Criminal Law Book 2

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Criminal LAW BOOK 2
Criminology (Capitol University)
Scan to open on Studocu
Studocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by Ape, Janna Mae A. (jannaape4@gmail.com)
lOMoARcPSD|38274473
CRIMINAL LAW BOOK 2
Summary of Titles
1 Crimes Against the Against National Security and Laws Page 1
of Nations
2 Crimes Against The Fundamental Laws of the State Page 17
3 Crimes Against Public Order Page 29
4 Crimes Against Public Interest Page 38
5 Crimes Relative To Opium and Prohibited Drugs Page 45
6 Crimes Against Public Morals Page 54
7 Crimes Committed By Public Officers Page 56
8 Crimes Against Persons Page 69
9 Crimes Against Personal Liberty and Security Page 82
10 Crimes Against Property Page 100
11 Crimes Against Chastity Page 147
12 Crimes Against Civil Status of Persons Page 163
13 Crimes Against Honor Page 167
14 Quasi Offenses Page 175
15 Final Provisions Page 178
Title 1 CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE LAW

OF NATIONS
Art. 114 TREASON
Any person who, owing allegiance to (the Philippine), not being

a foreigner, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies,
giving them aid or comfort within the Philippine Islands or elsewhere,
shall be punished by reclusion temporal to death and shall pay a fine
not to exceed P20, 000.
No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the

testimony of 2 witnesses at least to the same overt acts or on
confession of the accused in open court.
Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippines Islands, who

commits acts of treason as defined in par. 1 of this article shall be
punished by prision mayor to death and shall pay a fine not to exceed
P20, 000.
Elements:
1. The offender owes allegiance to the Government of the
Philippines;
2. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved;
3. The offender either:
a. Levies war against the Government; or
b. Adheres to the enemies, giving them aid or comfort.

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
TREASON is a breach of allegiance, which is the obligation of fidelity

and obedience one owes to the government or sovereign under
which he lives, in return for the protection he receives.
PERSONS LIABLE FOR TREASON

1. Filipino citizens – owe permanent allegiance to the
government.
2. Resident aliens – owe temporary allegiance to the
government.
TWO MODES OF COMMITTING TREASON

1. BY LEVYING WAR – actual assemblage of persons for the
purpose of executing a treasonable design.
2. BY ADHERING TO THE ENEMY, GIVING HIM AID AND
COMFORT
ADHERENCE TO THE ENEMY – a citizen intellectuality or

emotionally favors the enemy and harbors sympathies or convictions
disloyal to his country’s policy or interest.
AID OR COMFORT – an act which strengthens or tends to

strengthen the enemy of the government in the conduct of war
against the government or of the country to resist or to attack the
enemies of the government or of the country.
When the alleged treasonous acts consist only of giving aid and
comfort, the law requires that it must be coupled with adherence. In
other words, the mere giving of aid and comfort WITHOUT
ADHERENCE is not treason.
On the other hand, if the manner of committing treason by
engaging the forces of the government in combat, there is no need to
show that the offenders are doing so out of adherence to the enemy.
If the aid or support given to the enemy is one which does not
strengthen the enemy in the conduct of war, there must be
independent evidence of adherence, otherwise, the accused is
entitled to acquittal.
Basically, the mental condition cannot bring about the offense
not until the offender has started committing an overt act.
EVIDENCE NEEDED FOR CONVICTION IN TREASON

1. Testimony of at least 2 witnesses to the same overt act;
2. Confession of guilt by the accused in open court.
TWO-WITNESS RULE
Under Art.114 of the RPC, no person shall be convicted of
treason except upon the testimony of at least 2 witnesses by the
same overt act or upon his confession in open court. The 2-witness

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
rule refers to that portion of the provision which requires testimonies

of 2 witnesses at least on the same overt act.
Example:
Supposing during the World War, A had cooperated with the
Enemy soldiers and A was seen by it in the company of such soldiers
burning a certain barrio. A is again seen by C in the company of the
same enemy soldiers burning again another barrio. Under these sets
of facts, if B and C would testify of what they have respectively
witnessed, may A be convicted of treason?
Answer:
No, it is not only the number of witnesses or the substance but
at least 2 witnesses should testify on the same overt act, commission
of the same treasonous act at the same place and at almost the
same time. It is not enough that there be witnesses. It is necessary
that the 2 witnesses have testified to the same overt act.
“OVERT ACT” – we mean acts committed in different places at

times far remote from each other, you will need 2 witnesses to each
of those places before a conviction may be done.
So, even if there several witnesses testifying on the treasonous

acts, one witness to 2 treasonous act and the other to another
treasonous acts, if the acts testified to are not committed in the same
place and at the same time, the 2-witnesses rule is not complied with.
The accused himself is entitled to freedom.
EXCEPTION: When the accused himself pleads guilty to the

accusation of treason.
NOTE: The confession of guilt mentioned in this rule is not a

confession of guilt in the ordinary sense of the word.
The confession referred to here is a plea of guilty in open court.
So, if a person accused of treason has previously executed a

confession before the interrogating officer, but upon being arraigned
in court, pleads not guilty, he cannot be convicted simply because he
had that confession.
But the confession is admissible in evidence. Only, it is not

sufficient as a basis for conviction. Extra judicial confessions are
admissible but they are not enough to sustain conviction.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TREASON AND SEDITION:

TREASON SEDITION
Violation by a subject of his The raising of commotion or

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
allegiance to his sovereign or the disturbances in the state.

supreme authority of the state.
TREASON DISTINGUISHED FROM REBELLION:

1. An act of levying war to help the enemy is treason otherwise
it would be rebellion.
2. In treason, the purpose is to deliver the government to the
enemy or to pave the way for the coming of the enemy while in
rebellion, the purpose is to substitute the government with their own.
IMPORTANT POINTS TO REMEMBER REGARDING TREASON:

1. Treason is committed only in time of war. It cannot be
committed in time of peace. Treasonable acts may actually be during
peacetime, but there are no traitors until war has started. [LAUREL
VS. MISA, 77 PHIL 856]
2. No matter how many acts of treason are committed by the
offender, he will be liable for one crime of treason only.
3. There is no complex crime of treason with murder. Murder is
an integral element of the crime of treason which correspond to the
giving of aid and comfort to the enemy. The offender will be liable for
treason only.
4. In the imposition of the penalty the course may disregard the
attending mitigating and aggravating circumstances. It may consider
only the number, nature and gravity of the treasonous acts proven.
The imposition of the penalty, although indivisible, may rest largely on
the exercise of judicial discretion.
5. Treachery, abuse of superior strength and evident
premeditation are inherent in treason if there are killings.
ART. 115- CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT TREASON
Elements of Conspiracy to Commit Treason:

1. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved;
2. Two or more persons come to an agreement to levy war
against the government or to adhere to the enemies and to give them
aid or comfort.
3. They decide to commit it.
Elements of Proposal to Commit Treason:

1. There is war in which the Philippines is involved;
2. The accused has decided to levy war against the
Government or to adhere to the enemies giving them aid or comfort.
3. He proposes its execution to some other person or persons.
NOTE: If actual acts of treason are committed after the

conspiracy or after the proposal is accepted, the crime committed will

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
be treason. The conspiracy or proposal is considered as a means in

the commission thereof.
POINTS TO CONSIDER:
The co-conspirators or those persons involved in the proposal
will be criminally liable to that extent only as long as none among
them has committed treasonous acts.
If anyone of the conspirators or persons participating in the

proposal have already done a treasonous act even though unknown
to the others, the crime of all of them will be treason and not merely
conspiracy or proposal.
NOTE: Bear in mind that in conspiracy, there must be an

agreement with concurrence of decision; a mere agreement without
decision is not conspiracy. So also, a mere proposal without
acceptance, it is not a criminal proposal.
There must always be the CONCURRENCE of these 2

elements. One without the other is not punishable, even if it refers to
treason.
ART. 116- MISPRISION OF TREASON

Committed by every person owing allegiance to the government of
the Philippines and not being a foreigner, and having knowledge of
any conspiracy against it, conceals or does not disclose and make
known the same, to the governor or fiscal of the province where he
resides.
Elements:
1. Offender must owe allegiance to the Government of the
Philippines;
2. Offender is not a foreigner;
3. He has knowledge of a conspiracy to commit treason
against the said government;
4. He conceals or fails to disclose the same to the authorities of
the province or city in which he resides.
For this crime to be committed

-there must be a conspiracy to commit treason. Misprision of
treason arises when a person who knew of such conspiracy does not
report the same as soon as possible.
Even though the offender has reported the conspiracy to the

government, if by the time the report was made, the conspirators
were already able to commit overt acts of treason, then the party
knowing the conspiracy is nevertheless liable for misprision of
treason because the report was not made as soon as possible.

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Misprision of treason is a felony by omission. The offender

has knowledge of conspiracy to commit treason but he failed to report
it to the authorities AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
NOTE: It is not enough that the report be made. What is

required is that it must be reported as soon as possible,
because if the report is delayed, this might ripen to an act
of treason.
The idea here is to make it obligatory on the part of all citizens

of the Philippines to report to the government as soon as possible
any conspiracy to commit treason and that is known to them so that
the government may quell the treason before it can ripen.
Where the conspiracy has already ripened to an act of treason,
the obligation to report does not exist anymore because that means
that the government knows that there is treason going on.
NOTE: The obligation to report does not cover aliens even if

they are permanent residents of the Philippines. This crime can only
be committed by citizens of the Philippines, unlike treason, which
may be committed by aliens as long as they are permanent residents
of the Philippines.
ART. 117- ESPIONAGE

Without authority shall enter a warship, fort, or naval or military
reservation to obtain any information, plans, photograph, or other
data of a confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippines
There are 2 modes of committing espionage under the RPC.
Elements of the first mode:
1. Offender, without any authority enters a warship, naval or
military establishment or reservation, and
2. He obtains information, plans, photographs or other data of
a confidential nature relative to the defense of the
Philippines.
NOTE: The purpose of the offender in entering must be to get

hold of such materials.
If that is not the purpose, the crime committed is trespass to

government property. Mere entering here will bring about a
consummated espionage as long as the criminal intent of the offender
is to get hold of those materials which are vital to the defense of the
Philippines.

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Elements of the second mode:

1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He has in his possession articles, data or information
referred to in the first mode of committing this crime; and
3. He discloses their contents to a representative of a foreign
nation.
NOTE: Where the offender is not a custodian, the crime

committed is infidelity in the custody of public records, and it has
nothing to do with national defense of the Philippines, the offender
becomes liable only for infidelity in the custody of public records.
ESPIONAGE DISTINGUISHED FROM TREASON

ESPIONAGE TREASON
There is no need for war going There must be war.
on.
Committed in more than 2 ways. Committed in 2 ways only.
Generally committed by an alien. May be committed by citizens
or resident aliens.
ART. 118- INCITING TO WAR OR GIVING MOTIVES FOR

REPRISALS
Committed by any person who, by unlawful or unauthorized acts,
provokes or gives occasion for a war involving or liable to involve the
Philippines, or exposes the Filipinos to reprisals on their persons or
property.
Elements:
1. Offender commits unlawful or unauthorized acts;
2. Said acts provide or give occasion for war involving or liable
to involve the Philippines or expose Filipino citizens to
reprisals on their persons or property.
This is committed by any public officer or employee who, by

unlawful or unauthorized acts provokes or gives occasion for a war or
liable to involve the Philippines or exposes Filipino citizens to
reprisals on their persons or property. There is no need for war going
on. This may be committed in time of war or time of peace.
ART. 119- VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Committed by any person who on the occasion of a war in which the

Philippines is not involved, violates any regulation issued by
competent authority for the purpose of enforcing neutrality
Elements:
1. There is war in which the Philippines is not involved;
2. Competent authorities have issued regulations to enforce
neutrality; and
3. The offender violates any of said regulations.
Neutrality, defined- a nation which does not take part in the contest
of arms (war) among other nations is practicing neutrality.
There must be a war going on, but the Philippines is not a part
of the war. It cannot be committed as a crime if the government has
not promulgated rules and regulations for the observance of
neutrality. It is the violation of such rules that brings about the crime
of violation of neutrality.
ART. 120- CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE COUNTRY

Committed by any person who in time of war, shall have
correspondence with an enemy country or territory occupied by
enemy troops.
Elements:
1. There is war in which the Philippines is involved;
2. The offender shall have correspondence with an enemy
country or territory occupied by enemy troops; and
3. Said correspondence is:
a) prohibited by the government;

b) the offender shall have correspondence with an enemy
country or territory occupied by enemy troops;
c) notice or information to be given thereby which might
be useful to the enemy or intended by the offender to
aid the enemy.
This presupposes that there is a war going on and the

Philippines is a party to that war. Under this article, the mere sending
or carrying on of correspondence from one who is in the enemy
country or who is in the territory occupied by enemy troops is a crime
under the circumstances specified in the article.
The implication is that when a person writes to another in any
enemy country and he makes use of ciphers and conventional signs
he is hiding something and that is maybe one which is vital to the
defense of the Philippines, so the mere sending of that under those
conditions makes it a crime.

