist to the court.
the Crime Laboratory, was not a breach in the chain of recovered from Donato.
ere, the first link had been complied with. The
H
custody. Here, PO1 Villarino took charge of the seized eforegoinglapsesinthechainofcustodyoftheillegal
Th
necessary witnesses — an elective government official,
items from the moment of confiscation up to its drug purportedly seized from Donato, fatally
Manalo, and a member of the media, Trinidad, were
submission to the crime laboratory. compromised its integrity and evidentiary value.
presentduringtheconductofinventory,whichwasdone
immediately after seizure. Both witnesses signed the owever, the prosecution FAILED to demonstrate
H
Receipt of Physical Inventory. Whilethemarkingsmade observance of the third and fourth links in the chain of
on the items were not exactly as directed in the PNP custody. People v. Mariano2022
Manual, the markings made by PO1 Villarino using his 1. hile it appears that the requests were stamp
W ere, the prosecution failed to establish the first, third
H
initials still served the purpose. received by PO2 Comia, the latter was not and fourth links.
ere was also no break in the second link. People v.
Th presented in court to shed lightonthecondition ne plastic sachet containing what appears to beshabu
O
Casilang reiterated that the usual procedure is that the ofthecontrabandwhenitwasreceived,aswellas wasthesubjectofthesaletransactionbetweenNoraand
police officer who seizesthesuspectedillegaldrugturns the necessary precautions employed to ensure PO3 Tutor and another 40 pieces of elongated plastic
itovertoasupervisingofficerwhowillthensendittothe that the seized illegal drugs were not sachets, also believed to contain shabu, were recovered
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page211of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
f rom the possession of Nora. PO3 Tutor admittedly did 6 , 2011, the inventory of the seized items was only Department of Justice (DOJ), and
not immediately mark thesaidelongatedplasticsachets conducted on August 8. 3. a nyelectedpublicofficialwhoshallberequiredto
at the place of the apprehension but only made the
I n sum, the prosecution failed to prove Nora's guilt sign the copies of the inventory and be given a
marking at the police station. Thesachetsweremingled beyond reasonable doubt for the police officers' copy thereof.
with each other and the lack of marking thus made it non-compliancewiththechainofcustodyandSection21
impossiblefortheprosecutiontoidentifywhichitemwas Was the chain of custody preserved in this case?
of RA 9165.
subject of the sale, and which sachets were confiscated O. First of all, the confiscated items were not marked
N
from Nora's possession. This critical lapseonthepartof Physical Inventory, Photograph, Marking of Seized Evidence immediately after the seizure. Secondly, the law
the apprehending officers made the initial link in the specificallyrequiredthatthemarkingmustbewitnessed
1. I n seizures covered by search warrants, physical
chain of custody unreliable. by the accused. Thirdly, another substantial gap in the
inventory and photograph must be done wherethe
pon arrival at the police station, PO3 Tutor placed his
U warrant was served. chain of custody concerned the absence of any
markingsontheseizeditemsandindorsedthem,aswell representative of the media or of the DOJ, and of the
2. I n warrantless seizures, such asbuy-busts,maybe electedpublicofficialduringthebuy-bustoperationand
as the accused, to the desk officer, PO2 Ahadain. PO3
done at the nearest police station or office of the at the time of the confiscation of the dangerous drugs
Tutor testified thathepersonallydeliveredthespecimen
apprehending team/officer. fromtheaccusedintheareaofoperation.And,lastly,the
to PO1 Marron of the crime laboratory forexamination.
However, there is no evidence on record indicating how 3. A
buy-bust operation is not invalidated by mere arresting officers did not prepare any inventory of the
hehandledandpreservedtheidentityoftheseizeddrugs non- coordination with the PDEA. confiscated items, and did not take photographs of the
whilehewasinpossessionthereofbeforehandingitover items.
People v. Reyes2016
to PSIFabian.Therearealsonoinformativedetailsasto
howPSIFabianhandledandpreservedtheidentityofthe eapprehendingofficer/teamhavinginitialcustodyand
Th
seized drugs before and after she conducted the controlofthedrugsshall,immediatelyafterseizureand People v. Alon-Alon2019
qualitative examination. confiscation, physically inventory and photograph the e chain of custody rule requires testimonyastoevery
Th
onsequently, there is doubt on whether the supposed
C same in thepresenceof link in the chain, describing how and from whom the
shabuseizedfromaccused-appellantwerethesameones 1. t he accused or the person/s from whom such seized evidence was received, its condition in which it
submitted to the crime laboratory, and eventually, items were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her was delivered to the next link in the chain, and the
presented in court. representative or counsel, precautions taken to ensure its integrity.
Here, whilethebuy-bustoperationtookplaceonAugust 2. a representative from the media and the
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page212of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
People v. Ruiz2019
Place of markingvsplace of inventory 1. his or her representative; and
nder R.A. 10640, the marking, physical inventory and
U 2. his or her counsel.
photographing of the seized items by the apprehending Lescano v. People 2016
s to the representative of the National Prosecution
A
team shall be conducted immediately after seizure and s regards the items seized and subjected to marking,
A
Service, a representative of themediamaybepresentin
confiscation, and in the presence of the accused or the Section 21(1) of RA 9165, as amended, requires the
his or her place.
persons from whom such itemswereconfiscatedand/or performance of two (2) actions: physical inventory and
seized, orhis/herrepresentativeorcounsel.Thelawalso photographing. Section 21(1) is specific as to when and eople v. Garcia underscored that the mere marking of
P
mandates that the foregoing be witnessed by specific wheretheseactionsmustbedone.Astowhen,itmustbe seized paraphernalia, unsupported by a physical
persons, namely: "immediately after seizure and confiscation." As to inventoryandtakingofphotographs,andintheabsence
where,itdependsonwhethertheseizurewassupported of the personsrequiredbySection21tobepresent,does
a) an elected public official;AND
by a search warrant. If asearchwarrantwasserved,the not suffice.
b) a representative of the National Prosecution
physical inventory and photographing must be done at
Service or the media.
theexactsameplacethatthesearchwarrantisserved.In
case of warrantless seizures,theseactionsmustbedone CICL XXX v. People2022
"atthenearestpolicestationoratthenearestofficeofthe ere, the police officers did not mark, inventory, or
H
eople v. De Lumen2019
P
apprehending officer/team, whichever is practicable." photograph the confiscated items immediately after the
re Saving Mechanism Clause
oreover,Section21(1)requiresatleastthree(3)persons
M seizure. Although petitioners admitted that a video
eIRRofthelawprovidesthatnoncompliancewiththe
Th
to be present during the physical inventory and recording of them was captured at the basketball court,
requirements of Section 21, under justifiable grounds,
photographing. These persons are: the prosecution did not present the footage. Thereisno
will not render void and invalid the seizureandcustody
evidence at all demonstrating that the marking,
over the seized items so long as the integrity and 1. t heaccusedortheperson/sfromwhomtheitems
inventory, or photography were conducted, contrary to
evidentiary value of the seized items are properly were seized;
the clear mandate of RA 9165.
preserved by the apprehending team. Accordingly, the 2. an elected public official; and
prosecution must satisfactorily prove that: I n addition, no insulating witnesses were likewise
3. a representative of the National Prosecution present to affirm the proper confiscation and recording
a) there is justifiable ground for noncompliance; and Service. of the illegal drugs and paraphernalia. The prosecution
b) t he integrity and evidentiary value of the seized ereare,however,alternativestothefirstandthethird.
Th should sufficiently justify its non-compliance with the
items are properly preserved. As to the first, there are two (2) alternatives: procedure based on meritorious grounds, provided that
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page213of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
t he integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items resence of third-party witnesses is not an empty
p of arrest was a remote area;
have been properly preserved. However, the police formality in the conduct of buy-bust operations. 2. t heir safety duringtheinventoryandphotograph
officers did not bother to explain their failure to follow
e seizure and marking of the dangerous drugs from
Th of the seized drugs was threatened by an
the protocol.
the accused to the apprehending officer form the first immediateretaliatoryactionoftheaccusedorany
ere, the links are riddled with abnormalities. The
H crucial link in the chain of custody. The marking of the person/s acting for and in his/her behalf;
apprehendingofficer(PO2Paule)didnotmarktheseized evidenceservestoseparatethemarkedevidencefromthe
3. t heelectedofficialthemselveswereinvolvedinthe
items immediately after seizure at or near the place of corpus of all other similar or related evidence from the
punishable acts sought to be apprehended;
arrest. PO2 Holanda, the investigating officer, was the time they are seized from the accused until they are
one whomarkedtheevidenceevenifhewasnotpresent disposedofattheendofthecriminalproceedings,thus, 4. e arnest effortstosecurethepresenceofaDOJor
during the actual seizure. It is not clearifPO2Holanda preventing switching, planting or contamination of mediarepresentativeandanelectedpublicofficial
properly turned over the seized items to the crime evidence. withintheperiodrequiredunderArticle125ofthe
laboratory. RPCprovefutilethroughnofaultofthearresting
I n People v. Tomawis, this Court declared that the officers,whofacethethreatofbeingchargedwith
I n all, although the elements of Illegal Possession of third-party witnesses required by Section 21 must be
arbitrary detention; or
Dangerous DrugsandDrugParaphernaliawerepresent, present as early as the time of apprehension.
the integrity and evidentiary value of the confiscated 5. t ime constraints and urgency of the anti-drug
ere, the absence of witnesses during seizure and
H operations, which often rely on tips of
items were compromised because the police officersdid markingcastsreasonabledoubtontheactualoriginand
not follow the stringent requirements of Section 21 (1), confidential assets, prevented the law enforcers
identity of the drugs introduced in evidence. from obtaining the presence of the required
Article II of R.A. 9165 as well as its IRR.