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
ART. 121- FLIGHT TO ENEMY COUNTRY

Committed by any person who owes allegiance to the Government,
attempts to flee or go to an enemy country when prohibited by
competent authority.
Elements:
1. Existence of war in which the Philippines is involved;
2. Offender owes allegiance to the Philippines; and
3. He attempts to flee to the enemy country, which is prohibited
by the government.
This crime can be committed only in times of war where the

Philippines is a party. Mere attempt to flee to the side of the enemy
will already consummate this crime.
The law presupposes that in time of war, a person in the
Philippines would try to go to the enemy line, that person must have
something for the enemy to the prejudice of the Philippines and its
forces.
ATTEMPT TO FLEE TO ENEMY COUNTRY --- This is

committed when a citizen of the Philippines or one owing allegiance
to the Philippine government shall attempt to go to an enemy country.
ART. 122- Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas or in

Philippine waters
Piracy is committed by any person who, on the high seas shall
attack or seize a vessel or, not being a member of its complement nor
a passenger, shall seize the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel,
its equipment, or personal belongings of its complement or
passengers.
Piracy is robbery or forcible depredation on the high seas
without lawful authority and done with animo furandi and in the spirit
and intention of universal hostility.
Piracy is regarded not as a crime of any particular country but a
crime against the whole world so that whenever the offenders may go
to one country they can be prosecuted there.
REASON: The law they violated is not the law of a particular
country but the law of the family of nations.
3 KINDS OF PIRACY
1. Piracy in the high seas punished in the RPC;
2. Piracy in the Philippine waters punished in PD 532; and
3. Air piracy punished in RA 6235.

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
ELEMENTS OF PIRACY
1. A vessel is on the high seas or in Philippine waters;
2. The offenders are not members of its complement or
passengers of the vessel;
3. The offenders either: a. attack or seize that vessel or b.
seize the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel, its
equipment or personal belongings of its complement or
passengers
PIRACY IN THE HIGH SEAS UNDER THE REVISED PENAL CODE

1. By attacking or seizing a vessel on the high seas;
2. By seizing the whole or part of the cargo or equipment of the
vessel while on the high seas or the personal belongings of
its complement or passengers, the offenders not being of the
complement or passengers.
OFFENDERS OF PIRACY IN THE HIGH SEAS (RPC)

- Strangers to the vessel
- They are not passengers or members of the crew.
For the purposes of determining whether one is a stranger to
the vessel or not – you only have to determine whether one is lawfully
admitted to the vessel. If he is lawfully admitted to the vessel, other
than a complement thereof, then he is a passenger. But if he boards
the vessel without being lawfully admitted thereto, then he is a
stranger and therefore liable for piracy.
“HIGH SEAS” refer to the body of water outside of the territorial
waters of the Philippines, even if such is within the territorial waters of
a foreign country.
- Refers to that body of water beyond the three-mile limit of our
jurisdiction. At this point therefore, it can be easily understood that
piracy under the RPC begins where piracy under PD 532 ends.
ROBBERY ON THE HIGH SEAS

- Offender is a member of the complement or a passenger of
the vessel and there is violence against or intimidation of persons or
force upon things in taking the property in the vessel.
PIRACY – the offender is an outsider.
NOTE: In both robbery on the high seas and piracy, there is
1. Intent to gain; and

2. Manner of committing the crime is the same.
10

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
MUTINY
MUTINY ON THE HIGH SEAS is the unlawful resistance to a

superior officer or the raising of commotions and disturbances on
board a ship against the authority of its commander. It may be
committed by members of the crew and passengers of the vessel.
NOTE: Mutiny must be committed on the high seas. When

committed on board a vessel within the waters of the Philippine, the
killing is punished as murder.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PIRACY AND MUTINY:

PIRACY MUTINY
The persons who attack or seize The persons who attack or seize
the vessel on the high seas are the vessel on the high seas are
strangers to said vessel. members of the crew passengers
to said vessel.
There is an intent to gain. There is usually no intent to gain
as the offenders may only intend
to ignore the strip’s officers or to
commit plunder.
PIRACY IN THE PHILIPPINE WATERS (P.D. 532)
If any of the acts described in Art. 122 and 123 are committed
in Philippine waters, the same shall be considered as piracy under
PD 532.
Any attack upon or seizure of any vessel, or the taking away of

the whole or part thereof or its cargo, equipment, or the personal
belongings of its complement or passengers, irrespective of the value
thereof, by means of violence against or intimidation of persons or
force upon things, committed by any person, including a passenger or
member of the complement of said vessel in Philippine waters, shall
be considered as piracy.
In this kind of piracy, the offender may be any person. He may

be a stranger to the vessel, a passenger or member of the crew of
the vessel.
2 WAYS OF COMMITTING PIRACY IN PHILIPPINE WATERS:

(1) By seizing or attacking a vessel while in the Philippine
waters with intent to gain by means of violence or intimidation;
11

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
(2) By taking away the belongings of a member of a crew or

passenger.
Example:
If in the course of the voyage of an inter-island vessel, a
passenger at the point of a knife divested another passenger of his
valuables, the former will be liable for piracy in Philippine waters, not
for robbery.
Q: What will be the crime committed if on the occasion of

piracy in Philippine waters, only a person was killed by the
pirates?
- Crime will be piracy in Philippine waters only.
“PHILIPPINE WATERS” refers to all bodies of water around,

between and connecting each of the islands of the Philippine
Archipelago, irrespective of its breadth, depth, length, dimension, and
all other waters belonging to the Philippines by historic or legal title,
including territorial sea, sea-bed, insular shelves, and other
submarine areas over which the Philippines has sovereignty or
jurisdiction.
“VESSEL” - any vessel or watercraft for transport of

passengers and cargo from one place to another through Philippine
waters. Includes all kinds and types of vessels or boats used in
fishing.
ANY PERSON WHO AIDS OR PROTECTS PIRATES OR ABETS

THE COMMISSION OF PIRACY SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS AN
ACCOMPLICE.
Example:
1. Giving pirates information about the movement of police or
other peace officers of the government;
2. Acquires or receives property taken by such pirates or in any
manner derives any benefit therefrom;
3. Directly or indirectly abets the commission of piracy.
Under the decree, when these acts are committed the crime
is ABETTING PIRACY. These persons who participate by any of
the acts mentioned above will be charged not for the crime of
piracy but for a crime of abetting piracy under PD 532.
On the other hand, if the piracy falls under the RPC because it
was committed in the high seas, persons who participated in the loot
of the piracy or who harbor or conceal or help the pirates escape will
be accessories to the crime of piracy. The crime committed by them is
not abetting piracy but piracy itself.
12

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
So, under PD 532, the offender is a principal to the crime of

abetting piracy although the nature of the act of participation is that of
an accessory only and the penalty imposed under the same decree is
only that of an accomplice.
PRESUMPTION: – any person who does any of the acts provided in

this section has performed them KNOWINGLY, unless the contrary is
proven.
DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN PIRACY UNDER PD 532 AND RPC

1. Under the PRC, piracy can only be committed in the high
seas – meaning to say beyond the three mile limit of our territorial
waters, whereas under the decree piracy can only be committed
within Philippine waters.
2. Under the RPC, piracy is committed by attacking or seizing

the vessel or of any of the cargo of personal belongings of the
passengers or complements of the vessel.
NOTE: An attack or seizure of the vessel presupposes the

employment of force but it may be such degree of force
that does not amount to robbery.
Under the decree, piracy is committed not only be an attack

or seizure of the vessel or cargo or personal belongings of the
passengers or members of its complement through the use of
violence and intimidation.
3. Piracy under RPC is committed by attacking or seizing a

vessel, or by seizing the whole or part of its cargo, its equipment or
personal belongings of its complement or passengers, while such
modes under PD 532 are accomplished by means of violence against
or intimidation of persons or force upon things.
NOTE: Under the RPC, use of force upon things does not bring
about piracy unless it is an attack or seizure of the vessel
or of the passenger and their belongings or of the
complement of the vessel.
To make the difference between piracy under the RPC and

piracy under the decree easier to understand, take note of the
following:
NOTE: The essence of piracy under the decree is not alone the
seizure or attack of the vessel but robbery committed on
board a vessel while this is in Philippine waters.
13

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
The crime of robbery under TITLE 10 is different from the crime

of theft although both crimes involve the taking of property. So, if the
taking of the cargo or personal belongings of the passengers or
complements of the vessel amounts only to theft, PD 532 will not
apply. Without the use of violence or intimidation of persons or
without the use of force upon things as this is understood under Art.
299 of the RPC, the decree will not apply unless there is a seizure of
the vessel or an attack upon the vessel.
Therefore, the taking must be with violence and intimidation or

with the use of force upon things. If these are absent on the taking,
the crime is only theft.
R.A. 6235
ACT TO PROHIBIT CERTAIN ACTS INIMICAL TO CIVIL AVIATION
Although RA 6235 is commonly referred to as the hijacking

law, strictly the acts punished if this law are not purely of hijacking.
When we say hijacking, we generally associate the idea with
that of compelling the plane to land in a place other than its
scheduled destination. This, however, is not the only meaning of
hijacking.
Hijacking generally refers to the taking of goods in transit
through force.
TWO KINDS OF AIRCRAFT MAY BE INVOLVED HERE:

1. Domestic
2. International
PROHIBITED ACTS:
IF AIRCRAFT IS OF PHILIPPINE REGISTRY
(1.) To compel a change in the course or destination of an

aircraft of Philippine registry, while in flight; or
(2.) To seize or usurp the control thereof, while it is in-flight.
(3.) To compel an aircraft of foreign registry to land in
Philippine territory; or
(4.) To seize or usurp the control thereof while it is within
Philippine territory.
AIRCRAFT IS IN FLIGHT
An aircraft is “IN FLIGHT” from the moment all its external

doors are closed following embarkation until any of such doors are
opened for disembarkation.
14

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Under the law, air piracy regarding an international plane is

committed if the offender compelled the plane to fly in Philippine
territory, seized or usurped it. If the seizure or usurpation of an
international plane, what is essential is that the plane must be in
Philippine territory.
NOTE: PROHIBITION IS ABSOLUTE
a. IF OFFENDER IS A JURIDICAL PERSON – the penalty

shall be imposed upon the manager, representative, director, agent or
employee who violated, or caused, directed, cooperated or
participated in the violation thereof;
b. IF VIOLATION IS COMMITTED IN THE INTEREST OF A
FOREIGN CORPORATION LEGALLY DOING BUSINESS IN THE
PHILIPPINES – penalty shall be imposed upon its resident agent,
manager, representative or director responsible for such violation and
in addition thereto, the license of said corporation to do business in
the Philippines shall be revoked.
(1.) Section 4 --- The shipping, loading or carrying of any

substance or material in any cargo aircraft operating as a public utility
within the Philippines shall be not in accordance with the regulations
issued by the Civil Aeronautics Adm.
NOTE: PROHIBITION IS NOT ABSOLUTE
For any death or injury to persons or damage to property

resulting from a violation of Sects. 3 and 4, the person responsible
therefore may be held liable in accordance with the applicable
provision of the RPC.
- Injury / damage --- not absorbed in that crime.
- Offenders may be prosecuted under the RPC as well.
NOTE: Aircraft companies which operate as public utilities or

operators of aircraft which are or hire are authorized to open and
investigate suspicious packages and cargoes in the presence of the
owner or shipper, or his authorized representatives, if present.
PURPOSE: To help the authorities in the enforcement of the

provisions of this Act.
If the owner, shipper or his representative refuses to have the

same opened and inspected, the airline or air-carrier is authorized to
refuse the loading thereof.
15

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
ART. 123- QUALIFIED PIRACY

Piracy is qualified if any of the following circumstances is
present, to wit:
1. Whenever the offenders have seized the vessel by boarding
or firing upon the same; or
2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims without
means of saving themselves; or
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide,
physical injuries, or rape. (SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME)
TITLE 2-CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE

STATE
Art. 124. Arbitrary detention - committed by any public officer or

employee who, without legal grounds, detains a person.
ELEMENTS OF ARBITRARY DETENTION:

1. The offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He detains another; and
3. The detention is without legal grounds.
Detention, defined- one is detained when he is placed in

confinement or there is restraint on his person.
16

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 125. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper

judicial authorities.
- committed by any public officer or employee who shall detain any
person for some legal ground and shall fail to deliver such person to
the proper judicial authorities1 within the period of:
a. 12 hours- for crimes or offenses punishable by light penalties;

b. 18 hours- for crimes or offenses punishable by correctional
penalties;
c. 36 hours- for crimes or offenses punishable by afflictive or capital
penalties.
ELEMENTS OF DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED

PERSONS
2. He detained another person but for some legal ground; and
3. He failed to deliver the detained person to the proper judicial
authorities within the period above stated.
Art. 126. Delaying release- committed by any public officer or

employee who:
1. Delays the performance of a judicial or executive order for the
release of a prisoner;
2. Delays the service of the notice of such order to said prisoner;
and
3. Delays the proceedings upon any petition for the liberation of
such a person.
Elements:
a.) That the offender is a public officer or employee
b.)that there is a judicial or executive order for the release of a
prisoner or detention prisoner, or that there is a proceeding upon a
petition for the liberation of such person
c.) that the offender without good reason delays (1) the service of
the notice such order to the prisoner or (2) the performance of such
judicial or executive order for the release of the prisoner, or (3) the
proceedings upon a petition for the release of such person.
Note: Articles 124-126- are collectively known as the classes of

arbitrary detention.
Art. 127. Expulsion - committed by a public officer or employee who

without being authorized by law:
a. expels any person from the Philippines; or
b. compels a person to change his residence
Elements:
1
17

lOMoARcPSD|38274473

b.) That he expels any person from the Philippines, or compels a
person his residence
c.) That the offender is not authorized to do so by law.
Art. 128. Violation of domicile - committed by a public officer or

employee who, not being authorized by judicial order shall:
a. enter any dwelling against the will of the owner thereof;

b. search any papers or other effects found therein without the
previous consent of the owner; or
c. refuse to leave the premises, after having surreptitiously entered
said dwelling and after having been required to leave the
premises.
Elements:
b.) That he is authorized by judicial order to enter the dwelling
and/or to make a search therein for papers or other effects.
Art. 129. Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in the

service of those legally obtained- committed by any public officer
or employee who shall:
a. procure a search warrant without just cause; or

b. exceed his authority or by using unnecessary severity in
executing a search warrant legally procured.
Elements:
2. He procures a search warrant;
3. There is no just cause for procuring it.
Art. 130. Searching domicile without witnesses. – committed by

any public officer or employee who in cases where search is proper,
shall search the domicile, papers or other belongings of any person,
in the absence of the latter, any member of his family, or in their
default, without the presence of two witnesses residing in the same
locality.
Elements:
a.) That the offender is a public officer or employee;
b.) That he is armed with search warrant legally procured;
c.) That he searches the domicile, papers or other belongings of
any person; and
d. That the owner, or any member of his family, or two witnesses
residing in the same locality are not present.
18

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 131. Prohibition, interruption, and dissolution of peaceful

meetings- committed by any public officer or employee who without
legal ground shall:
a. prohibit or interrupt the holding of a peaceful meeting
b. dissolve a peaceful meeting;
c. hinder any person from joining any lawful association
d. hinder any person from attending any of its lawful meetings
e. prohibit or hinder any person from addressing alone or
otherwise, any petition to the authorities for the correction of
abuses or redress of grievances.
Elements:
a.) That the offender is a public officer or employee; and
b.) That he performs any of the acts mentioned above.
Art. 132. Interruption of religious worship. - committed by a public

officer or employee who shall prevent or disturb the ceremonies or
manifestations of any religion.
Elements:
a.) That the offender is a public officer;
b.) That religious ceremonies or manifestations of any religion are
about to take place or are going on; and
c.) That the offender prevents or disturbs the same.
Art. 133. Offending religious feelings. - committed by anyone who,

in a place devoted to religious worship or during the celebration of a
religious ceremony, shall perform acts notoriously offensive to the
feelings of the faithful.
Elements:
a.) That the acts complained of were performed (1) in a place
devoted to religious worship, or (2) during the celebration of any
religious ceremony.
b.) That the acts must be notoriously offensive to the feelings of
the faithful.
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9372

AN ACT TO SECURE THE STATE AND PROTECT OUR PEOPLE
FROM TERRORISM
SECTION 1.Short Title.“ This Act shall henceforth be known as the

Human Security Act of 2007.
SEC. 3.TERRORISM, defined. “Any person who commits an act

punishable under any of the following provisions of the Revised
Penal Code:
19

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
1. Article 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in the High Seas or in the
Philippine Waters);
2. Article 134 (Rebellion or Insurrection);
3. Article 134-a (Coup d’ etat), including acts committed by private
persons;
4. Article 248 (Murder);
5. Article 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention);
6. Article 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction,
or under
1. Presidential Decree No. 1613 (The Law on Arson);

2. Republic Act No. 6969 (Toxic Substances and Hazardous and
Nuclear Waste Control Act of 1990);
3. Republic Act No. 5207, (Atomic Energy Regulatory and Liability
Act of 1968);
4. Republic Act No. 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law);
5. Presidential Decree No. 532 (Anti-piracy and Anti-highway
Robbery Law of 1974); and,
6. Presidential Decree No. 1866, as amended (Decree Codifying the
Laws on Illegal and Unlawful Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in,
Acquisition or Disposition of Firearms, Ammunitions or Explosives)
thereby sowing and creating a condition of widespread and

extraordinary fear and panic among the populace, in order to coerce
the government to give in to an unlawful demand shall be guilty of the
crime of terrorism and shall suffer the penalty of forty (40) years of
imprisonment, without the benefit of parole as provided for under Act
No. 4103, otherwise known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as
amended.
SEC. 4.Conspiracy to Commit Terrorism.“ Persons who conspire

to commit the crime of terrorism shall suffer the penalty of forty (40)
years of imprisonment.
There is conspiracy when two or more persons come to an

agreement concerning the commission of the crime of terrorism as
defined in Section 3 hereof and decide to commit the same.
SEC. 7.Surveillance of Suspects and Interception and Recording

of Communications. The provisions of Republic Act No. 4200 (Anti-
wire Tapping Law) to the contrary notwithstanding, a police or law
enforcement official and the members of his team may, upon a
written order of the Court of Appeals, listen to, intercept and record,
with the use of any mode, form, kind or type of electronic or other
surveillance equipment or intercepting and tracking devices, or with
the use of any other suitable ways and means for that purpose, any
communication, message, conversation, discussion, or spoken or
written words between members of a judicially declared and outlawed
20

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
terrorist organization, association, or group of persons or of any

person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism.
Provided, That surveillance, interception and recording of

communications between lawyers and clients, doctors and patients,
journalists and their sources and confidential business
correspondence shall not be authorized.
SEC. 18.Period of Detention Without Judicial Warrant of Arrest. “

The provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code to the
contrary notwithstanding, any police or law enforcement personnel,
who, having been duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism
Council has taken custody of a person charged with or suspected of
the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism
shall, without incurring any criminal liability for delay in the delivery of
detained persons to the proper judicial authorities, deliver said
charged or suspected person to the proper judicial authority within a
period of three (3) days counted from the moment the said charged
or suspected person has been apprehended or arrested, detained,
and taken into custody by the said police, or law enforcement
personnel: Provided, That the arrest of those suspected of the crime
of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism must result from the
surveillance under Section 7 and examination of bank deposits under
Section 27 of this Act.
The police or law enforcement personnel concerned shall, before

detaining the person suspected of the crime of terrorism, present him
or her before any judge at the latter residence or office nearest the
place where the arrest took place at any time of the day or night. It
shall be the duty of the judge, among other things, to ascertain the
identity of the police or law enforcement personnel and the person or
persons they have arrested and presented before him or her, to
inquire of them the reasons why they have arrested the person and
determine by questioning and personal observation whether or not
the suspect has been subjected to any physical, moral or
psychological torture by whom and why. The judge shall then submit
a written report of what he/she had observed when the subject was
brought before him to the proper court that has jurisdiction over the
case of the person thus arrested. the judge shall forthwith submit
his/her report within three (3) calendar days from the time the
suspect was brought to his/her residence or office.
Immediately after taking custody of a person charged with or

suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism,
the police or law enforcement personnel shall notify in writing the
judge of the court nearest the place of apprehension or arrest:
Provided, That where the arrest is made during saturdays, sundays,
holidays or after office hours, the written notice shall be served at the
21

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
residence of the judge nearest the place where the accused was
arrested.
SEC. 19. Period of Detention in the Event of an Actual or

Imminent Terrorist Attack.“ In the event of an actual or imminent
terrorist attack, suspects may not be detained for more than three
(3) days without the written approval of a municipal, city,
provincial or regional official of a Human Rights Commission or
judge of the municipal, regional trial court, the Sandiganbayan
or a justice of the Court of Appeals nearest the place of the
arrest. If the arrest is made during Saturdays, Sundays, holidays or
after office hours, the arresting police or law enforcement personnel
shall bring the person thus arrested to the residence of any of the
officials mentioned above that is nearest the place where the
accused was arrested. The approval in writing of any of the said
officials shall be secured by the police or law enforcement personnel
concerned within five (5) days after the date of the detention of the
persons concerned: Provided, however, That within three (3) days
after the detention the suspects, whose connection with the terror
attack or threat is not established, shall be released immediately.
SEC. 20. Penalty for Failure to Deliver Suspect to the Proper

Judicial Authority Within Three (3) Days. “ The penalty of ten (10)
years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment shall be
imposed upon any police or law enforcement personnel who has
apprehended or arrested, detained and taken custody of a person
charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to
commit terrorism and fails to deliver such charged or suspected
person to the proper judicial authority within the period of three (3)
days.
SEC. 44. Infidelity in the Custody of Detained Persons. “ Any

public officer who has direct custody of a detained person under the
provisions of this Act and who by his deliberate act, misconduct, or
inexcusable negligence causes or allows the escape of such
detained person shall be guilty of an offense and shall suffer the
penalty of: (a) twelve (12) years and one day to twenty (20) years of
imprisonment, if the detained person has already been convicted and
sentenced in a final judgment of a competent court; and (b) six (6)
years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment, if the
detained person has not been convicted and sentenced in a final
judgment of a competent court.
SEC. 52. Applicability of the Revised Penal Code. – The

provisions of Book I of the Revised Penal Code shall be applicable to
this Act.
SEC. 53. Anti-Terrorism Council. An Anti-Terrorism Council,

hereinafter referred to, for brevity, is hereby created. The members
22

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
of the Council are: (1) the Executive Secretary, who shall be its
chairperson; (2) the Secretary of Justice, who shall be its Vice
Chairperson; and (3) the Secretary of Foreign Affairs; (4) the
Secretary of National Defense; (5) the Secretary of the Interior and
Local Government; (6) the Secretary of Finance; and (7) the National
Security Advisor, as its other members.
The Council shall implement this Act and assume the responsibility
for the proper and effective implementation of the anti-terrorism
policy of the country
SEC. 58. Extra-Territorial Application of this Act.“ Subject to the

provision of an existing treaty of which the Philippines is a signatory
and to any contrary provision of any law of preferential application,
the provisions of this Act shall apply:
(1) to individual persons who commit any of the crimes defined and
punished in this Act within the terrestrial domain, interior waters,
maritime zone, and airspace of the Philippines;
(2) to individual persons who, although physically outside the

territorial limits of the Philippines, commit, conspire or plot to commit
any of the crimes defined and punished in this Act inside the territorial
limits of the Philippines;

territorial limits of the Philippines, commit any of the said crimes on
board Philippine ship or Philippine airship;
(4) to individual persons who commit any of said crimes within any
embassy, consulate, or diplomatic premises belonging to or occupied
by the Philippine government in an official capacity;

territorial limits of the Philippines, commit said crimes against
Philippine citizens or persons of Philippine descent, where their
citizenship or ethnicity was a factor in the commission of the crime;
and

territorial limits of the Philippines, commit said crimes directly against
the Philippine government.
RA 9745
AN ACT PENALIZING THE COMMISSION OF ACTS OF

TORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN AND
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT, PRESCRIBING
PENALTIES THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
23

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
SECTION 1. Short Title. – This Act shall be known as the “Anti-

Torture Act of 2009”.
SEC. 3. Definitions. – For purposes of this Act, the following

terms shall mean:
(a) “Torture” refers to an act by which severe pain or

suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a
person for such purposes as obtaining from him/her or a third
person information or a confession; punishing him/her for an act
he/she or a third person has committed or is suspected of having
committed; or intimidating or coercing him/her or a third person; or for
any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain
or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or
acquiescence of a person in authority or agent of a person
in authority. It does not include pain or suffering arising only
from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
(b) “Other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or

punishment” refers to a deliberate and aggravated treatment or
punishment not enumerated under Section 4 of this Act, inflicted by a
person in authority or agent of a person in authority against a person
under his/her custody, which attains a level of severity causing
suffering, gross humiliation or debasement to the latter.
(d) “Order of Battle” refers to a document made by the military,

police or any law enforcement agency of the government, listing the
names of persons and organizations that it perceives to be enemies
of the State and that it considers as legitimate targets as combatants
that it could deal with, through the use of means allowed by domestic
and international law.
SEC. 4. Acts of Torture. – For purposes of this Act, torture

shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
(a) Physical torture is a form of treatment or punishment inflicted by

a person in authority or agent of a person in authority upon another in
his/her custody that causes severe pain, exhaustion, disability or
dysfunction of one or more parts of the body, such as:
1. systematic beating, headbanging, punching, kicking, striking

with truncheon or rifle butt or other similar objects, and jumping
on the stomach;
2. food deprivation or forcible feeding with spoiled food, animal
or human excreta and other stuff or substances not normally
eaten;
3. electric shock;
4. cigarette burning; burning by electrically heated rods, hot oil,
acid; by the rubbing of pepper or other chemical substances on
24

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
mucous membranes, or acids or spices directly on the

wound(s);
5. the submersion of the head in water or water polluted
with excrement, urine, vomit and/or blood until the brink of
suffocation;
6. being tied or forced to assume fixed and stressful bodily
position;
7. rape and sexual abuse, including the insertion of foreign bodies
into the sex organ or rectum, or electrical torture of the genitals;
8. mutilation or amputation of the essential parts of the body such
as the genitalia, ear, tongue, etc.;
9. dental torture or the forced extraction of the teeth;
10. pulling out of fingernails;
11. harmful exposure to the elements such as sunlight and
extreme cold;
12. the use of plastic bag and other materials placed over the
head to the point of asphyxiation;
13. the use of psychoactive drugs to change the perception,
memory, alertness or will of a person, such as: (i) the
administration of drugs to induce confession and/or
reduce mental competency; or (ii) the use of drugs to induce
extreme pain or certain symptoms of a disease; and
14. other analogous acts of physical torture; and
(b) Mental/Psychological torture refers to acts committed by a

person in authority or agent of a person in authority which are
calculated to affect or confuse the mind and/or undermine a person’s
dignity and morale, such as:
1. blindfolding;
2. threatening a person(s) or his/her relative(s) with bodily
harm, execution or other wrongful acts;
3. confinement in solitary cells or secret detention places;
4. prolonged interrogation;
5. preparing a prisoner for a “show trial”, public display or public
humiliation of a detainee or prisoner;
6. causing unscheduled transfer of a person deprived of liberty
from one place to another, creating the belief that he/she shall
be summarily executed;
7. maltreating a member/s of a person’s family;
8. causing the torture sessions to be witnessed by the person’s
family, relatives or any third party;
9. denial of sleep/rest;
10. shame infliction such as stripping the person naked,
parading him/her in public places, shaving the victim’s head or
putting marks on his/her body against his/her will;
11. deliberately prohibiting the victim to communicate with
any member of his/her family; and
25

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
12. other analogous acts of mental/psychological torture.
SEC. 12.Criminal Liability. – Any person who actually participated

or induced another in the commission of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment or who cooperated
in the execution of the act of torture by previous or simultaneous acts
shall be liable as principal. Any superior military, police or law
enforcement officer or senior government
official who issued an order to a lower ranking personnel to subject a
victim to torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment for whatever purpose shall be held equally liable as
principal. Any public officer or employee shall be liable as an
accessory if he/she has knowledge that torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment is being committed
and without having participated therein, either as principal or
accomplice, takes part subsequent to its commission in any of the
following manner:
(a) By themselves profiting from or assisting the offender to

profit from the effects of the act of torture or other cruel, inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment;
(b) By concealing the act of torture or other cruel, inhuman

and degrading treatment or punishment and/or destroying the effects
or instruments thereof in order to prevent its discovery; or
(c) By harboring, concealing or assisting in the escape of

the principal/s in the act of torture or other cruel, inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment: Provided, That the accessory
acts are done with the abuse of the official’s public functions.
SEC. 13. Liability of Commanding Officer or Superior. –

The immediate superior of the unit concerned of the Armed Forces of
the Philippines or the equivalent senior official of the offender shall be
held accountable for “neglect of duty” under the doctrine of
“command responsibility” if he/she has knowledge of or, owing to the
circumstances at the time, should have known that acts of torture or
other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment shall be
committed, is being committed or has been committed by his/her
subordinates or by others within his/her area of responsibility and,
despite such knowledge, did not take preventive or corrective action
either before, during or immediately after its commission, when
he/she has the authority to prevent or investigate allegations of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment but failed to prevent or investigate allegations of such
act, whether deliberately or due to negligence, shall, without
prejudice to criminal liability, be held administratively liable under the
principle of command responsibility.
26

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
SEC. 14. Penalties. – (a) The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall

be imposed upon the perpetrators of the following acts:
1. Torture resulting in the death of any person;

2. Torture resulting in mutilation;
3. Torture with rape;
4. Torture with other forms of sexual abuse and, in consequence
of torture, the victim shall have become insane, imbecile,
impotent, blind or maimed for life; and
5. Torture committed against children.
SEC. 15. Exclusion from the Coverage of Special Amnesty Law.

– In order not to depreciate the crime of torture, persons who have
committed any act of torture shall not benefit from any special
amnesty law or similar measures that will have the effect of
exempting them from any criminal proceedings and sanctions.
SEC. 16. Nonexclusivity or Double Jeopardy Under International

Law. – Notwithstanding the provisions of the foregoing section, any
investigation, trial and decision in any Philippine court or other
agency for any violation of this Act shall be without prejudice to any
investigation, trial, decision or any other legal or administrative
process before the appropriate international court or agency under
applicable international human rights and humanitarian laws.
SEC. 17. On Refouler. – No person shall be expelled, returned

or extradited to another State where there are substantial grounds for
believing that such person would be in danger of being subjected to
torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment.
SEC. 18. Compensation to Victims of Torture and Other

Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. – Any
person who has suffered torture or other cruel, inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment shall have the right to claim for
compensation as provided for under Republic Act No. 7309:
Provided, That in no case shall the compensation be any lower
than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00). The victim shall also have
the right to claim for compensation from such other financial relief
programs that may be available to him/her.
27

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
TITLE 3 CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER
Art. 134. Rebellion or insurrection - committed by rising publicly

and taking arms against the government for the purpose of:
a. Removing from the allegiance to said government or its laws, the

territory of the Republic of Philippines or any part thereof, or any
body of land, naval, or other armed forces, or
b. Depriving the Chief Executive or Congress, wholly or partially, of
any of its powers or prerogatives.
ELEMENTS:
1. There is public uprising and taking up arms against the
government;
2. The purpose of the uprising is either:
a. Remove from the allegiance to the government or its laws: 1. the

territory of the Philippines or any part thereof; or 2. any body of land,
naval or other armed forces
b. deprive the Chief Executive or Congress wholly or partially of any
of their powers or prerogatives.
28

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
There is no complex crime of rebellion with murder, etc. See

People vs. Hernandez; Salazar vs. Ensile
Art. 134-A Coup d’etat - The crime of coup d'etat is a swift attack
accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth,
directed against duly constituted authorities of the Republic of the
Philippines, or any military camp or installation, communications
network, public utilities or other facilities needed for the exercise and
continued possession of power, singly or simultaneously carried out
anywhere in the Philippines by any person or persons, belonging to
the military or police or holding any public office of employment with
or without civilian support or participation for the purpose of seizing or
diminishing state power. (As amended by R.A. 6968).
Elements:
a. That the offender is a person or persons belonging to the military
of police of holding any public office or employment;
b. That it is committed by swift attack accompanied by violence,
intimidation or threat, or stealth,
c. That the attack is directed against duly constituted authorities of
the Republic of the Philippines or any military camp or
installation, communications network or public utilities or other
facilities needed for the exercise and continued possession of
power;
d. That the purpose of attack is to seize or diminish state power.
Art. 135. Penalty for rébellion, insurrection, coup d’ etat.

Any person who promotes, maintains, or heads rebellion or
insurrection shall suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
● Any person merely participating or executing the commands of
others in a rebellion shall suffer the penalty of reclusion
temporal.
● Any person who leads or in any manner directs or commands
others to undertake a coup d'etat shall suffer the penalty of
reclusion perpetua.
● Any person in the government service who participates, or
executes directions or commands of others in undertaking
a coup d'etat shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its
maximum .
● Any person not in the government service who participates, or
in any manner supports, finances, abets or aids in undertaking
a coup d'etat shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal in its
maximum period.
● When the rebellion, insurrection, or coup d'etat shall be under
the command of unknown leaders, any person who in fact
directed the others, spoke for them, signed receipts and other
documents issued in their name, as performed similar acts, on
29

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
behalf or the rebels shall be deemed a leader of such a

rebellion, insurrection, or coup d'etat. (As amended by R.A.
6968, approved on October 24, 1990).
Art. 136. Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d’ etat

rebellion or insurrection.
Art. 137. Disloyalty of public officers or employees.-committed by

public officers or employees who:
a. Failed to resist a rebellion by all the means of their power;

b. Continuing to discharge the duties of their offices under the
control of the rebels; or
c. Accepting appointments to office under the rebels.
Art. 138. Inciting to rebellion or insurrection - Committed by any

person who, without taking arms or in open hostility against the
government, shall incite others to the execution of any of the acts
specified in article 134, by means of speeches, proclamations,
writings, banners or their representations tending to the same end.
Elements:
a. That the offender does not take arms or is not in open hostility
against the Government.
b. That he incites others to the execution of any of the acts of
rebellion.
Art. 139. Sedition- committed by persons who rise publicly and

tumultuously in order to attain by force, intimidation or other means
outside of legal methods.
1. That the offender rise (1) publicly, and (2) tumultuously;
2. That they employ force, intimidation, or other means outside of
legal methods;
3. That the offender employs any of those means to attain any of the
following objectives:
a. To prevent the promulgation or execution of any law or the
holding of any popular election;
b. To prevent the Government or any public officer from freely
exercising its or his functions, or prevent the execution of any
administrative order.
c. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the person or
property of any public officer or employee;
d. To commit for any political or social end, any act of hate or
revenge against private persons or any social class
e. To despoil for any political or social end, any person,
municipal, provincial or national government of all its property or
any part thereof.
30

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 141. Conspiracy to commit sedition.
Art. 142. Inciting to sedition -committed by any person who shall:

a. incite others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which
constitute sedition by means of writing, speeches, proclamations,
emblems etc.
b. uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to disturb the
public peace
c. writing, publishing, circulating scurrilous libels against the
government or any of its duly constituted authorities which tend to
disturb the public peace.
Elements;
a. That the offender does not take direct part in the crime of
sedition.
b. That he incites others to the accomplishment of any of the acts
which constitute sedition.
c. That the inciting is done by means of speeches, proclamations,
writings, emblems, cartoons, banners, or other representations
tending to the same end.
Art. 143. Acts tending to prevent the meeting of national

assembly and similar bodies. Committed by any person who by
force or fraud prevents the meeting of the following:
a. National assembly
b. Any of its committees or subcommittees
c. Constitutional commissions or its committees
d. Provincial board
e. City or municipal council
Elements:
a. That there be a projected or actual meeting of the National
Assembly or any of its committees or subcommittees, constitutional
committees or divisions thereof, or of any provincial board or city or
municipal council or board.
b. That the offender who may be any person such meeting by
force or fraud.
Art. 144. Disturbance of proceedings – committed by any person

who disturbs the meetings of letters a to e above, or while in the
presence of any such bodies should behave in such a manner as to
interrupt its proceedings or to impair the respect due it.
Elements:
a. That there be a meeting of the National assembly or any of its
committees or subcommittees, constitutional committees or
divisions thereof, or of any provincial board or city or municipal
council or board.
31

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
b. That the offender does any of the following acts:

- He disturbs any of such meetings
- He behaves while in the presence of any such bodies in such
a manner as to interrupt its proceedings or to impair the respect due
to it.
Art. 145. Violation of parliamentary immunity. - committed by any

person who:
a. Shall use force, violence, intimidation threats or fraud to prevent

any member of the National Assembly to attend its meetings or
committees or subcommittees, constitutional commissions or
committees thereof, or from expressing his opinion or casting his
vote.
b. Shall arrest or search any member of the National Assembly
while it is in regular or special session, except in case
where such member has committed a crime punishable
under the Code by a penalty higher than prision mayor 2. (2nd
form)
ELEMENTS OF VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY OF

THE 2ND FORM:
2. He arrests or searches any member of the Congress;
3. The Congress at the time of the arrest or search is either in
regular or special session;
4. The member of Congress has not committed a crime punishable
under the RPC by a penalty higher than prision mayor.
Art. 146. Illegal Assemblies-The acts punishable are:

a. Staging a meeting attended by armed persons for the purpose of
committing any of the crimes punishable by the RPC
b. Staging a meeting in which the audience whether armed or not is
invited to the commission of treason, rebellion, sedition or assault
upon a person in authority or his agents
(Persons liable: Organizers and leaders and persons merely

present3 at such meeting armed or not)
Art. 147. Illegal associations

Acts Punishable:
1. existence of an association totally or partially organized for the
purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable by the RPC.
2. existence of associations totally or partially organized for some
purpose contrary to public morals.
2
3
32

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
(Persons liable: Founders, president and directors of the

association and mere members thereof.)
Art. 148. Direct assault committed by any person who:

a. Without public uprising, shall employ force or intimidation for the
attainment of any of the purposes enumerated in defining the
crimes of rebellion and sedition. (This is known as the 1st form of
direct assault)
b. Without public uprising, by attacking, by employing force or by
seriously intimidating or by seriously resisting any person in
authority or any of his agents, while engaged in the performance
of official duties, or on the occasion of such performance. ( This is
known as the 2nd form of direct assault)
ELEMENTS OF DIRECT ASSAULT OF THE 2ND FORM:
1. The offender makes an attack or employs force or makes a serious

intimidation or makes a serious resistance;
2. That the victim thereof is a person in authority or agent of a
person in authority;
3. That these persons at the time of the assault were engaged in the
actual performance of official duties, or he is assaulted by reason of
the past performance of official duties.
4. There must be no public uprising.
5. The offender knows the status of the person he is assaulting
(debatable).
Q: What is qualified direct assault?