witnesses even before the offenders could escape.
ho may be witnesses during search and
W People v. Vinluan2022 e IRR of RA 9165 allows,however,fornon-compliance
Th
inventory with the rules on chain of custody as long as there is a
eoplev.Baluyot,citingPeoplev.Limholdsthatintheevent
P justifiablereason,andtheintegrityandevidentiaryvalue
People v. Castillo2019 of absence of one or more of the witnesses, the of the seized items are preserved. Here, there were no
prosecution must allege and prove that their presence representativesfromthemediaandtheDOJ.Nowherein
e requirement of conducting inventory and taking of
Th
duringtheinventoryoftheseizeditemswasnotobtained therecordsdoesitshowthatthepoliceofficersemployed
photographs immediately after seizure and confiscation
due to reasons such as: earnest efforts to procure the attendance of the other
necessarily means that the requiredwitnessesmustalso
be present during the seizure and confiscation. The 1. theirattendancewasimpossiblebecausetheplace required witnesses.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page214of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
rosecutiondidnotadduceanyexplanationastowhythe
p MPD Press Corp.
e Court finds that the police officers failed to comply
Th
with the witness-requirement of Section 21,ArticleIIof policeofficersdeviatedfromtheprocedureunderSection
eople v. Tomawis held that he presence of the three
P
RA 9165. 21.
witnessesmustbedeemednotonlyduringtheinventory
eparties'stipulationtodispensewiththetestimonyof
Th but more importantly at the time of the warrantless
forensic chemist PI Navarro did not fully cover the arrest. The IRR of R.A. No. 9165 provides for a saving
People v. Ortega2022 necessary pieces of information as required by clause to ensure thatnoteverynon-compliancewiththe
jurisprudence, namely: procedure for the preservation of the chain of custody
rior to the amendment of Sec 21 of RA 9165, three
P
1. will prejudice the prosecution's case.
witnesses were required, namely: t hat the forensic chemist received the seized
article as marked, properly sealed, and intact; or the saving clause to apply, however, the following
F
1. a representative from the media;
2. must be present:
t hat he resealed it after examination of the
2. a representative from the DOJ; and
content; and 1. t he existence of justifiable grounds to allow
3. any elected public official. departure from the rule on strict compliance; and
3. t hat he placed his own marking on the same to
ere, only the barangay official, Andres, was present
H ensurethatitcouldnotbetamperedwithpending 2. t he integrity and the evidentiary value o f t he
during the time the police officers conducted the trial. seized items are properly preserved by the
inventory of the seized drugs. apprehending team.
onsequently, a huge gap in the chain of custodyofthe
C
urther, the Inventory/Confiscation Receipt was not
F seized drugs is created. In all, the prosecution failed to In all, the prosecution failed to:
signed by Ortega or by his counsel or representative, as show that the chain of custody was properly preserved.
1. overcome appellant's presumption of innocence;
required by Section 21. It was also admitted by the
prosecutorhandlingthecasethattherewasnoproofthat 2. rove that the requirements of securing three
p
Ortegaandtherequiredwitness/eswerefurnishedacopy People v. Arellaga2020 witnesses had been complied with;
of the said document. 3. o ffer any explanation for non-compliance with
ere, the buy-bust team failed to establishthepresence
H
hiletheabsenceoftherequiredwitnessesdoesnotper
W Section 21; and
of the three required witnesses at the time of the
serendertheconfiscateditemsinadmissible,ajustifiable inventory and photograph taking of the drugs. Neither 4. rove the corpus delicti of the crime with moral
p
reason for such failure or a showingofanygenuineand wasitshownthattherewerejustifiablegroundsfortheir certainty.
sufficient effort to secure the required witnesses must absence. The Inventory of Property/Seized shows that
first be adduced by the prosecution. Here, the therewasonlyone(1)witness,acertainCrisostomoofthe
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page215of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
People v. Addin2019 e Rule on Chain of Custody was not complied with.
Th c ontroloftheplaceisnotnecessary.PPvs.Tira,May
Section 21 of RA 9165 requirestheapprehendingofficers 28, 2004
ere,thepoliceofficersfailedtoobservetheprocedurein
H
to immediately conduct the marking,physicalinventory 2) A
ny person convicted for drug trafficking or
relationtotheseizureandcustodyofdangerousdrugsor
and photograph of the seized drugs. pushingcannot avail of Probation Law.
the chain of custody; which is found in Section 21(1),
Article II of RA 9165, prior to its amendment by RA 10640. oreover, the physical inventory and taking of
M 3) P
ositivefindingfortheuseofdangerousdrugsshall
photographs shall be conducted in the presence of: be a qualifying aggravating circumstance in the
ection21ofRA9165,priortoitsamendment,mandates
S
1. t heaccusedorthepersonsfromwhomsuchitems commission of any crime.
that the marking, photographing and inventory of the
seized items be done in the presence of representatives were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her 4) A
ttemptorconspiracypenalizedbysamepenaltyin
from the media and the DOJ, and any elected public representative or counsel; Nos1, 2, 3, 5 and 13.
official. Here, the police only managed to secure the 2. a representative from the media; 5) C
riminal liability of public officer or employee for
presence and signature of a representative from the misappropriation, misapplication or failure to
3. a representative from the DOJ; and
media.Noexplanationwasprovidedwhythepresenceof account confiscated, seized and/or surrendered
a representative from the DOJ and any elected public 4. a n elected public official, after seizure and articles is Life-Death and 500K-10M + Absolute
official was not secured. confiscation. Perpetual DQ.
J urisprudence states that there should be evidence to ere, an inventory report was notaccomplishedbyany
H 6) A
ny elective official who benefited from proceeds
show that earnest efforts were employed by the of the police officers. Absent the inventory report, the shall be removed from office and perpetually DQ
prosecution in order to secure the attendance of the required presence of the insulating witnesses cannot be
from holding position in government.
necessary witnesses. Relevantly, this lapse casts doubt considered to have been complied with.
upon the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized 7) G
overnment officials and employees meted with
uetolapsesinthechainofcustodyandultimately,lack
D MAXpenalty+ Absolute Perpetual DQ.
item. of compliance with Section 21, Article II of RA 9165,
petitioner's acquittal is warranted. 8) Planting Evidence =Death.
I n conclusion, the prosecution failed to show that the
chainofcustodywasproperlypreserved.Therefore,proof 9) I n case of juridical persons, the partner,president,
beyond reasonable doubt was likewise not established. NOTES director, manager, trustee, estate administrator, or
1) C
onstructive possession – when the drug is under officer who consents and knowingly tolerates shall
the dominion and control of the accused or he has beco-principal.
Uy v. People2022 the right to exercise such dominion orcontrolover
10) Unless penalty is death, alien offender is
the place where itisfound.Exclusivepossessionor
immediately deported after service of sentence.
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page216of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
r estore the accusedtohisstatuspriortothe
11) A ccessory penalty of DQ from exercising civil and a) Complied with rules and regulations;
case.
political rights, or suspension of such rights b) H
as never been charged or convicted ofany
pending appeal. 3) P
rivilegeofSuspendedSentencetobeAvailedOnly
offense under this Act, RPC, or any special
Once
12) Voluntary submission of a drug dependent to penal laws;
confinement, treatment and rehabilitation: c) N 4) P
romulgationofSentence-shouldtheoffender
o record of escape, Provided in case of
a) B violate any condition.
y himself or through parent, spouse, escape, shall surrender 1 week from said
guardian,relativewithin4thdegree,applyto escape. 5) P
robation or Community Service in Lieu of
Board; d) P Imprisonment.
oses no serious danger to himself, family,
b) B oard submits to Court which orders and community. 16) Parent, spouse, guardian who refuses tocooperate
examination for dependency; 14) The period of prescription under the compulsory may be cited forcontempt.
c) D OH-accredited physician issues submission program shall not run during the time 17) Required procedure on the seizure and custody of
certification of dependency; thedrugdependentisunderconfinement,orunder drugs under Sec 21(1) Art II RA 9165: Shall,
treatment and rehabilitation approved by the Board. immediately after seizure and confiscation,
d) C ourt orders treatment and rehab in a
physically inventory and photograph, the same in
Board-designated Center for at least 6 15) Provisions Applicable to First-Time Offenders
months; Provided, may be placed under care the presence of the accused, or his counsel, a
1) S
uspension of sentence - over 15 yrs old at the representative from media and the DOJ, and any
of DOH-accredited physician, if (1) no time of commissionbutnotmorethan18at electedofficial,whoshallsignsaidinventory,andbe
available Center, or (2) offender is below 18
the promulgation of judgment,Provided: given a copy of.
and a 1st-time offender.
a) not been previously convicted, 18) Chain of custody establishes the identity of the
e) C onfinementnottoexceed1year.TheBoard
and Court shall be apprised by the head of b) n
ot been previously committed to a substancefromthemomentitemisseizeduptothe
the Center of the status. Center or care of a DOH-accredited time it is offered in evidence.
physician; and 19) There can be no crime of illegal possession of
f) D etermine whether further confinement
c) Board favorably recommends so. prohibited drug if nagging doubts persist on
required.
whether the item confiscated isthesamespecimen
13) Exemption from Criminal Liability under 2) D
ischarge After Compliance with Conditions of
examined.