A: It is qualified when:
1. The assault is committed with a weapon;

2. The offender is a public officer or employee; and
3. The offender lays hands upon a person in authority.
Art. 149. Indirect assaults- committed by any person who shall

make use of force or intimidation upon any person coming to the aid
of the authorities or their agents on occasion of the commission of
any of the crimes defined in the preceding paragraph.
Elements of Indirect Assaults:

1. That a person in authority or his agent is the victim of any of the
forms of direct assault defined in article 148.
2. That a person comes to the aid of such authority or his agent.
3. That the offender makes use of force or intimidation upon such a
person coming to the aid of the authority or his agent.
33

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 150. Disobedience to summons issued by the National

Assembly, its committees or subcommittees, by the
Constitutional Commissions, its committees, subcommittees
or divisions.
Acts Punishable:
1. Without legal excuse, refusing to obey summons of the National
Assembly, its special or standing committees and
subcommittees or divisions, or by any commission or committee
chairman or member authorized to summon witnesses.
2. Refusing to be sworn or placed under affirmation while being
before such legislative or constitutional bodies or official.
3. By refusing to answer any legal inquiry
4. By refusing to produce any books, papers, documents or
records in his possession, when required by them to do so in
the exercise of their functions
5. By restraining another from attending as a witness in such
legislative or constitutional body
6. By inducing disobedience to a summon or refusal to be sworn
by the above mentioned bodies or officials.
Art. 151. Resistance and disobedience to a person in authority or

the agents of such person.- committed by any person who shall
resist or seriously disobey any person in authority, or the agents of
such person, while engaged in the performance of official functions. 4
Elements of Article 151:

1. That a person in authority or his agent is engaged in the
performance of official duty or gives a lawful order to the
offender;
2. The offender does an act
3. The act consists of resisting or seriously disobeying such person
in authority or his agent
4. The act of the offender must not fall in any of the following
articles: Articles 148 to 150.
Distinguish Direct Assault from Resistance or Serious

Disobedience:
1. Direct assault (2nd mode) is committed by:

a. seriously intimidating,
b. by attacking,
c. by employing force and
d. by seriously resisting a person in authority or his agent; while
Resistance or Serious Disobedience is committed only by

a. resisting or
4
34

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
b. seriously disobeying a person in authority or his agent.
2. In Direct Assault, the person in authority or his agent must be

engaged in the performance of official duties or that he is assaulted
by reason thereof; but in resistance, the person in authority or his
agent must be in actual performance of his duty.
3. In direct assault by resisting an agent of a person in authority the

force is serious. In resistance against an agent of a person in
authority, the use of force is not serious.
Art. 152. Persons in authority, defined (Mga taong may

kapangyarihan at mga kagawad ng mga taong makapangyarihan) -
any person directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as an individual
or as a member of some court or government corporation, board, or
commission.
Agent of a person in authority- is any person who, by direct

provision of law or by election or by appointment by competent
authority, is charged with the maintenance of public order and the
protection and security of life and property, such as barrio
councilman, barrio policeman and barangay leader.
In applying article 148 and 151, teachers, professors, and

persons charged with the supervision of public or duly recognized
private schools, colleges and universities, and lawyers in the actual
performance of their professional duties or on the occasion of such
performance shall be deemed persons in authority.
Note: Articles 153 to 156 are also classified as crimes under

public disorders.
Art. 153. Tumults5 and other disturbances of public order. (Mga

gulo at iba pang uri ng kaguluhan sa kaayusan ng bayan)-
Acts Punishable:
1. Causing any serious disturbance in a public place, office or
establishment
2. Interrupting or disturbing performances, functions, or gatherings, or
peaceful meetings, if the act does not fall under Articles 131 and 132.
3. Making any outcry tending to incite rebellion or sedition in any
meeting, association or public place;
4. Displaying placards or emblems which provoke a disturbance of a
public order in such place;
5. Burying with pomp the body of a person who has been legally
executed.
35

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 154. Unlawful use of means of publication and unlawful

utterances.
Acts Punishable:
1. Publishing or causing to be published either by printing,
lithography, or any means of publication, as news any false news
which may endanger public order, or cause damage to the interest or
credit of the State.
2. By the same means, or by utterances or words or speeches
encouraging disobedience to the law or to the authorities, or praising,
justifying, or extolling any act punished by law
3. By maliciously publishing or causing to be published any official
resolution or document without proper authority, or before they have
been published officially
4. By printing, publishing, or distributing or causing to be printed,
published or distributed pamphlets, periodicals, or leaflets which do
not bear the real printer’s name, or which are classified as
synonymous.
Art. 155. Alarms and scandals. - committed by any person who

shall:
1. Within any town or public place, shall discharge any firearm,
rocket, firecracker, or other explosive calculated to cause alarm or
danger;
2. Instigate or take an active part in any charivari 6 or other disorderly
meeting offensive to another or prejudicial to public tranquility
3. While wandering about at night or while engaged in any nocturnal
amusements, shall disturb the public peace; or
4. Who while intoxicated or otherwise, shall cause any disturbance or
scandal in public places, as long as article 153 is not applicable.
Art. 156. Delivering prisoners from jail- committed by any person

who shall remove from any jail or penal establishment any person
confined therein or shall help the escape of such person, by means of
violence, intimidation or bribery.
ELEMENTS OF DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM JAIL:

1. There is a person confined in jail or any penal establishment;
2. The offender removes such person therefrom, or helps in his
escape.
Art. 157. Evasion of service of sentence- committed by any convict

who shall evade service of his sentence by escaping during the term
of his imprisonment by reason of final judgment
Art. 158. Evasion of service of sentence on the occasion of

disorders, conflagrations, earthquakes, or other calamities. -
6
36

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
committed by a convict, who shall evade the service of his sentence

by leaving the penal institution on the occasion of the above
mentioned events, or during a mutiny in which he has not
participated, who shall fail to give himself up to the authorities within
48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation by the Chief
Executive announcing the passing away of such calamity. In this case
he shall suffer an increase of 1/5 of the time still remaining to be
served under the original which however shall not exceed six
months.7
Art. 159. Other cases of evasion of service of sentence. -

committed by any convict who, having been granted conditional
pardon by the Chief executive , shall violate any condition of such
pardon. If the penalty remitted by the granting of such pardon be
higher than 6 years, the convict shall suffer the unexpired portion of
his original sentence
Art. 160. Commission of another crime during service of penalty

imposed for another previous offense. - Any person who shall
commit a felony after having been convicted by final judgment, before
beginning to serve such sentence, or while serving the same, shall be
punished by the maximum period of the penalty prescribed by law for
the new felony (This is known as Quasi Recidivism).
TITLE 4-CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST
Art. 161. Counterfeiting the great seal of the government, forging

the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive.
Art. 162. Using forged signatures or counterfeit seals or stamps.
Art. 163. Making and importing and uttering false coins-

committed by any person who shall make, import or utter false 8 coins
in connivance with counterfeiters or importers.
Art. 164. Mutilation of coins- committed by any person who shall

mutilate coins of the legal currency of the Philippines or import or
utter mutilated current coin in connivance with mutilator or importer.9
Art. 165. Selling of false or mutilated coins, without connivance.
7
8
9
37

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Acts Punishable:
1. Possession of coins, with knowledge that it is false or mutilated
and with intent to utter the same- and the same coin was
counterfeited or mutilated by another person
2. Utterances of such false or mutilated coins, knowing them to be
false or mutilated
Art. 166. Forging treasury or bank notes or other documents

payable to bearer; importing and uttering such false or forged
notes and documents
Acts Punishable:
1. Forging and falsification of treasury or bank notes or other
documents payable to bearer.
2. Importation of these false or forged obligations or notes
3. Uttering these forged or false obligation and notes the utterer
conniving with the forgers or importers
Art. 167. Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments not

payable to bearer. - committed by any person who shall forge,
import or utter, in connivance with the importer or forgers, any
instrument payable to order or other document of credit not payable
to bearer.
Art. 168. Illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank

notes and other instruments of credit –committed by any person
who shall knowingly use or have in his possession, with intent to use
any of the false or falsified instruments referred to above.
Art. 169. How forgery committed:

1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument payable to
bearer or to order mentioned therein, the appearance of a true and
genuine document.
2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering by any means
the figures, letters, words, or sign contained therein
Art. 170. Falsification of legislative documents- committed by any

person who, without proper authority shall alter any bill, resolution or
ordinance enacted or approved or pending approval by either house
or any provincial or municipal board or council
Art. 171. Falsification by public officer, employee or notary or

ecclesiastical minister- committed by these people who, taking
advantage of their public position, shall falsify a document by
committing any of these:
1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric;
2. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or
proceeding when they did not in fact so participate
38

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or

proceeding statements other than those in fact made by them
4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts
5. Altering true dates;
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document
which changes its meaning
7. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a
copy of an original document when no such original exists, or
including in such copy a statement contrary to, or different from, that
of the genuine original; or
8. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance
thereof in a protocol, registry or official book.
ELEMENTS OF FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER,

EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY PUBLIC:
1. The offender is a public officer, employee or notary public;
2. He takes advantage of his official position;
3. He falsifies a document by committing any of the acts above
enumerated;
4. If the offender is an ecclesiastical minister, the falsification is
committed with respect to any record or document of such character
that it may affect the civil status of another.
Art. 172. Falsification by private individuals and use of falsified

documents- committed by:
1. Private individual who shall commit any of the falsifications
mentioned in the preceding article in any public or official document
or letter of exchange or any kind of commercial document; and
2. Any person who, to the damage of another, or with intent to cause
such damage, shall in any private document shall commit any of the
acts of falsifications therein
3. any person who shall knowingly introduce evidence in any judicial
proceeding to the damage of another or who, with intent to cause
such damage, shall use any of the false documents embraced in the
preceding article or in any of the subdivisions of this article.
ELEMENTS OF FALSIFICATION UNDER PARAGRAPH 1

1. The offender is a private individual or a public officer who did not
take advantage of his official position;
2. He committed any acts of falsification enumerated in Article 171;
3. The falsification is committed in a public or official or commercial
document.
ELEMENTS OF FALSIFICATION UNDER PARAGRAPH 2

1. The offender committed any acts of falsification enumerated in
Article 171 with the single exception of that stated in paragraph
seven;
39

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
2. The falsification is committed in a private document;

3. The falsification was done with intent to cause damage or it
actually caused damage to a third party.
Kinds of documents under Philippine laws that may be falsified:

1. Public document: is any instrument executed by a notary public
or by public or a competent public authority, with the solemnities
required by law;
2. Private document- a deed or instrument executed by a private
person without the intervention of a notary public or persons legally
authorized, by which document some disposition or agreement is
proved, evidenced or set forth.
3. Official document- a document issued by a public official in the
exercise of the functions of his office.
4. Commercial document- a document or instrument used by
merchants or businessmen to facilitate or promote trade or credit
transactions.
Art. 173. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph, and telephone

messages, and use of said falsified messages.
Art. 174. False medical certificates, false certificates of merit or

service, etc. - committed by:
1. Physician or surgeon who in connection with the practice
of his profession , shall issue a false certificate
2. Public officer who shall issue a false certificate of merit of
service, good conduct, or similar circumstances
3. Private person who shall falsify any of the above
mentioned certificates.
Art. 175. Using false certificate. - committed by anyone who shall

make use of the false certificates mentioned in the next preceding
article.
Art. 176. Manufacturing and possession of instruments or

implements for falsification. - committed by any person who shall:
1. Make or introduce into the Philippines any stamps, dies, marks,

or other instruments or implements for counterfeiting or
falsification
2. Possess with intent to use the instruments or implements for
counterfeiting or falsification made in or introduced into the
Philippines by another person.
40