Voluntary Submission Program Suspended Sentence - expunge all records,
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page217of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
eople v. Macaspac2019
P eteriorating, altering or suppressing computer
d
Acts punished dataorprogram,electronicdocument,orelectronic
re Illegal Transport of Dangerous Drugs
efollowingactsconstitutetheoffenseofcybercrime
Th data message, withoutrightorauthority,including
e core element of illegal transporting of dangerous
Th punishable under this Act: the introduction or transmission of viruses.
drugs is themovementofthedangerousdrugfromone
placetoanother."Totransport"means"tocarryorconvey 1. O
ffenses against the confidentiality, integrity 5) Misuse of Devices.
from one place to another." There was no definitive and availability of computer data and systems;
6) C
ybersquatting.–Theacquisitionofadomainname
momentwhenanaccused"transports"aprohibiteddrug. 2. Computer-related Offenses; over the internet in bad faith to profit, mislead,
When the circumstances establish the purpose of an destroy reputation, and deprive others from
3. Content-related Offenses.
accused to transport and the fact of transporting itself, registering the same.
there shouldbenoquestionastotheperpetrationofthe Offenses against computer data and systems
criminal act. The fact that there is actual conveyance Computer-related Offenses
1) I llegalAccess.–Theaccesstothewholeoranypartof
suffices to support a findingthattheactoftransporting a computer system without right. 1) Computer-related Forgery.—
was committed. The law does not dictate the threshold
2) I llegal Interception. – The interception made by a. Th
e input, alteration, or deletion of any
how far the drugs should have been transported to fall
technical means without right of any non-public computer data without right resulting in
within the limits of illegal transporting of dangerous
transmissionofcomputerdatato,from,orwithina inauthentic data with the intent that it be
drugs. Further, in cases of illegal transporting of
computer system including electromagnetic consideredoracteduponforlegalpurposesasif
prohibiteddrugs,itisimmaterialwhetherornottheplaceof
emissions from a computer system carrying such it were authentic, regardlesswhetherornotthe
destination is reached.
computer data. data is directly readable and intelligible; or
3) D
ata Interference. — The intentional or reckless b. Th
eactofknowinglyusingcomputerdatawhich
Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 alteration, damaging, deletion or deterioration of is the product of computer-related forgery as
G computer data, electronic document, or electronic defined herein, for the purposeofperpetuating
R.A. No. 10175, Secs. 4-7
data message, without right, including the a fraudulent or dishonest design.
omputer crimes, or Cybercrimes are crimes that
C introduction or transmission of viruses. 2) C
omputer-related Fraud. — Theunauthorizedinput,
involve a computer and/or a network. 4) S alteration,ordeletionofcomputerdataorprogram
ystem Interference. — The intentional alteration or
1. The computer device or networkas target; reckless hindering or interference with the or interference in the functioning of a computer
functioning of a computer orcomputernetworkby system, causing damage thereby with fraudulent
2. The computer device or networkas a tool.
inputting, transmitting, damaging, deleting, intent:
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page218of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
rovided,Thatifnodamagehasyetbeencaused,the
P ll crimes defined and penalized by the RPC, and
A 2. with the aid of a computer system; and
penalty imposable shall beone (1) degree lower. speciallaws,ifcommittedby,throughandwiththeuse
3. for favor or consideration.
3) C of information and communications technologiesshall
omputer-related Identity Theft. – The intentional
be covered by the relevant provisions of this Act: ere, it was established that Jerrie distributed the lewd
H
acquisition, use, misuse, transfer, possession,
alteration or deletion of identifying information photosandvideosofAAA252353toPatrickwhopaidhim
rovided,Thatthepenaltytobeimposedshallbeone(1)
P
belonging to another, whether natural or juridical, degree higher than that provided for by the RPC and via local money transfer.
without right: special laws.
rovided,Thatifnodamagehasyetbeencaused,the
P Liability under Other Laws olentino v. People2018
T
penalty imposable shall beone (1) degree lower. re prescriptive period of cyberlibel
prosecutionunderthisActshallbewithoutprejudiceto
A
Content-related Offenses anyliabilityforviolationofanyprovisionoftheRPC,as ection6ofRANo.10175providesthatthe"penaltytobe
S
amended, or special laws. imposedshallbeone(1)degreehigherthanthatprovided
1) C ybersex. — The willful engagement, maintenance,
for by the Revised Penal Code (RPC), as amended, and
control, or operation, directly or indirectly, of any
People v. Arraz2022Lopez, M., J. special laws, as the case may be." As such, the former
lascivious exhibition of sexual organs or sexual
activity,withtheaidofacomputersystem,forfavor J errie was charged with violation ofSection4(c)(1)ofRA penalty of prision correccional in it its minimum and
No. 10175, ortheCybercrimePreventionActof2012.The medium periods is increased to prision corrreccional in
or consideration.
Actseekstopunishcyberprostitution,whiteslavetrade, its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum
2) C hild Pornography. — The unlawful or prohibited period. The new penalty, therefore, becomes afflictive,
and pornography for favor and consideration. This
acts defined and punishable by RA 9775 or the following Section 25 of the RPC. Corrolarily, following
includes interactive prostitution and pornography, i.e.,
Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009, committed Article 90 oftheRPC,thecrimeoflibelinrelationtoRA
by webcam.
through a computer system:
1 0175 now prescribes in fifteen (15) years. Thus,
e element of 'engaging in a business' is necessary to
Th
rovided, Thatthepenaltytobeimposedshallbe(1)
P respondent Eva Rose Pua's filing of the complaint on
constitute illegal cybersex. Three elements must be
one degree higherthan that provided for in RA 9775. August 8, 2017 against petitioner's Facebook post dated
established to successfully prosecute the crime of
3) L ibel. — The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as April 29, 2015waswellwithintheprescriptiveperiodfor
cybersex:
defined in Article 355 of the RPC, as amended, libel in relation to RA 10175.
1. e ngagement, maintenance,control,oroperation,
committedthroughacomputersystemoranyother
directly or indirectly, of any lasciviousexhibition
similar means which may be devised in the future.
of sexual organs or sexual activity; Disini v. Sec. of Justice2014 En Banc
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page219of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
VOID PROVISIONS is is violative of the constitutional guarantees to
Th Libel.
1. S
ection 4(c)(3) of Republic Act 10175 that penalizes freedom of expression and against unreasonable
posting of unsolicited commercial communications; searchesandseizures.Foranexecutiveofficertoseize
contentallegedtobeunprotectedwithoutanyjudicial pecial Protection of Children
S
nsolicited advertisements are legitimate forms of
U
warrant,itisnotenoughforhimtobeoftheopinion Against Abuse, Exploitation, and
expressions. The recipient has the option of not
that such content violates some law, for to do so Discrimination Act
H
opening or reading these mail ads. To prohibit the
transmission of unsolicited adswoulddenyaperson would make him judge, jury, and executioner all .A. No. 7610, Secs. 3, 5, 6, 10, 12, and 16, as amended
R
the right to read his emails. Commercial speechisa rolled into one. by R.A. No. 9231 and R.A. No. 11648
separatecategoryofspeechwhichisnotaccordedthe 4. S
ection 4(c)(4) that penalizes online libel as VALID
same level of protection as that given to other and CONSTITUTIONAL with respect to the original Definition of Terms
constitutionally guaranteed forms of expression but author of the post; but VOID and 1) "Children" refers to
is nonetheless entitled to protection. UNCONSTITUTIONAL with respect to others who
simply receive the post and react to it; and a) person below eighteen (18) years of age or
2. S
ection12thatauthorizesthecollectionorrecording
of traffic data in real-time; 5. S
ection 5 that penalizes aiding or abetting and b) t hoseoverbutareunabletofullytakecareof
attempt in the commission of cybercrimesasVALID themselves or protect themselves from
I t threatens the right of individuals to privacy. abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or
and CONSTITUTIONAL only in relation to Section
Althoughitlimitsthecollectionoftrafficdatatothose discrimination because of a physical or
“associated with specified communications”, this is 4(a)(1) on Illegal Access, Section 4(a)(2) on Illegal
Interception, Section 4(a)(3) on Data Interference, mental disability or condition.
no limitation at all since it is the LEAs that would
Section4(a)(4)onSystemInterference,Section4(a)(5) 2) " C
hild abuse" refers to the maltreatment,whether
specify the target communications. The power is
virtually limitless, enabling law enforcement on Misuse of Devices, Section 4(a)(6) on habitual or not, of the child which includes any of
Cyber-squatting, Section4(b)(1)onComputer-related the following:
authorities to engage in “fishing expedition,”
Forgery, Section 4(b)(2) on Computer-related Fraud,
choosing whatever specified communication they a) P
sychological and physical abuse, neglect,
Section 4(b)(3) on Computer-related Identity Theft,
want. cruelty, sexual abuse and emotional
and Section 4(c)(1) on Cybersex; but VOID and
3. S
ection 19 of the same Act that authorizes the maltreatment;
UNCONSTITUTIONAL with respect to Sections
Department of Justice to restrict or block access to 4(c)(2) on Child Pornography, 4(c)(3) on Unsolicited b) A
ny act by deeds or words which debases,
suspected Computer Data. Commercial Communications, and 4(c)(4) on online degradesordemeanstheintrinsicworthand
dignity of a child as a human being;
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page220of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c) U nreasonable deprivation of hisbasicneeds e) B
eing a victim of a man-made or natural 4) Th
reateningorusingviolencetowardsachildto
for survival, such as food and shelter; or disaster or calamity; or engage him as a prostitute; or
d) F ailure to immediately give medical f) C
ircumstances analogous to those above 5) G
iving monetary consideration goods or other
treatment to an injured child resulting in stated which endanger the life, safety or pecuniary benefit to a child with intent to
serious impairment of his growth and normal development of children. engage such child in prostitution.
development or inhispermanentincapacity
b) Th
ose who commit the act of sexualintercourseof
or death. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse lascivious conduct with a child exploited in
3) C ircumstanceswhichgravelythreatenorendanger hildren, whethermaleorfemale,whoformoney,profit,
C prostitution or subject to other sexual abuse;
the survival and normal development of children or any other consideration or due to the coercion or hen the victim is under sixteen (16)yearsofage,
W
include, but are not limited to, the following; influence of any adult, syndicate or group, indulge in the perpetrators shall be prosecuted under
a) B eing in acommunitywherethereisarmed sexualintercourseorlasciviousconduct,aredeemedto
1. Article 335(3), forrapeand
conflict or being affected by armed be children exploited in prostitution and other sexual
conflict-related activities; abuse. 2. A
rticle 336, for rape, or lascivious conduct,
as the case may be.
b) W orkingunderconditionshazardoustolife, epenaltyofreclusiontemporalinitsmediumperiodto
Th
safety and normal which unduly interfere reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon the following: e penalty for lascivious conduct whenthe
Th
with their normal development; victimisundersixteen(16)yearsofageshall
a) Those who engage in or promote, facilitate or
be reclusion temporal in its medium period;
c) L iving in or fending for themselves in the i nduce child prostitution which include, but are
and
streets of urban or rural areas without the not limited to, the following:
care of parents or a guardian or basic c) Th
ose who derive profit or advantage therefrom,
1) Acting as a procurer of a child prostitute;
services needed for a good quality of life; whether as manager or owneroftheestablishment
2) I nducing a person to be a client of a c hild where the prostitution takes place,orofthesauna,
d) B eing a member of a indigenous cultural prostitute by means of written or o ral disco, bar, resort, place of entertainment or
community and/or living under conditions advertisements or other similar means; establishmentservingasacoverorwhichengagesin
of extreme poverty or in an area which is
3) T
akingadvantageofinfluenceorrelationshipto prostitutioninadditiontotheactivityforwhichthe
underdeveloped and/or lacks or has
procure a child as prostitute; license has been issued to said establishment.
inadequate access to basic services needed
for a good quality of life;
Attempt to Commit Child Prostitution
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page221of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
e xhibitions and indecent shows, whether liveor,in
1. U nderSection5(a)whenanypersonwho,notbeing 2) Th
epenaltyshallbeimposedinitsmaximumperiod
video, or model in obscene publications or
a relative of a child, is found alone with the said when the victim isunder sixteen (16) yearsof age.
child inside the room or cubicleofahouse,aninn, pornographic materials, or to sell or distribute the
hotel, motel, pension house, apartelle or other Attempt to Commit Child Trafficking said materials shall suffer the penalty of prision
similar establishments, vessel, vehicle or any other mayorin itsmediumperiod.
1) W
hen a child travels alone to a foreign country
hiddenorsecludedareaundercircumstanceswhich 2) I f the child used as a performer, subject, or
withoutvalidreasonthereforandwithoutclearance
would lead a reasonable person to believe that the seller/distributorisundereighteen(18)yearsofage,
issued by the DSWD or written permit or
child is about to be exploited in prostitution and the penalty shall be imposed in its maximum
justification from the child's parents or legal
other sexual abuse. period.
guardian;
2. U nder Section 5(b) when any person is receiving
services from a child in a sauna parlor or bath,
2) W
hen a person, agency, establishment or Employment of Children
child-caring institution recruits women or couples
massage clinic, health club and other similar GR: hildren below fifteen (15)yearsofageshallnotbe
C
tobearchildrenforthepurposeofchildtrafficking;
establishments. employed
or
3. A penalty lower by two (2) degrees than that EXC:
3) W
hen a doctor, hospital or clinic official or
prescribed for the consummated felony under
employee,nurse,midwife,localcivilregistrarorany 1) W
hen a child works directly under the sole
Section 5 hereof shall be imposed upon the
other person simulates birth for the purpose of responsibility of his/her parents or legal guardian
principals of the attempt to commit the crime of
child trafficking; or and where only members of his/her family are
child prostitution.
4) W employed.Provided
hen a person engages in the act of finding
Child Trafficking children among low-income families, hospitals, a) H
is/her employment neither endangers
clinics, nurseries, day-care centers, or other his/her life, safety, health, and morals, nor
1) A nypersonwhoshallengageintradinganddealing child-duringinstitutionswhocanbeofferedforthe impairs his/her normal development.
with children including, but not limited to, the act
purpose of child trafficking.
ofbuyingandsellingofachildformoney,orforany b) Th
eparentorlegalguardianshallprovidethe
consideration, or barter, shall suffer the penalty of said child with the prescribed primary
Obscene Publication and Indecent Shows and/or secondary education; or
reclusion temporaltoreclusion perpetua.
1) A
ny person who shall hire, employ, use, persuade, 2) W
here a child's employment or participation in
induce, or coerce a child to perform in obscene public entertainment or information through
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page222of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c inema, theater, radio, television or other forms of c annot be accused of both crimes for the same act c onduct through the coercion or intimidation by an
media isessential. because his right against double jeopardy will be adult. In the latter case, there must be some form of
e following requirements in all instances are
Th prejudiced. A person cannot be subjected twice to compulsionequivalenttointimidationwhichsubduesthe
strictly complied with: The employer shall criminal liability forasinglecriminalact.Likewise,rape free exercise of the offended party's will.
cannot be complexed with a violation of Section 5 (b) of RA
a) e nsure the protection,health,safety,morals
7610. Under Section 48 of the RPC, a felony under the
and normal development of the child;
RPC such as rape cannot be complexed with an offense Calaoagan v. People2019
b) i nstitute measures to prevent the child's penalized by a special law.
exploitation or discrimination taking into ec. 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610 penalizes an act when it
S
account the system and level of constitutes as child abuse. In relation thereto, Sec. 3(b)
remuneration, and the duration and highlights that in child abuse, the act by deeds or words
People v. Basa, Jr 2019
arrangement of working time; and must debase, degrade, or demean the intrinsic worth and
efore an accused can be held criminally liable for
B dignity of a child as a human being.
c) f ormulate and implement, subject to the lascivious conduct under Section 5(b) R.A.No.7610,the
approval and supervision of competent hentheinflictionofphysicalinjuriesagainstaminoris
W
CourtheldinQuimvelv.PeoplethattherequisitesforActs
authorities, a continuing program for done at the spur ofthemoment,itisimperativeforthe
of Lasciviousness, as penalized under Article 336 of the
training and skills acquisition of the child. prosecutiontoproveaspecificintenttodebase,degrade,
RPC, must bemetinaddition totherequisitesforsexual or demean the intrinsic worth of the child; otherwise,
abuse under R.A. No. 7610. the accused cannot be convictedunderSec.10(a)ofR.A.
People v. Tubillo2017
child is deemed exploited in prostitution or subjected to
A No. 7610.
nderSection5(b),ArticleIIIofRA7610inrelationtoRA
U
other sexual abuse when the child indulges in sexual
8353,ifthevictimofsexualabuseisbelow12yearsofage,
intercourse or lascivious conduct
the offender should not be prosecuted for sexual abuse
a) for money, profit or any other consideration; or Sanchez v. People
ut for statutory rape under Article 266-A(1)(d) of the
b
RPC and penalized withreclusion perpetua. b) u
nder the coercion or anyinfluenceofanyadult, ere, the applicable laws are Article 59 of P.D. No. 603
H
syndicate or group. and Section 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610. The use of "or" in
n the other hand, ifthevictimis12yearsorolder,the
O
Section10(a)ofRA7610beforethephrase"beresponsible
offender should be charged with either sexual abuse I nthecaseofOlivarezv.CA,theCourtexplainedthatthe
for other conditions prejudicial to the child's
underSection5(b)ofRA7610orrapeunderArticle266-A phrase"othersexualabuse,"coversnotonlyachildwhois
development" supposes that there are four punishable
(except par 1 [d]) of the RPC. However, the offender abusedforprofit,butalsoonewhoengagesinlascivious
acts therein. First, the act of child abuse; second, child
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page223of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c ruelty; third, child exploitation; and fourth, being a ccusedtodebase,degradeordemeantheintrinsicworth the perpetrator is, inter alia,the parent of thevictim.
responsible for conditions prejudicial to the child's and dignity of the child as a human being should it be
development. The fourth penalized act cannot be punishedaschildabuse.Otherwise,itispunishedunder
interpreted as a qualifying condition for the threeother the RPC. People v. Carlos Alhambra2014
acts.
eprosecutionwasabletoestablishAlhambra’scriminal
Th
liability under Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610. First, AAA
People v. Baraga2014
testifiedthat,whilstcladonlyintowelafterhavingtaken
Araneta v. People
exual abuse under Section 5(b), Article III of R.A. No.