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 177. Usurpation of authority or official functions: - committed

by any person who shall-
1. Knowingly and falsely representing himself to be an officer,
agent or representative of any department or agency of the
Philippine Government or any foreign government. (usurpation
of authority)
2. Perform any act pertaining to any person in authority or public
officer of the Philippine Government or of a foreign government
or any agency thereof, under pretense of official position, and
without being lawfully entitled to do so. (Usurpation of official
function).
Art. 178. Using fictitious name and concealing true name-

committed by any person who shall:
1. Publicly use a fictitious name for the purpose of concealing a
crime, evading the execution of a judgment, or causing
damage.
2. Conceal his true name and other personal circumstances.
Using fictitious name distinguished from concealing true
name
1. In using fictitious names, the element of publicity must be
present, in concealing true name and other personal
circumstances, that element is not necessary.
2. The purpose in use of fictitious name is to conceal a crime,
evade the execution of a sentence or to cause damage. While
concealing a true name, the purpose is merely to conceal
identity.
Art. 179. Illegal use of uniforms and insignia- committed by any

person who shall publicly and improperly make use of insignia,
uniforms, or dress pertaining to an office not held by such person or
to a class of persons of which he is not a member.
Art. 180. False testimony10 against a defendant- committed by any

person who shall give false testimony against the defendant in any
criminal case.
Elements:
1. There is court proceeding criminal in nature;
2. The offender falsely testifies under oath against the defendant
therein;
3. The offender knows that the testimony is false.
Art. 181. False testimony favorable to the defendant- committed

by any person who shall give false testimony in favor of the
defendant.
10
41

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 182. False testimony in civil cases-

Elements:
1. There is a civil case;
2. The testimony of the offender was given in relation to the issues
presented therein;
3. The testimony is false;
4. The offender knows that it is false;
5. The testimony is malicious.
Art. 183. False testimony in other cases and perjury in solemn

affirmation- committed by any person who shall knowingly make
untruthful statements and not being included in the provisions of the
next preceding articles, shall testify under oath, or make an affidavit,
upon any material matter before a competent person authorized to
administer an oath in cases in which the law so requires.
Elements:
1. The accused made a statement under oath or executed an
affidavit upon a material matter;
2. This statement or affidavit was made before a competent officer
authorized to receive and administer oath;
3. In his statement or affidavit, the accused made a willful and
deliberate assertion of falsehood; and
4. The sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is required
by law.
Art. 184. Offering false testimony in evidence- committed by any

person who shall knowingly offer in evidence a false witness or
testimony in any judicial or official proceeding.
Art. 185. Machinations in public auction- committed by any person

who shall:
1. Solicit any gift or promise as a consideration for refraining from
taking part in any public auction;
2. Attempt to cause bidders to stay away from an auction by threats,
gifts, promises or any other artifice.
Art. 186. Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade.
Committed by any person who shall:

1. Enter into any contract or agreement or shall take part in any
conspiracy or combination, in restraint of trade or commerce or to
prevent by artificial means free competition in the market.
2. Monopolize any merchandise or object of trade or commerce, or

shall combine with any person/s to monopolize said merchandise or
42

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
object in order to alter the price thereof by spreading false rumors or

making use of any artifice to restrain free competition in the market.
3. Being a manufacturer, producer, or processor of any merchandise

or object of commerce or an importer of any merchandise, either as
wholesaler or retailer, shall combine, conspire or agree in any manner
with any person likewise engaged in the manufacture, production,
processing, assembling or importation of such merchandise or object
of commerce for the purpose of making transaction prejudicial to
lawful commerce, or of increasing the market price.
See RA 8293 The Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines-

Infringement (Sec.155)Unfair Competition (Sec. 168) and False
Designation of Origin and False description or Representation (
Sec. 169).
COMMONWEALTH ACT 142

(As amended by RA 6085)
ANTI ALIAS LAW

Sec. 6. No person having been baptized with a name different from
that which he was registered at birth in the local civil registry, shall
represent himself in any public or private transaction or shall sign or
execute any public or private document without stating or affixing his
real or original name and all names and aliases or pseudonym he is
or may have been authorized.
Sec. 1. No person shall use any name different from the one with
which he was registered at birth. Exceptions:
a. pseudonym for literary, cinema, television, radio, or other
entertainment purposes and in athletic events where use of
pseudonym is an accepted practice.
Sec. 5. Penalty 1-5 years imprisonment.
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 247
PROHIBITING AND PENALIZING DEFACEMENT, MUTILATION,

TEARING, BURNING OR DESTRUCTION OF CENTRAL BANK
NOTES AND COINS
WHEREAS, defacing, mutilating, tearing, or partially burning or

destroying our currency by any means renders it unfit for circulation,
thereby unduly shortening its lifetime, and such acts unfavorably
reflect on the discipline of our people and create a bad image for our
country;
43

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
1. That it shall be unlawful for any person to willfully deface, mutilate,

tear, burn or destroy, in any manner whatsoever, currency notes and
coins issued by the Central Bank of the Philippines; and
2. That any person who shall violate this Decree shall, upon
conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than twenty thousand
pesos and/or by imprisonment of not more than five years.
TITLE 5- CRIMES RELATIVE TO OPIUM AND PROHIBITED

DRUGS
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165
AN ACT INSTITUTING THE COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS

DRUGS ACT OF 2002, REPEALING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6425,
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF
1972, AS AMENDED, PROVIDING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES
Section 1. Short Title. – This Act shall be known and cited as the
"Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002".
ARTICLE II
Unlawful Acts and Penalties
Section 4. Importation of Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled

Precursors and Essential Chemicals.- .The penalty of life
imprisonment to death and a ranging from Five hundred thousand
pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00).
Section 5. Sale, Trading, Administration, Dispensation, Delivery,

Distribution and Transportation of Dangerous Drugs and/or
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals. - The penalty of
life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred
thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00)
.
44

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
If the sale, trading, administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution

or transportation of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor
and essential chemical transpires within one hundred (100) meters
from the school, the maximum penalty shall be imposed in every
case.
For drug pushers who use minors or mentally incapacitated

individuals as runners, couriers and messengers, or in any other
capacity directly connected to the dangerous drugs and/or controlled
precursors and essential chemical trade, the maximum penalty shall
be imposed in every case.
If the victim of the offense is a minor or a mentally incapacitated

individual, or should a dangerous drug and/or a controlled precursor
and essential chemical involved in any offense herein provided be
the proximate cause of death of a victim thereof, the maximum
penalty provided for under this Section shall be imposed.
Section 6. Maintenance of a Den, Dive or Resort. - The penalty of

life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred
thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos
(P10,000,000.00).
Section 7. Employees and Visitors of a Den, Dive or Resort. - The

penalty of imprisonment ranging from twelve (12) years and one (1)
day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from One hundred
thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos
(P500,000.00).
Section 8. Manufacture of Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled

Precursors and Essential Chemicals. - The penalty of life
imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred
thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos
(P10,000,000.00).
Section 10. Manufacture or Delivery of Equipment, Instrument,

Apparatus, and Other Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs and/or
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals. - The penalty of
imprisonment ranging from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to
twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand
pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00).
Section 11. Possession of Dangerous Drugs. - The penalty of life

imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred
thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00)
shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law,
shall possess any dangerous drug in the following quantities,
regardless of the degree of purity thereof:
45

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
(1) 10 grams or more of opium;

(2) 10 grams or more of morphine;
(3) 10 grams or more of heroin;
(4) 10 grams or more of cocaine or cocaine hydrochloride;
(5) 50 grams or more of methamphetamine hydrochloride or
"shabu";
(6) 10 grams or more of marijuana resin or marijuana resin oil;
(7) 500 grams or more of marijuana; and
(8) 10 grams or more of other dangerous drugs such as, but not
limited to, methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDA) or
"ecstasy", paramethoxyamphetamine (PMA),
trimethoxyamphetamine (TMA), lysergic acid diethylamine
(LSD), gamma hydroxyamphetamine (GHB), and those
similarly designed or newly introduced drugs and their
derivatives, without having any therapeutic value or if the
quantity possessed is far beyond therapeutic requirements, as
determined and promulgated by the Board in accordance to
Section 93, Article XI of this Act.
Otherwise, if the quantity involved is less than the foregoing

quantities, the penalties shall be graduated as follows:
(1) Life imprisonment and a fine ranging from Four hundred

thousand pesos (P400,000.00) to Five hundred thousand
pesos (P500,000.00), if the quantity of methamphetamine
hydrochloride or "shabu" is ten (10) grams or more but less
than fifty (50) grams;
(2) Imprisonment of twenty (20) years and one (1) day to life
imprisonment and a fine ranging from Four hundred thousand
pesos (P400,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos
(P500,000.00), if the quantities of dangerous drugs are five (5)
grams or more but less than ten (10) grams of opium,
morphine, heroin, cocaine or cocaine hydrochloride, marijuana
resin or marijuana resin oil, methamphetamine hydrochloride or
"shabu", or other dangerous drugs such as, but not limited to,
MDMA or "ecstasy", PMA, TMA, LSD, GHB, and those similarly
designed or newly introduced drugs and their derivatives,
without having any therapeutic value or if the quantity
possessed is far beyond therapeutic requirements; or three
hundred (300) grams or more but less than five (hundred) 500)
grams of marijuana; and
(3) Imprisonment of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty
(20) years and a fine ranging from Three hundred thousand
pesos (P300,000.00) to Four hundred thousand pesos
(P400,000.00), if the quantities of dangerous drugs are less
than five (5) grams of opium, morphine, heroin, cocaine or
46

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
cocaine hydrochloride, marijuana resin or marijuana resin oil,

methamphetamine hydrochloride or "shabu", or other
dangerous drugs such as, but not limited to, MDMA or
"ecstasy", PMA, TMA, LSD, GHB, and those similarly designed
or newly introduced drugs and their derivatives, without having
any therapeutic value or if the quantity possessed is far beyond
therapeutic requirements; or less than three hundred (300)
grams of marijuana.
Section 12. Possession of Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus

and Other Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs. - The penalty of
imprisonment ranging from six (6) months and one (1) day to four (4)
years and a fine ranging from Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) to
Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00).
Section 13. Possession of Dangerous Drugs During Parties,

Social Gatherings or Meetings.
Section 15. Use of Dangerous Drugs. – A person apprehended or

arrested, who is found to be positive for use of any dangerous drug,
after a confirmatory test, shall be imposed a penalty of a minimum of
six (6) months rehabilitation in a government center for the first
offense, subject to the provisions of Article VIII of this Act. If
apprehended using any dangerous drug for the second time, he/she
shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment ranging from six (6) years
and one (1) day to twelve (12) years and a fine ranging from Fifty
thousand pesos (P50,000.00) to Two hundred thousand pesos
(P200,000.00): Provided, That this Section shall not be applicable
where the person tested is also found to have in his/her possession
such quantity of any dangerous drug provided for under Section 11 of
this Act, in which case the provisions stated therein shall apply.
Section 23. Plea-Bargaining Provision. – Any person charged

under any provision of this Act regardless of the imposable penalty
shall not be allowed to avail of the provision on plea-bargaining.
Section 24.Non-Applicability of the Probation Law for Drug

Traffickers and Pushers. – Any person convicted for drug trafficking
or pushing under this Act, regardless of the penalty imposed by the
Court, cannot avail of the privilege granted by the Probation Law or
Presidential Decree No. 968, as amended.
Section 25. Qualifying Aggravating Circumstances in the

Commission of a Crime by an Offender Under the Influence of
Dangerous Drugs. – Notwithstanding the provisions of any law to
the contrary, a positive finding for the use of dangerous drugs shall
be a qualifying aggravating circumstance in the commission of a
crime by an offender, and the application of the penalty provided for
in the Revised Penal Code shall be applicable.
47

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Section 26. Attempt or Conspiracy. – Any attempt or conspiracy to

commit the following unlawful acts shall be penalized by the same
penalty prescribed for the commission of the same as provided under
this Act:
(a) Importation of any dangerous drug and/or controlled

precursor and essential chemical;
(b) Sale, trading, administration, dispensation, delivery,

distribution and transportation of any dangerous drug and/or
controlled precursor and essential chemical;
(c) Maintenance of a den, dive or resort where any dangerous

drug is used in any form;
(d) Manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or controlled

precursor and essential chemical; and
(e) Cultivation or culture of plants which are sources of

dangerous drugs.
Section 29. Criminal Liability for Planting of Evidence. – Any

person who is found guilty of "planting" any dangerous drug and/or
controlled precursor and essential chemical, regardless of quantity
and purity, shall suffer the penalty of death.
Section 57.Probation and Community Service Under the

Voluntary Submission Program. – A drug dependent who is
discharged as rehabilitated by the DOH-accredited Center through
the voluntary submission program, but does not qualify for exemption
from criminal liability under Section 55 of this Act, may be charged
under the provisions of this Act, but shall be placed on probation and
undergo a community service in lieu of imprisonment and/or fine in
the discretion of the court, without prejudice to the outcome of any
pending case filed in court.
Such drug dependents shall undergo community service as part of

his/her after-care and follow-up program, which may be done in
coordination with nongovernmental civil organizations accredited by
the DSWD, with the recommendation of the Board.
Section 58. Filing of Charges Against a Drug Dependent Who is