S abath,herfatherforciblyremovedhertowelcoveringher
e Rules and Regulations of the questioned statute
Th 7610 has three elements: body, kissed her on the neck, removed her
distinctlyandseparatelydefinedchildabuse,crueltyand 1) t he accused commits anactofsexualintercourse undergarments, and kissedherontheotherpartsofher
exploitation just to show that these three acts are or lascivious conduct; body. Second, Alhambra used his moral ascendancy and
differentfromoneanotherandfromtheactprejudicialto influence over his daughter AAA to consummate his
the child's development. 2) t hesaidactisperformedwithachildexploitedin lascivious design. Third, AAAwasonly17yearsoldwhen
prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse; the said incident happened.
n accused can be prosecuted and be convicted under
A and
Section 10(a) if he commits any of the fouractstherein. lhambra’sassertionthatheisnotliableforsexualabuse
A
The prosecution need not prove that the acts of child 3) the child is below 18 years old. under Section 5(b) since AAA is not a child engaged in
abuse, child cruelty and child exploitation have resulted e penalty forsexualabuseperformedonachildunder
Th prostitution or subjected to othersexualabuseisplainly
intheprejudiceofthechildbecauseanactprejudicialto 18 years old but over 12 years old under Section 5(b) of without merit. The law covers not only a situation in
thedevelopmentofthechildisdifferentfromtheformer R.A.No.7610isreclusiontemporalinitsmediumperiod whichachildisabusedforprofitbutalsooneinwhicha
acts. to reclusion perpetua. The Court likewise considers the c hild, through coercion or intimidation, engages in
alternative circumstance of relationship againstBaraga any lascivious conduct. A child is deemed subjected to
as an aggravating circumstance. Since there is an “othersexualabuse”whenheorsheindulgesinlascivious
Bongalon v. People2013 aggravating circumstance and no mitigating conduct under the coercionorinfluenceofanyadult.As
circumstance, the penalty shall be applied in its establishedbytheprosecution,Alhambrawasonlyableto
ot every instance of the laying of hands on a child
N
maximum period, i.e., reclusion perpetua. Besides, consummate his lascivious design towardsAAAthrough
constitutes the crime of childabuseunderSection10(a)
Section 31 of R.A. No. 7610 expressly provides that the coercion and withtheuseofhisinfluenceoverthelatter
ofRepublicActNo.7610.Onlywhenthelayingofhandsis
penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period when as her father.
shown beyond reasonable doubt to be intended by the
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page224of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Rape under RPC from sexual child abuse Age of Victim U
nder 12 years 1 2 years old or 1 8 years Age of Victim U
nder 12 years 1 2 years old or 1 8 years
old or demented below 18, or 18 old and old or demented below 18, or 18 old and
1. U nder 12 prosecute as Statutory Rape under RPC; Crime under special above Crime under special above
penalty is RP Committed circumstances Committed circumstances
rosecuteasActsofLasciviousnessunderRPC,but
p c hildren i n relation to o f R.A. No. abuse c asedeath eriod to
p
penalty provided under Sec. 5 (b), RA7610whichis exploited in Section 5(b) of 7610: penaltyshall be reclusion
RT med. prostitution or R.A. No. 7610: reclusion imposed perpetua
2. O ver 12 butUnder18eitherRapeunderRPC(ifany other sexual reclusion temporalin
apeunder
R
of 4 circumstances occur) abuse temporalin its its medium
Article 266-A(1)
medium period period to
o r RA 7610 if victim is “subjected to other sexual in relation to
reclusion apeunder
R ape
R
abuse” or under persuasion, inducement, exual Assault
S Art. 266-B of
Sexual Assault perpetua Article under
enticement, coercion or influence (PIECI) where under Article the RPC:
penalty isRT mediumtoRP. committed 266-A(1) in Article
266-A(2) of the reclusion
against Rape by carnal relation to 266-A(1)
3. Over 18Rape under RPC; RPC in relation perpetua,except
children knowledge Art. 266-B of of the
to Section 5(b) NA when the victim
cts of Lasciviousness under RPC (prision
A exploited in the RPC: RPC:
of R.A. No. isbelow 7years
correccional). prostitution or reclusion reclusion
7610:reclusion old in which
other sexual perpetua perpetua
esignation of the Crime & Imposable
D temporalin its casedeath
PenaltyfromTulagan v. People2019 En Banc a buse
medium period penaltyshall be
imposed
Age of Victim U
nder 12 years 1 2 years old or 1 8 years exual
S apeunder
R exual
S
old or demented below 18, or 18 old and Intercourse Article 266-A(1) Abuseunder exual Assault
S ascivious
L exual
S
Crime under special above committed of the RPC: Section 5(b) under Article Conduct Assault
Committed circumstances
against reclusion of R.A. No. 266-A(2) of the under under
NA Rape by Sexual
cts of
A cts of
A ascivious
L children perpetua,except 7610: RPC in relation Section 5(b) Article
Assault
Lasciviousness Lasciviousness conduct exploited in when the victim reclusion to Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 266-A(2)
NA
committed under Article under prostitution or isbelow 7years temporal in of R.A. No. 7610: of the
against 336 of the RPC Section 5(b) other sexual old in which its medium 7610:reclusion reclusion RPC:
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page225of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Age of Victim U
nder 12 years 1 2 years old or 1 8 years ld andabove,andnotdemented,thatthecrimeshould
o f. g
roping, or any advances,whetherverbalor
old or demented below 18, or 18 old and be called as "S
exual Assault under paragraph 2, Article physical, that is unwanted and has
Crime under special above
Committed 266-A of the RPC" with the imposable penalty of prision threatenedone'ssenseofpersonalspaceand
circumstances
mayor. physical safety and committed in public
t emporalin its t emporalin p rision spaces such as alleys, roads, sidewalks and
medium period its medium mayor parks.
period to Safe Spaces Act 3. Th
ey are those performed in buildings, schools,
reclusion I
R.A. No. 11313, Secs. 3-7 and 11 churches, restaurants, malls, public washrooms,
perpetua
bars,internetshops,publicmarkets,transportation
1. The crimes of gender-based streets and public
terminals or public utility vehicles.
spacessexualharassmentarecommittedthrough
Tulagan v. People2019 En Banc a ny unwanted and uninvited sexual actions or 4. G
ender-based online sexual harassment refers
remarksagainstanypersonregardlessofthemotive toanonlineconducttargetedataparticularperson
I f the acts constituting sexual assault are committed
for committing such action or remarks. that causes or likely to cause another mental,
againstavictimunder12yearsofageorisdemented,the
emotional or psychological distress, and fear of
nomenclature of the offense should now be "S exual 2. It includes personal safety, sexual harassment acts including
Assault” under paragraph 2, Article 266-A of theRPCin
a. c atcalling, wolf-whistling, unwanted a. u
relation to Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610. The imposable nwanted sexual remarks and comments,
invitations, misogynistic, transphobic,
penaltyisstillreclusiontemporalinitsmediumperiod,and threats,
homophobic and sexist slurs,
notprision mayor. b. u
ploadingorsharingofone'sphotoswithout
b. p
ersistent uninvited comments or gestures consent, video and audio recordings,
hereas if the victim is 12 yearsoldandunder18years
W
on a person's appearance,
old, or 18 years old and above under special c. cyberstalking and
circumstances, thenomenclatureofthecrimeshouldbe c. relentless requests for personal details,
d. online identity theft.
"LasciviousConductunderSection5(b)ofR.A.No.7610" d. s tatement of sexual comments and
with the imposable penalty of reclusion temporal in its suggestions, 5. S
talking refers to conduct directed at a person
mediumperiodtoreclusionperpetua,butitshouldnotmake involving the repeated visual or physicalproximity,
e. p
ublic masturbation or flashing of private non-consensual communication, or a combination
any reference to the provisions of the RPC.
parts, thereofthatcauseorwilllikelycauseapersontofear
Itisonlywhenthevictimofthesexualassaultis18years
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page226of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
f or one's own safety or the safety of others, or to b yasubordinate,ortoateacherbyastudent,or
7. Thecrimeof gender-basedsexualharassmentin
suffer emotional distress. to a trainer by a trainee.
the workplaceincludes the following;
6. Q ualified Gender-Based Streets, Public Spaces and 8. E
xemptions. — Acts that are legitimateexpressions
a. A
n act or series of acts involving any
Online Sexual Harassment. — The penalty next of indigenous culture and tradition, as well as
unwelcome sexual advances, requests or
higher in degree will be applied in the following breastfeeding in public shall not bepenalized.(Sec
demandforsexualfavorsoranyactofsexual
cases: 31)
nature, whether done verbally, physically or
a. I ftheacttakesplaceinacommoncarrieror through the use of technology such as text
PUV,including,butnotlimitedto,jeepneys, n Act Providing for Stronger
A
messaging orelectronicmailorthroughany
taxis, tricycles, or app-based transport other forms of information and
Protection Against Rape and Sexual
network vehicle services, where the communication systems, that has or could J Exploitation and Abuse, Increasing
perpetrator is the driver of the vehicle and haveadetrimentaleffectontheconditionsof the Age for Determining the
the offended party is a passenger; an individual's employment or education, Commission of Statutory Rape
R.A. No. 11648, Secs. 1-3
b. I f the offended party is a minor, a senior job performance or opportunities;
citizen, or a PWD, or a breastfeeding b. A
conduct of sexual nature and other
Amendment on Rape
mothernursing her child; conduct-basedonsexaffectingthedignityof
c. I f the offended party is diagnosed with a a person, which is unwelcome, 1) R
apeisCommittedbyapersonwhoshallhavecarnal
mental problemtending to impair consent; unreasonable,andoffensivetotherecipient, knowledge of another person under any of the
whether doneverbally,physicallyorthrough following circumstances:
d. I f the perpetrator is a member of the
theuseoftechnologysuchastextmessaging a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;
uniformedservices,suchasthePNPandthe
orelectronicmailorthroughanyotherforms
AFP, and the act was perpetrated while the b) W
hen the offended party is deprived of
of information and communication systems;
perpetrator was in uniform; and reason or otherwise unconscious;
c. A
conduct that is unwelcome and pervasive
e. I f the act takes place in the premises of a c) B
y means of fraudulent machination or
and creates an intimidating, hostile or
government agency offering frontline grave abuse of authority; and
humiliating environment for the recipient.
servicestothepublicandtheperpetratorisa
d) W
hen the offended party is under sixteen
government employee. e crime of gender-based sexual
Th
(16)yearsofageorisdemented,eventhough
harassment may also be committed between
peers and those committed to asuperiorofficer
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page227of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
one of the circumstancesmentionedabove
n ecause of personal,
b family and social
Amendment on Qualified Seduction
be present. circumstances.
1) The seduction
ere shall be NO criminal liability on the
Th 3) " C
hildinConflictwiththeLaw"orCICLrefersto
part of a personhavingcarnalknowledgeof a) o faminor,16andoverbutunder18yearsof achildwhoisallegedas,accusedof,oradjudgedas,
another person under sixteen (16) years of age, having committed an offense under Philippine laws.
age b) c ommittedbyanypersoninpublicauthority, 4) Th
e exemption from criminal liability herein
1. w hen the agedifferencebetweenthe priest, home-servant, domestic, guardian, established does not include exemption from civil
parties is not more than three (3) teacher, or any person who, inanycapacity, liability.
years, and shall be entrusted with the education or
5) The CICL shall enjoy the presumption of
custody of the minor seduced.
2. t hesexualactinquestionisprovento minority. The age of a child may be determined
be consensual, non-abusive, and 2) Th
e penalty next higher in degree shallbeimposed
upon any person who shall seduce his sister or a. f rom the child's birth certificate, baptismal
non-exploitative.
descendant, whether or not she be a virgin orover certificate or any other pertinent documents.
I f the victim is under thirteen (13)
eighteen years of age. b. I n the absence thereof, from the child
yearsofage,thisexceptionshallNOT
3) U
nder the provisions of this Chapter, seduction is himself/herself, testimonies of other
apply.
committedwhentheoffenderhascarnalknowledge persons,thephysicalappearanceofthechild
2) N on-abusive shall mean the absence of undue and other relevant evidence.
of any of the persons and under thecircumstances
influence, intimidation, fraudulent machinations,
described herein. I ncaseofdoubtastotheageofthechild,itshallbe
coercion, threat, physical, sexual, psychological, or
resolved in his/her favor.
mental injury or maltreatment, either with
intention orthroughneglect,duringtheconductof
Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act 6) " S tatus Offenses" refers to offenses which
sexual activities with the child victim.
K R.A. No. 9344, Secs. 4, 6, 7, 20 and 38, as amended by discriminateonlyagainstachild,whileanadultdoes
R.A. No. 10630 not suffer any penalty for committing similar acts.
3) N on-exploitative shall mean there is no actual or
attemptedactoractsofunfairlytakingadvantageof 1) " C
hild"referstoapersonundertheageofeighteen These shall include curfew violations; truancy,
the child’s position of vulnerability, differential (18) years. parental disobedience and the like.
power, or trust during the conduct of sexual ny conduct not considered an offense or not
A
2) " C
hildatRisk"referstoachildwhoisvulnerableto
activities. penalized if committed by an adult shall not be
and at the risk of committing criminal offenses
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page228of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
c onsidered an offense and shall not be punished if read together with Lababo FFmaythusbeconfinedinanagriculturalcamporany
F
committed by a child. (Section 57)
ec68ofRA9344allowstheretroactiveapplicationofthe
S othertrainingfacilityinaccordancewithSection51ofRA
7) A utomaticSuspensionofSentence.—Oncethechildis No.9344.Thecaseshallthusberemandedtothecourtof
Act to those who have been convicted and are serving
found guilty of the offense charged, the courtshall origintoeffectappellant'sconfinementinanagricultural
sentenceatthetimeoftheeffectivityofthissaidAct,and
determineandascertainanycivilliability.However, camp or other training facility, following the Court's
who were below the age of 18 years at the time of the
insteadofpronouncingthejudgmentofconviction, pronouncement inPeople v. Sarcia.
commission of the offense.
the court shall place the CICL under suspended
sentence, without need of application. inceRA9344doesnotdistinguishbetweenaminorwho
S
has been convicted of a capitaloffenseandanotherwho
uspension of sentence shall still be applied even if
S osal Hubilla v. People2014
R
has been convicted of a lesser offense, the Court should
thejuvenileisalreadyeighteenyears(18)ofageormoreat People v. Wile2016
also not distinguish and should apply the automatic
the time of the pronouncement of his/her guilt. I f the CICL has reached eighteen (18) years of agewhile
suspensionofsentencetoachildinconflictwiththelaw
(Section 38) under suspended sentence, the court shall determine
who has been found guilty of a heinous crime.
8) P robation for CICLs. — The court may, after itshall whether
onetheless, Sec. 40 of the same law limits the said
N
have convicted and sentenced a CICL, and upon 1. todischargethe child in accordance with this Act,
suspension of sentence until the said child reaches the
applicationatanytime,placethechildonprobation
aximum ageof 21.Todate,accused-appellantisabout
m 2. to orderexecution of sentence, or
in lieu of service of his/her sentence taking into
31yearsofage.Thus,theapplicationofSecs.38and40to
account the best interest of the child. 3. t o extend the suspended sentence for a certain
the suspension of sentence is nowmoot and academic.
specified period or until the child reaches the
9) Other benefits of convicted CICLs
maximum age of twenty-one (21) years.
a. S hall be credited in the services of his/her
People v. Lababo 2018 review of the provisions of RA No. 9344 reveals that
A
sentence with the full time spent in actual
imprisonment ofCICLisbynomeansprohibited.While
commitment and detention; e CA correctly took into account FFF's minority, he
Th Section5(c)ofRANo.9344bestowsonCICLtherightnot
b. B e madetoservehis/hersentence,inlieuof being 17 years old at the time of the commission of the
to be unlawfully or arbitrarily deprived of their liberty;
confinement in a regular penal institution, crime, in reducing the period of imprisonment to be
imprisonment as a proper disposition of a case is duly
in an agricultural camp and other training served by him. Being of said age, FFF is entitled to the recognized, subject tocertainrestrictionsontheimposition
facilities. privileged mitigating circumstance of minority under
of imprisonment, namely:
Article 68(2)of the RPC.
People v. Sarcia a) thedetentionorimprisonmentisadispositionof
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page229of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
last resort, and iththelawundersuspendedsentenceevenifsuchchild
w s aid accused, then ___ years oldandwithoutanyknown
has reached 18 years or more at the time of judgment. address, willfully, unlawfullyandfeloniously,withintent
b) t he detention or imprisonment shall be for the
to gain, without force upon things or violence upon
shortest appropriate periodof time.
persons and without the knowledge and consent of
astly,followingSection51ofRANo.9344,thepetitioner,
L
V Practical Exercises _____________________,theowner,tooka_____________
although he hastoservehissentence,mayserveitinan valuedat__________________Pesos(P________.00)tothe
agricultural camp or other training facilities in a Complaint prejudice of said owner.
mannerconsistentwiththeoffenderchild'sbestinterest.
uch service ofsentencewillbe inlieu ofserviceinthe
S REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
Department of Justice CONTRARY TO LAW.
regular penal institution. National Prosecution Service
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR ____________________________
[City]
Complainant
People v. Ancajas2015
EOPLE OF THE
P
llain acted with discernment as shown by his act of
A
PHILIPPINES
coveringAAA'smouthwithahandkerchieftopreventher Criminal Case No.: 123984 UBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this __th
S
from shouting and conspired with appellant Vergel in Plaintiff, day of _________ 200_ in ________ City.
raping AAA. Allain was only 17 years old when he -versus- ____________________________
For: [CRIME]
committed the crime; he is, therefore, entitled to the
[ACCUSED], Assistant City Prosecutor
privileged mitigating circumstance of minority under
Article 68(2) of the RPC. Accused.
Information
ence, the imposable penalty must be reduced by one
H x--------------------------x.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
degree, i.e., from reclusion perpetua, which is reclusion REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
temporal. Being a divisible penalty, the ISLaw is COMPLAINT
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
applicable. e Undersigned accuses _____________________ of the
Th BRANCH [#], [VENUE]
ection 38 of RA No. 9344 provides that when the child
S crime of [CRIME], committed as follows:
EOPLE OF THE
P
below 18 years of age who committed a crime and was at on or about ________ 200_, in the City of________
Th PHILIPPINES
found guilty, the court shall place the child in conflict and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,the Criminal Case No.: 123984
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page230of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
_ ____________________,theowner,tooka_____________ _ ____________________ two (2) wounds on hischestand
Plaintiff,
valuedat__________________Pesos(P________.00)tothe stomach, which wounds would have been fatal had not
-versus- For: [CRIME] prejudice of said owner. timely medical assistance been rendered to the said
[ACCUSED], _____________________.
FOR ATTEMPTED RAPE:
Accused. at on or about ________ 200_, in ________ City, the
Th ONTRARYTOLAW[withtheaggravatingcircumstance
C
accused did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and of (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE)].
x--------------------------x.
feloniously enter the house of _____________________, a ____________________________
INFORMATION marriedwoman,andfindingthatherhusbandwasaway,
Assistant City Prosecutor
with lewd designs and by means of force and
e Undersigned accuses _____________________ of the
Th CERTIFICATE OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
crime of [CRIME], committed as follows: intimidation, commenced directly by overt acts to
committhecrimeofattemptedrapeuponherperson,to I hereby certify that a preliminary investigation in this
FOR BIGAMY: wit:while_____________________wascookinglunch,the case was conducted bymeinaccordancewithlaw;thatI
at on or about ________ 200_, in the City of________
Th accused seized her from behind, threw her to the floor, examined theComplainantandherwitnesses;thatthere
and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,the raised her skirt, pulled down her underwear and is reasonable ground to believe that the offensecharged
said accused, being then legally married to attempted to penetrate her with his sexual organ and had been committed and that the accused is probably
_____________________, and without such marriage would have succeeded in doing so had not her loud guilty thereof; that the accused was informed of the
havingbeenlegallydissolvedandthusvalidandexisting, protestsandvigorousresistancebroughtherneighborsto Complaint and of the evidence submitted against him
did wilfully,unlawfullyandfeloniouslycontractasecond her assistance, causing the accused to flee from the and was given the opportunity to submit controverting
marriage with _____________________ in the City of premises without completing all the acts of execution. evidence; and that the filing of this Information is with
________. FOR FRUSTRATED MURDER: the prior authority and approval of the City Prosecutor.
FOR THEFT: at on or about ________ 200_, in ________ City, the
Th ____________________________
at on or about ________ 200_, in the City of________
Th accuseddidthenandtheretakealoaded________pistol, Assistant City Prosecutor
and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,the directly aim the same firearm at the person of
UBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this __th
S
said accused, then ___ years oldandwithoutanyknown _____________________, an invalid septuagenarian, and,
day of _________ 200_ in ________ City.
address, willfully, unlawfullyandfeloniously,withintent at point-blank range, with intent to kill, discharge the
to gain, without force upon things or violence upon firearm twice against the person of said ____________________________
persons and without the knowledge and consent of _____________________, inflicting on said City Prosecutor
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page231of232
Criminal Law v1.1 Syllabus-basedReviewerfor the2024Bar based on Bar Bulletin No. 1by Atty. Rehne Gibb N. Larena
Bail Recommended: P10,000.00
Replace Certificate of PI to this if necessary
CERTIFICATION AS TO CONDUCT OF INQUEST
I hereby certify that the accused was lawfully arrested
without a warrant and that, uponbeinginformedofhis
rights,refusedtowaivetheprovisionsofArticle125ofthe
Revised Penal Code and, for thisreason,anInquestwas
conducted;thatbasedonthecomplaintandtheevidence
presentedbeforemewithoutanycountervailingevidence
submitted by the accused, despite opportunity to doso,
thereisreasonablegroundtobelievethattheaccusedhas
committed the crime of theft and should, thus, be held
for said crime; that this Information was with theprior
authority of the City Prosecutor.
____________________________
Assistant City Prosecutor
eCodal+Pro This material is available only to eCodal+Pro subscribers for theirPERSONALuse; and must not be reproducedand/or distributed either for profit or otherwise. Page232of232
You might also like
- PhilawsophiaDocument4 pagesPhilawsophiasan71% (7)
- Legal Ethics ReviewerDocument88 pagesLegal Ethics ReviewerRoyce Ann Pedemonte100% (1)
- TeleologicalDocument6 pagesTeleologicalLeiya Lansang100% (3)
- Mea Builders Vs CADocument1 pageMea Builders Vs CAHaze Q.No ratings yet
- Criminal Law PDFDocument290 pagesCriminal Law PDFEdwin Villa100% (1)
- Crim Law Sagsago NotesDocument371 pagesCrim Law Sagsago NotesGlomarie GonayonNo ratings yet
- Feinberg Joel The Rights of Animals and Unborn Generations1 PDFDocument14 pagesFeinberg Joel The Rights of Animals and Unborn Generations1 PDFJeyver RodriguezNo ratings yet
- Teves vs. COMELECDocument1 pageTeves vs. COMELECMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Immigration and The Nation-State PDFDocument367 pagesImmigration and The Nation-State PDFcountofmontecristoNo ratings yet
- (Batch 1) Criminal Law Syllabus-Based eREVIEWER 2024Document11 pages(Batch 1) Criminal Law Syllabus-Based eREVIEWER 2024vjggutierrezNo ratings yet
- Acfrogdprovkknpmiymoxfmxhym9qwlmqtch247odtchpanrgjjpszg2ohf5ydtabykg91 r9pgqgnnr y 9pfokiank BGK Unux17sgrjytzk47bf2ujabh5njeov0mkhjvvp2svrdrgi52b7nDocument261 pagesAcfrogdprovkknpmiymoxfmxhym9qwlmqtch247odtchpanrgjjpszg2ohf5ydtabykg91 r9pgqgnnr y 9pfokiank BGK Unux17sgrjytzk47bf2ujabh5njeov0mkhjvvp2svrdrgi52b7nrexshalynlagartoNo ratings yet
- Principles of Forensic ScienceDocument2 pagesPrinciples of Forensic ScienceSaurabh RangariNo ratings yet
- 123Document143 pages123Renz Guiang100% (1)
- Take Home Activity No# 1: Four Major Schools of Thought in CriminologyDocument3 pagesTake Home Activity No# 1: Four Major Schools of Thought in CriminologyMarrie Eloisa Biag SaLazarNo ratings yet
- Natural Law TheoryDocument20 pagesNatural Law TheoryLeiya Lansang50% (2)
- 2 Theories of Crime CausationDocument11 pages2 Theories of Crime CausationJONATHAN BUDADENNo ratings yet
- Criminallaw - Sagsago NotesDocument295 pagesCriminallaw - Sagsago NotesAnonymous MmbSn3No ratings yet
- Criminal Law UST Golden NotesDocument298 pagesCriminal Law UST Golden NotesFlor ExplorerNo ratings yet
- Schools of Thought Reaction Paper For Legal PhilosophyDocument6 pagesSchools of Thought Reaction Paper For Legal PhilosophyAsthreyaNo ratings yet
- MODULE 1 NotesDocument16 pagesMODULE 1 NotesapnacinoNo ratings yet
- Criminal Law ReviewerDocument262 pagesCriminal Law Reviewerchristian.ilagana50No ratings yet
- Sir Sagsago - Notes in Crim LawDocument317 pagesSir Sagsago - Notes in Crim LawPingotMaganga100% (2)
- (Batch 1) Political Law Syllabus-Based EREVIEWER 2024Document19 pages(Batch 1) Political Law Syllabus-Based EREVIEWER 2024jona lynNo ratings yet
- (Batch 1) Remedial Law and Ethics Syllabus-Based EREVIEWER 2024Document27 pages(Batch 1) Remedial Law and Ethics Syllabus-Based EREVIEWER 2024vjggutierrezNo ratings yet
- The Path of The LawDocument23 pagesThe Path of The LawadrnevesNo ratings yet
- Chapter 4 BA22Document9 pagesChapter 4 BA22Anacristina PincaNo ratings yet
- Psychologism, Its Arguments and Its Attitude To The Usual Counter-ArgumentsDocument13 pagesPsychologism, Its Arguments and Its Attitude To The Usual Counter-ArgumentsEvyatar TurgemanNo ratings yet
- Chapter 3. The Teological PerpectiveDocument48 pagesChapter 3. The Teological Perpectivehoneydolphin325No ratings yet
- Blockchain 4 Paper InputsDocument7 pagesBlockchain 4 Paper Inputsministry.o.reconciliationNo ratings yet
- Ethics Final NotesDocument8 pagesEthics Final NotesChristia PiloNo ratings yet
- NotesDocument20 pagesNotesGille ann TimbalNo ratings yet
- CriminologyDocument2 pagesCriminologyKaren Claire RussNo ratings yet
- Syllabus Crim Law 2Document6 pagesSyllabus Crim Law 2Hyman Jay BlancoNo ratings yet
- Week 1-2 Ethics Vs MoralDocument5 pagesWeek 1-2 Ethics Vs MoralMaria Teresa FaminianoNo ratings yet
- Golden Notes Criminal LawDocument279 pagesGolden Notes Criminal LawEunice Saavedra100% (3)
- Natural Law Theory: Maria Josefina R. Alfonso (1-I) Eunika Raiza V. Fernando (1-G) Angela Paminter (1-I)Document20 pagesNatural Law Theory: Maria Josefina R. Alfonso (1-I) Eunika Raiza V. Fernando (1-G) Angela Paminter (1-I)sarnatNo ratings yet
- Natural Law - AquinoDocument4 pagesNatural Law - AquinoHi Law School0% (1)
- NotesDocument20 pagesNotesMac Mac DispoNo ratings yet
- CORRADDocument56 pagesCORRADWendell Bernardo RCrim CseNo ratings yet
- Sample PDFDocument7 pagesSample PDFYagamiPerezNo ratings yet
- Crimrev Reviewer Book 1Document53 pagesCrimrev Reviewer Book 1Mara Vinluan100% (1)
- ChoiceThry Sclgy LL.B2 22 IJTDocument10 pagesChoiceThry Sclgy LL.B2 22 IJTsandhuafaq1No ratings yet
- Intro To LawDocument9 pagesIntro To LawPlease I Need The FileNo ratings yet
- Philosophia: Philosophy and Theory of Law by Bernardo 2017 Summary NotesDocument39 pagesPhilosophia: Philosophy and Theory of Law by Bernardo 2017 Summary NotesTeri Castano100% (6)
- Crim Law 1campanilla Notes by AlmDocument68 pagesCrim Law 1campanilla Notes by Almmanuelpadayogdog15No ratings yet
- Chapter 6 (Classic Naturalism)Document4 pagesChapter 6 (Classic Naturalism)1211300317No ratings yet
- The Positivist Perspective Analytical Jurisprudence-One of The OldestDocument4 pagesThe Positivist Perspective Analytical Jurisprudence-One of The OldestChristine Ann ContiNo ratings yet
- (Crim 103) Itroduction To CriminologyDocument24 pages(Crim 103) Itroduction To Criminologyaaronajbpineda16No ratings yet
- OrcaDocument10 pagesOrcaJohn Manuel Saldua TiguloNo ratings yet
- Preliminary Article - This Law Shall Be Known As "The Revised Penal Code."Document27 pagesPreliminary Article - This Law Shall Be Known As "The Revised Penal Code."Gopeng CjNo ratings yet
- Alexander 1986 Consent Punishment ProportionalityDocument5 pagesAlexander 1986 Consent Punishment ProportionalityStamnumNo ratings yet
- Philawsophia Lecture Notes 1Document5 pagesPhilawsophia Lecture Notes 1Xen Nicolas100% (3)
- Jurisprudence 3Document144 pagesJurisprudence 3fikirjohn8No ratings yet
- PhiLaw Chapter-3 1Document25 pagesPhiLaw Chapter-3 1Jessa Ervina Badion-GerillaNo ratings yet
- Full Download PDF of (Ebook PDF) Experiencing The World's Religions 8th Edition by Michael Molloy All ChapterDocument43 pagesFull Download PDF of (Ebook PDF) Experiencing The World's Religions 8th Edition by Michael Molloy All Chaptermanalinobes100% (8)
- Content Conceptual Content and Nonconcep PDFDocument31 pagesContent Conceptual Content and Nonconcep PDFCarlos Orlando Wilches GuzmánNo ratings yet
- Crim 102Document5 pagesCrim 102Jennica MNo ratings yet
- Theorizing Criminal Intent: A Methodological AccountDocument33 pagesTheorizing Criminal Intent: A Methodological AccountXino De PrinzNo ratings yet
- Natural Law Handouts FinalDocument7 pagesNatural Law Handouts FinalsebongteenxbangtanNo ratings yet
- Analytic Philosophy and Jurisprudence: Digital Repository at Maurer LawDocument16 pagesAnalytic Philosophy and Jurisprudence: Digital Repository at Maurer LawStarcraft2shit 2sNo ratings yet
- Itl NotesDocument9 pagesItl NotesJames PabonitaNo ratings yet
- Reso - Fa To Pasig Archery TeamDocument1 pageReso - Fa To Pasig Archery TeamMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Reso - Fa Pasig Arnis Team For Pekap National Open Arnis ChampionshipDocument1 pageReso - Fa Pasig Arnis Team For Pekap National Open Arnis ChampionshipMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Reso - Fa To SK TreasurersDocument1 pageReso - Fa To SK TreasurersMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- HO 25 - Civil Law - Compromise Agreement and Quasi-Contracts PDFDocument16 pagesHO 25 - Civil Law - Compromise Agreement and Quasi-Contracts PDFMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form: SPMS Form No. 3 Annex "C"Document3 pagesIndividual Performance Commitment and Review Form: SPMS Form No. 3 Annex "C"Mario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Reso - Fa Athletic Team 2023Document1 pageReso - Fa Athletic Team 2023Mario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Reso - Grant of Assistance To TyphoonDocument2 pagesReso - Grant of Assistance To TyphoonMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- HO 21 - Civil Law - Land Titles and Deeds PDFDocument35 pagesHO 21 - Civil Law - Land Titles and Deeds PDFMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Memorandum: Performance Management System For Leaders (SPMS), To Be Held OnDocument3 pagesMemorandum: Performance Management System For Leaders (SPMS), To Be Held OnMario Roldan Jr.100% (1)
- EO On Ban of Fireworks (Integrated)Document2 pagesEO On Ban of Fireworks (Integrated)Mario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Reso MOA Stipulation Barangay Clearance MKTDocument2 pagesReso MOA Stipulation Barangay Clearance MKTMario Roldan Jr.100% (1)
- Ord - Expro Brgy. Kalawaan of Antonio P. de Mesa 2Document3 pagesOrd - Expro Brgy. Kalawaan of Antonio P. de Mesa 2Mario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Reso - Final 20K Fa To Manggahan FloodwayDocument2 pagesReso - Final 20K Fa To Manggahan FloodwayMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Summary - West Philippine Sea Arbitral AwardDocument29 pagesSummary - West Philippine Sea Arbitral AwardMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Ordinance - Guidelines For TyphoonDocument3 pagesOrdinance - Guidelines For TyphoonMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- O - Market Presumptive IncomeDocument2 pagesO - Market Presumptive IncomeMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- PCG DepEd Ayala Ortigas MOA (Rev Clean)Document17 pagesPCG DepEd Ayala Ortigas MOA (Rev Clean)Mario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- O - Barangay Clearance RemittanceDocument3 pagesO - Barangay Clearance RemittanceMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- OCLP CaminoVerde-ShawBlvd MOA V3Document7 pagesOCLP CaminoVerde-ShawBlvd MOA V3Mario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Ong vs. Mazo LegMedDocument9 pagesOng vs. Mazo LegMedMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- RA 1379 - Bugarin vs. Republic - UnasDocument2 pagesRA 1379 - Bugarin vs. Republic - UnasMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Autopsy (Post-Mortem Examination, Necropsy,: Medico-Legal Autopsy or Forensic or Coroner'sDocument2 pagesAutopsy (Post-Mortem Examination, Necropsy,: Medico-Legal Autopsy or Forensic or Coroner'sMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Alfugencia vs. Metrobank ModesDocument8 pagesAlfugencia vs. Metrobank ModesMario Roldan Jr.No ratings yet
- Jil vs. Municipality of PasigDocument21 pagesJil vs. Municipality of PasigKate DomingoNo ratings yet
- Temporary Modification of Licensed Premises July 22 2020 5pDocument3 pagesTemporary Modification of Licensed Premises July 22 2020 5pAnonymous Pb39klJNo ratings yet
- AbdulRahimShahdi (AsGuardianOfMissFatumaARShadhili) VsMandharGovindRaykar296 of 2004 SW 2Document26 pagesAbdulRahimShahdi (AsGuardianOfMissFatumaARShadhili) VsMandharGovindRaykar296 of 2004 SW 2cley100% (1)
- United States Air Force Court of Criminal AppealsDocument15 pagesUnited States Air Force Court of Criminal AppealsScribd Government DocsNo ratings yet
- Minutes of Pre TrialDocument4 pagesMinutes of Pre TrialGearomme DepositarioNo ratings yet
- Project RK24Document21 pagesProject RK24rkNo ratings yet
- Negotiable Instrument 1: Negotiability - Right of Transferee To Hold The Instrument and Collect The Sum DueDocument4 pagesNegotiable Instrument 1: Negotiability - Right of Transferee To Hold The Instrument and Collect The Sum DuetrebororNo ratings yet
- Constitutional Law II Const. Evolution in GhanaDocument13 pagesConstitutional Law II Const. Evolution in Ghanaadolphine segbedekuNo ratings yet
- Vicarious LiabilityDocument35 pagesVicarious LiabilityBetson CajayonNo ratings yet
- Libel Law Had The Effect of Repealing So Much of Article 256 As Relates To Written Defamation, Abuse, or Insult, and That Under The Information andDocument11 pagesLibel Law Had The Effect of Repealing So Much of Article 256 As Relates To Written Defamation, Abuse, or Insult, and That Under The Information andmonchievaleraNo ratings yet
- CH 1 Forensic Science HistoryDocument42 pagesCH 1 Forensic Science HistoryAbdulazizNo ratings yet
- Memo MootDocument20 pagesMemo Mootbhuvi29may2002No ratings yet
- Estate of Lino Olaguer v. OngjocoDocument2 pagesEstate of Lino Olaguer v. OngjocoVian O.No ratings yet
- Part 2 SpeproDocument20 pagesPart 2 SpeproPatrick TanNo ratings yet
- Iran Electronic Commerce Law (2003)Document13 pagesIran Electronic Commerce Law (2003)Social Media Exchange AssociationNo ratings yet
- DUMLAO vs. COMELEC Case Digest Dumlao vs. Comelec 95 SCRA 392 L-52245 January 22, 1980Document9 pagesDUMLAO vs. COMELEC Case Digest Dumlao vs. Comelec 95 SCRA 392 L-52245 January 22, 1980Pantas DiwaNo ratings yet
- Pharmaceutical and Health Care Assoc v. Duque IIIDocument61 pagesPharmaceutical and Health Care Assoc v. Duque IIILourdes LescanoNo ratings yet
- Naturalization Citizenship Mock Interview - Minus 100 QsDocument8 pagesNaturalization Citizenship Mock Interview - Minus 100 Qsallieza maeNo ratings yet
- What Is Burden of ProofDocument7 pagesWhat Is Burden of Proofasim khanNo ratings yet
- Construction Law For Design Professionals Construction Managers and Contractors 1st Edition Sweet Solutions ManualDocument4 pagesConstruction Law For Design Professionals Construction Managers and Contractors 1st Edition Sweet Solutions Manualgarconshudder.4m4fs100% (27)
- RA 10172 - Amended Clerical Error LawDocument2 pagesRA 10172 - Amended Clerical Error LawJovito LimotNo ratings yet
- 5 Contract - DischargeDocument6 pages5 Contract - DischargeJasline SohNo ratings yet
- Commissioner of Public Highways Vs Lourdes San DiegoDocument14 pagesCommissioner of Public Highways Vs Lourdes San DiegoacaylarveronicayahooNo ratings yet
- Chapter One 1.1 Background of The StudyDocument63 pagesChapter One 1.1 Background of The StudyDev Garhwal100% (2)
- Case Digest - Swedish Match v. CA, GR No. 128120, 2004-10-20Document3 pagesCase Digest - Swedish Match v. CA, GR No. 128120, 2004-10-20graceNo ratings yet
- Reviewer For FinalsDocument12 pagesReviewer For FinalsVictor Francis Divino FernandezNo ratings yet
- Rights and Responsibilities of A Public School Teacher in The PhilippinesDocument6 pagesRights and Responsibilities of A Public School Teacher in The PhilippinesDaisy Mae EgosNo ratings yet
- Virgilio C. Briones, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS and CASH ASIA Credit Corporation, RespondentsDocument2 pagesVirgilio C. Briones, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS and CASH ASIA Credit Corporation, RespondentsBion Henrik Priolo100% (1)