Not Rehabilitated Under the Voluntary Submission Program. – A
drug dependent, who is not rehabilitated after the second
commitment to the Center under the voluntary submission program,
shall, upon recommendation of the Board, be charged for violation of
Section 15 of this Act and prosecuted like any other offender. If
convicted, he/she shall be credited for the period of confinement and
rehabilitation in the Center in the service of his/her sentence.
48

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Section 66. Suspension of Sentence of a First-Time Minor

Offender. – An accused who is over fifteen (15) years of age at the
time of the commission of the offense mentioned in Section 11 of this
Act, but not more than eighteen (18) years of age at the time when
judgment should have been promulgated after having been found
guilty of said offense, may be given the benefits of a suspended
sentence, subject to the following conditions:
(a) He/she has not been previously convicted of violating any

provision of this Act, or of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, as
amended; or of the Revised Penal Code; or of any special
penal laws;
(b) He/she has not been previously committed to a Center or to

the care of a DOH-accredited physician; and
(c) The Board favorably recommends that his/her sentence be

suspended.
While under suspended sentence, he/she shall be under the

supervision and rehabilitative surveillance of the Board, under such
conditions that the court may impose for a period ranging from six (6)
months to eighteen (18) months.
Upon recommendation of the Board, the court may commit the

accused under suspended sentence to a Center, or to the care of a
DOH-accredited physician for at least six (6) months, with after-care
and follow-up program for not more than eighteen (18) months.
In the case of minors under fifteen (15) years of age at the time of the
commission of any offense penalized under this Act, Article 192 of
Presidential Decree No. 603, otherwise known as the Child and
Youth Welfare Code, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 1179
shall apply, without prejudice to the application of the provisions of
this Section.
Section 67. Discharge After Compliance with Conditions of

Suspended Sentence of a First-Time Minor Offender. – If the
accused first time minor offender under suspended sentence
complies with the applicable rules and regulations of the Board,
including confinement in a Center, the court, upon a favorable
recommendation of the Board for the final discharge of the accused,
shall discharge the accused and dismiss all proceedings.
Upon the dismissal of the proceedings against the accused, the court
shall enter an order to expunge all official records, other than the
confidential record to be retained by the DOJ relating to the case.
Such an order, which shall be kept confidential, shall restore the
accused to his/her status prior to the case. He/she shall not be held
49

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
thereafter to be guilty of perjury or of concealment or

misrepresentation by reason of his/her failure to acknowledge the
case or recite any fact related thereto in response to any inquiry
made of him for any purpose.
Section 68. Privilege of Suspended Sentence to be Availed of

Only Once by a First-Time Minor Offender. – The privilege of
suspended sentence shall be availed of only once by an accused
drug dependent who is a first-time offender over fifteen (15) years of
age at the time of the commission of the violation of Section 15 of this
Act but not more than eighteen (18) years of age at the time when
judgment should have been promulgated.
Section 69. Promulgation of Sentence for First-Time Minor

Offender. – If the accused first-time minor offender violates any of
the conditions of his/her suspended sentence, the applicable rules
and regulations of the Board exercising supervision and rehabilitative
surveillance over him, including the rules and regulations of the
Center should confinement be required, the court shall pronounce
judgment of conviction and he/she shall serve sentence as any other
convicted person.
Section 70. Probation or Community Service for a First-Time

Minor Offender in Lieu of Imprisonment. – Upon promulgation of
the sentence, the court may, in its discretion, place the accused
under probation, even if the sentence provided under this Act is
higher than that provided under existing law on probation, or impose
community service in lieu of imprisonment. In case of probation, the
supervision and rehabilitative surveillance shall be undertaken by the
Board through the DOH in coordination with the Board of Pardons
and Parole and the Probation Administration. Upon compliance with
the conditions of the probation, the Board shall submit a written
report to the court recommending termination of probation and a final
discharge of the probationer, whereupon the court shall issue such
an order.
The community service shall be complied with under conditions, time

and place as may be determined by the court in its discretion and
upon the recommendation of the Board and shall apply only to
violators of Section 15 of this Act. The completion of the community
service shall be under the supervision and rehabilitative surveillance
of the Board during the period required by the court. Thereafter, the
Board shall render a report on the manner of compliance of said
community service. The court in its discretion may require extension
of the community service or order a final discharge.
In both cases, the judicial records shall be covered by the provisions

of Sections 60 and 64 of this Act.
50

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
If the sentence promulgated by the court requires imprisonment, the

period spent in the Center by the accused during the suspended
sentence period shall be deducted from the sentence to be served.
Section 77.The Dangerous Drugs Board. – The Board shall be the

policy-making and strategy-formulating body in the planning and
formulation of policies and programs on drug prevention and control.
It shall develop and adopt a comprehensive, integrated, unified and
balanced national drug abuse prevention and control strategy. It shall
be under the Office of the President.
Section 78. Composition of the Board. – The Board shall be

composed of seventeen (17) members wherein three (3) of which are
permanent members, the other twelve (12) members shall be in an
ex officio capacity and the two (2) shall be regular members.
The other twelve (12) members who shall be ex officio members of

the Board are the following:
(1) Secretary of the Department of Justice or his/her

representative;
(2) Secretary of the Department of Health or his/her

representative;
(3) Secretary of the Department of National Defense or his/her

representative;
(4) Secretary of the Department of Finance or his/her

representative;
(5) Secretary of the Department of Labor and Employment or

his/her representative;
(6) Secretary of the Department of the Interior and Local

Government or his/her representative;
(7) Secretary of the Department of Social Welfare and

Development or his/her representative;
(8) Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs or his/her

representative;
(9) Secretary of the Department of Education or his/her

representative;
(10) Chairman of the Commission on Higher Education or

his/her representative;
(11) Chairman of the National Youth Commission;
51

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
(12) Director General of the Philippine Drug Enforcement

Agency.
Cabinet secretaries who are members of the Board may designate

their duly authorized and permanent representatives whose ranks
shall in no case be lower than undersecretary.
The two (2) regular members shall be as follows:
(a) The president of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines; and
(b) The chairman or president of a non-government

organization involved in a dangerous drug campaign to be
appointed by the President of the Philippines.
The Director of the NBI and the Chief of the PNP shall be the
permanent consultants of the Board, and shall attend all the meetings
of the Board.
Section 82. Creation of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency

(PDEA). – To carry out the provisions of this Act, the PDEA, which
serves as the implementing arm of the Board, shall be responsible for
the efficient and effective law enforcement of all the provisions on
any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential
chemical as provided in this Act.
The PDEA shall be headed by a Director General with the rank of

Undersecretary, who shall be responsible for the general
administration and management of the Agency. The Director General
of the PDEA shall be appointed by the President of the Philippines
and shall perform such other duties that may be assigned to him/her.
He/she must possess adequate knowledge, training and experience
in the field of dangerous drugs, and in any of the following fields: law
enforcement, law, medicine, criminology, psychology or social work.
Section 90. Jurisdiction. – The Supreme Court shall designate

special courts from among the existing Regional Trial Courts in each
judicial region to exclusively try and hear cases involving violations of
this Act.
52

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
TITLE 6-CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS
See PD 1602- Law Prescribing Stiffer Penalty in Gambling.
Acts punishable in PD 1602:

1. Those who, directly or indirectly takes part in any illegal or
unauthorized activities or games of:
a. cockfighting, jueteng, jai alai or horse racing to include

bookie operation and game fixing, numbers bingo and
other forms of lotteries;
b. cara y cruz, pompiang and the like;
c. 7-11 and any game using dice;
d. Black jack, lucky nine, poker and its derivative, monte,
baccarat, cuajo, panguingue and other card games;
e. Pak que, high and low, mahjong, domino, and other
games using plastic tiles and the like;
f. Slot machines, roulettes, pinball and other mechanical
contraptions and devices;
g. Dog racing, boat racing, car and other forms of racing;
h. Basketball, boxing, volleyball, bowling, ping pong and
other forms of individual or team contests to include game
fixing, point shaving and other machinations;
i. Banking or percentage game, or any other game or
scheme, whether upon chance or skill, wherein wages
consisting of money or other articles of value or
representative of value are at stake or made.
2. Any person who permits numbers 1 to 9 acts to be carried on in an

inhabited or uninhabited place, or any building, vessel or other means
of transportation owned or controlled by him.
3. Any person who knowingly permits any form of gambling to be

carried on in a place which has a reputation of a gambling place.
53

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
4. The maintainer or conductor of the gambling schemes.
5. Any person who knowingly and without lawful purpose possesses

any lottery lists, letter, or other material containing paper, figures
signs or symbols pertaining or used to the games of jueteng, jai alai
horse racing bookies and similar games of lotteries and numbers
which have taken place or about to take place.
Gambling defined- a game or scheme the result of which depends

wholly upon chance or hazard. Its elements are:
1. Money or other consideration of value;

2. The result of the game depends wholly or chiefly upon chance or
hazard.
PD 483- Betting and Game Fixing or Point Shaving and

Machinations in Sports Contests.
PD 449- Cockfighting Law of 1974.
Art. 199 RPC- Illegal Cockfighting.
RA 9287- An Act Increasing the Penalties for Illegal Number

Games Amending Certain Provisions of PD 1602 (Latest Law on
Gambling)- included the games of masiao and last two as illegal
number games.
Section 4 thereof states: “The possession of any gambling

paraphernalia and other materials used in the illegal numbers game
operation shall be deemed prima facie evidence of any offense
committed under RA 9287.”
Art. 200. Grave Scandal-committed by any person who shall offend

against decency or good customs by any highly scandalous conduct
not expressly falling within any article of the RPC.
Elements of grave scandal:

1. The offender performs an act;
2. The act must be highly scandalous as offending against decency
or good customs;
3. The scandalous conduct is not expressly falling within any other
article of the RPC; and
4. The act be committed in a public place or within the public
knowledge or view.
Art. 201. Immoral doctrines. Obscene publications and

exhibitions, and indecent shows- committed by any person who:
54

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
1. Shall publicly expound or proclaim doctrines openly contrary to

public morals;
2. The authors of obscene literature, published with their knowledge
in any form.
3. The editors publishing such literature
4. Owners or operators of establishment selling them
5. Those who in theaters, fairs, cinematographs, or any other place,
exhibit indecent or immoral plays, scenes, acts or shows. 11
6. Those who shall sell, give away, or exhibit films, prints,
engravings, sculptures, or literature which are offensive to morals.
Art. 202. Vagrants and prostitutes-

1. Any person having no apparent means of subsistence, who has
the physical ability to work and who neglects to apply himself to some
lawful calling.
2. Any person found loitering about public or semi public building or
places, or tramping or wandering about the country or the streets
without visible means of support;
3. Any idle or dissolute person who lodges in houses of ill fame;
ruffians or pimps and those who habitually associate with prostitutes
4. Any person found loitering in any inhabited or uninhabited place
belonging to another without any lawful or justifiable purpose
5. Prostitutes- any woman who for money or profit, habitually
indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct.
TITLE 7- CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS
Art. 203. Public officers, defined- any person who, by direct

provision of the law, popular election or appointment by competent
authority, shall take part in the performance of public functions in the
Government, or shall perform in said government or in any of its
branches public duties as an employee, agent, or subordinate official,
of any rank or class.
Malfeasance- the performance of some act which should not be

done.
Misfeasance- the improper performance of some act which should
have been lawfully be done
NonFeasance- the omission of some act which ought to be
performed.
11
55

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 204. Knowingly rendering unjust judgment- committed by any

judge who shall knowingly render an unjust judgment in any case
submitted to him for decision.
Art. 205. Judgment rendered through negligence- committed by

any judge who, by reason of inexcusable negligence or ignorance,
shall render a manifestly unjust judgment in any case submitted to
him for decision.
Art. 206. Unjust interlocutory order- committed by any judge who

shall knowingly or by reason of inexcusable negligence or ignorance
shall render an unjust interlocutory order or decree.
Art. 207. Malicious delay in the administration of justice-

committed by a judge who is guilty of malicious delay in the
administration of justice.
Art. 208. Prosecution of offenses; negligence and tolerance-

committed by public officers or officers of the law, who, in dereliction
of the duties of his office, shall maliciously refrain from instituting
prosecution for the punishment of violators of the law, or shall tolerate
the commission of offense.
Elements of dereliction of duty in the prosecution of offenses:

1. The offender is a public officer or officer of the law who has a duty
of prosecuting offenses;
2. He, knowing the commission of a crime does not cause the
prosecution of the criminal; and
3. He acts with malice.
Art. 209. Betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor-revelation of

secrets
Acts Punishable:
1. An attorney causing damage to his client by malicious breach of
professional duty or by inexcusable negligence or tolerance.
2. An attorney revealing any of the secrets of his client learned by
him in his professional capacity.
3. An attorney undertaking the defense of the opposing party in the
same case, without the consent of his first client, after having
undertaken the defense of the first client or after having received
confidential information from said client.
Art. 210. Direct bribery- committed by a public officer who:

1. Agrees to perform, or by performing, in consideration of any
offer, promise, gift or present-an act constituting a crime, in
connection with the performance of his official duty.
56

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
2. Accepts a gift in consideration of the execution of an act

which does not constitute a crime, in connection with the
performance of his official duty.
3. Agreeing to refrain, or by refraining, from doing something
which it is his official duty to do so, in consideration of a gift
or promise.
Elements:
1. The offender is a public officer;
2. He accepts an offer or a promise or receives a gift or present by
himself or through another;
3. Such offer or promise be accepted, or gift or present received by
him:
a. with a view to committing some crime; or
b. in consideration of the execution of an unjust act which does not
constitute a crime
c. to refrain from doing something which it is his official duty to do.
4. The act which the offender agrees to perform or which he
executes be connected with the performance of his official duties
Art. 211. Indirect bribery- committed by any public officer who shall
accept gifts offered to him by reason of his office.
Elements
2. Gifts are offered to him by reason of his office; and
3. He accepts the gift.
Art. 211-A.Qualified Bribery- committed by a public officer who is

entrusted with law enforcement and who refrains from arresting or
prosecuting an offender who has committed a crime punishable by
reclusion perpetua and/or death in consideration of any offer,
promise, and gift or present. 12 The death penalty shall be imposed if it
is the public officer who asks or demands such gift or present.
Elements:
1. The offender is a public officer entrusted with law enforcement;
2. He refrains from arresting or prosecuting an offender who has
committed a crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death;
and
3. He does so because of consideration of any promise, gift or
present.
Art. 212. Corruption of public officials- committed by any person

who shall have made the offers or promises or given the gifts or
presents as described in the preceding articles.
12
57

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Elements:
1. The offender makes offers or promises or gives gift or presents to
a public officer;
2. They are given under circumstances that will make the public
officer liable for direct or indirect bribery.
See RA 3019- The Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
Art. 213. Frauds against the public treasury and similar offenses.
Committed by a public officer who shall:
1. Enter into an agreement with any party or speculator or make use
of scheme, to defraud the government, in dealing with any person
with regard to furnishing of supplies, the making of contracts or the
adjustment or settlement of accounts.
2. Demand, the payment of sums different from or larger than those
authorized by law, in the collection of taxes, licenses, fees or
outposts.
3. Voluntarily failed to issue a receipt, for any sums of money
collected by him officially, in the collection of taxes, fees, licenses,
outposts.
4. Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, things or objects of a
nature different from that provided by law, in the collection of taxes,
fees, licenses and other imposts.
Art. 215. Prohibited transactions- committed by an appointed public

officer, who, during his incumbency, shall become interested in any
transaction of exchange or speculation within the territory subject of
his jurisdiction.
Art. 216. Possession of prohibited interest by a public officer-

committed by a public officer who shall become interested in any
contract or business in which it is his official duty to intervene.
Art. 217. Malversation of public funds or property- committed by a

public officer who by reason of the duties of his office is accountable
for public funds or property who shall:
1. Appropriate public funds or property
2. Take or misappropriate public funds or property.
3. Consent, or through abandonment or negligence, permits any
other person to take such public funds or property.
Prima Facie Evidence of Malversation: The failure of a public

officer to have duly forthcoming any public funds or property with
which he is chargeable, upon demand13 by any duly authorized
officer, shall be prima facie evidence that he has put such missing
funds or property to personal use.
13
58

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Elements:
2. He had control or custody of funds or property by reason of the
duties of his office;
3. These funds or property are public in character for which he is
accountable; and
4. He appropriated, misappropriated, took, or consented, or through
abandonment or negligence, permitted another person to take them.
Art. 218. Failure of accountable officer to render account-

committed by any public officer who is required by law or regulation
to render accounts to the Commission on Audit, or to a provincial
auditor and who fails to do so for a period of two months after such
accounts should be rendered.
Art. 219. Failure of responsible public officer to render accounts

before leaving the country- committed by a public officer who
unlawfully leaves or attempts to leave the country without securing a
certificate from the COA showing that his accounts have been finally
settled.
Art. 220. Illegal use of public funds or property - committed by a

public officer who shall apply any public funds or property under his
administration to any public use other than that for which such funds
or property were appropriated by law or ordinance.
Elements of technical malversation:

2. A public fund or property is under his administration;
3. Such public fund or property has been appropriated by law or
ordinance; and
4. He applies it to a public use other than that for which such fund or
property has been appropriated by law or ordinance.
Art. 221. Failure to make delivery of public funds or property-

committed by any public officer who is under obligation to make
payment from government funds in his possession, who shall fail to
make such payment.
It is also committed by a public officer who is ordered by

competent authority to deliver any property in his custody or under his
administration, shall refuse to make such delivery.
Note: Under Art 222, even private individuals may be held liable
under the provisions of Articles 217 to 221 if:
1. He is in charge of any national, provincial, municipal funds,
revenue or property.
59

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
2. He is the administrator or depository of funds or property,

attached, seized or deposited by public authority, even if such
property belongs to a private individual.
Art. 223. Conniving with or consenting to evasion - committed by

any public officer who shall consent to the escape of a prisoner in his
custody or charge.
Elements:
2. He had in his custody a detention prisoner or a prisoner convicted
by final judgment;
3. The prisoner escaped from his custody; and
4. He was in connivance with the prisoner in the latter’s escape.
Art. 224. Evasion through negligence- committed by a public officer

who is charged with the custody or conveyance of a prisoner and the
prisoner escaped through his negligence.
Art. 225. Escape of prisoner under the custody of a person not a

public officer- committed by any private person to whom the
conveyance or custody of a prisoner or person under arrest shall
have been confide4d, who shall commit any of the offenses
mentioned in the two preceding articles.
Art. 226. Removal, concealment or destruction of documents-

committed by a public officer to the damage of a third party or the
public interest shall remove, destroy or conceal documents or papers
officially entrusted to him.
Art. 227. Officer breaking seal- committed by any public officer

charged with the custody of papers or property sealed by proper
authority, which shall break the seals or permit them to be broken.
Art. 228. Opening of closed documents- committed by any public

officer who without proper authority, shall open or shall permit to be
opened any closed papers, documents, or objects entrusted to his
custody.
Art. 229. Revelation of secrets by public officer
Acts punishable:
1. Revealing any secrets known to the public officer by reason of his
official duty.
2. Delivering wrongful papers or copies of papers which he may have
charge and which should not be published.
60

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 230. Public officer revealing secrets of private individual-

committed by any public officer to whom the secrets of private
individual shall become known by reason of his office who shall
reveal such secrets.
Art. 231. Open disobedience- committed by any judicial or executive

officer who shall openly refuse to execute the judgment, decision or
order o\f any superior authority made within the scope of jurisdiction
of the latter and issued with all legal formalities.
Art. 232. Disobedience to order of superior officer when said

order was suspended by inferior officer- committed by a public
officer, who has suspended the execution of the orders of his
superior, shall disobey such superiors after the latter have
disapproved the suspension.
Art. 233. Refusal of assistance- committed by a public officer, who

to the damage of the public interest or to a third person, upon
demand from competent authority, shall fail to lend his cooperation
towards the administration of justice or other public service.
Art. 234. Refusal to discharge elective office - committed by any

person who, having been elected by election, shall refuse without
legal motive to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of said office.
Art. 235. Maltreatment of prisoners. Committed by any public officer

or employee who shall:
1. Overdo himself in the correction or handling of a prisoner or
detention prisoner under his charge by:
a. imposing punishment not authorized by regulations or
b. inflicting authorized punishment in a cruel and
humiliating manner.
2. Maltreat a prisoner to extort a confession or to obtain some

information.
Art. 236. Anticipation of duties of a public office- committed by

any person who shall assume the performance of the duties and
powers of any public office or employment without first being sworn in
or having given the bond required by law.
Art. 237. Prolonging performance of duties and powers-

committed by a public officer who shall continue to exercise the
duties and powers of his office, employment or commission beyond
the period provided by law or regulations.
61

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 238. Abandonment of office or position - committed by any

public officer who, before, the acceptance of his resignation, shall
abandon his office to the detriment of the public service.
Art. 239. Usurpation of legislative powers- committed by a public

officer who shall encroach the powers of the legislative branch of the
government by making rules and regulations beyond the scope of his
authority, or by attempting to repeal a law or suspending its
execution.
Art. 240. Usurpation of executive functions- committed by any

judge who shall assume any power pertaining to the executive
authorities, or shall obstruct the latter in the exercise of their powers.
Art. 241. Usurpation of judicial functions- committed by any

officers of the executive branch who shall assume judicial powers or
shall obstruct the execution of any order or decision rendered b7y
any judge within his jurisdiction.
Art. 242. Disobeying request for disqualification- committed by

any public officer, who before the question of jurisdiction is decided,
shall continue any proceeding after having been lawfully required to
refrain from doing so.
Art. 243. Orders or requests by executive officers upon judicial

authority- committed by any executive officers who shall address
any order or suggestion to any judicial authority with respect to any
case or business coming within the exclusive jurisdiction of courts.
Art. 244. Unlawful appointments- committed by any public officer

who shall knowingly nominate or appoint to any public office any
person lacking the legal qualifications therefore.
Art. 245. Abuses against chastity- committed by:

1. Public officer who shall solicit or make immoral or indecent
advances to a woman interested in matters pending before such
officer for decision, or with respect to which he is required to submit a
report to, or consult with a superior officer.
2. Any warden or public officer charged with the care and custody of
prisoners or persons under arrest who shall make or solicit immoral
or indecent advances to a woman under his custody. 14
Republic Act No. 7080

AN ACT DEFINING AND PENALIZING THE CRIME OF PLUNDER
ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH, DEFINED - means any asset, property,

business enterprise or material possession of any person within the
14
62

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
purview of Section two (2) hereof, acquired by him directly or

indirectly through dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or
business associates by any combination or series of the following
means or similar schemes:
1. Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or malversation of

public funds or raids on the public treasury;
2. By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift, share,

percentage, kickbacks or any/or entity in connection with any
government contract or project or by reason of the office or position
of the public officer concerned;
3. By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of assets

belonging to the National government or any of its subdivisions,
agencies or instrumentalities or government-owned or controlled
corporations and their subsidiaries;
4. By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any

shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or participation
including the promise of future employment in any business
enterprise or undertaking;
5. By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial monopolies or

other combinations and/or implementation of decrees and orders
intended to benefit particular persons or special interests; or
6. By taking undue advantage of official position, authority,

relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich himself or
themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the
Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines.
“Sec. 2. Definition of the Crime of PLUNDER; Penalties. – Any

public officer who, by himself or in connivance with members of his
family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business associates,
subordinates or other persons, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-
gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt criminal acts
as described in Section 1 (d) hereof in the aggregate amount or total
value of at least Fifty million pesos (P50,000,000.00) shall be guilty of
the crime of plunder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to
death. Any person who participated with the said public officer in the
commission of an offense contributing to the crime of plunder shall
likewise be punished for such offense. In the imposition of penalties,
the degree of participation and the attendance of mitigating and
63

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
extenuating circumstances, as provided by the Revised Penal Code,

shall be considered by the court. The court shall declare any and all
ill-gotten wealth and their interests and other incomes and assets
including the properties and shares of stocks derived from the
deposit or investment thereof forfeited in favor of the State.”
Sec. 3. Competent Court. Until otherwise provided by law, all

prosecutions under this Act shall be within the original jurisdiction of
the Sandiganbayan.
Sec. 6. Prescription of Crime. The crime punishable under this Act

shall prescribe in twenty (20) years. However, the right of the State to
recover properties unlawfully acquired by public officers from them or
from their nominees or transferees shall not be barred by
prescription, laches, or estoppel.
REPUBLIC ACT No. 3019

ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT
“Receiving any gift, defined” includes the act of accepting directly

or indirectly a gift from a person other than a member of the public
officer’s immediate family, in behalf of himself or of any member of
his family or relative within the fourth civil degree, either by
consanguinity or affinity, even on the occasion of a family celebration
or national festivity like Christmas, if the value of the gift is under the
circumstances manifestly excessive.
Section 3.Corrupt practices of public officers. In addition to acts

or omissions of public officers already penalized by existing law, the
following shall constitute corrupt practices of any public officer and
are hereby declared to be unlawful:
(a) Persuading, inducing or influencing another public officer to

perform an act constituting a violation of rules and regulations duly
promulgated by competent authority or an offense in connection with
the official duties of the latter, or allowing himself to be persuaded,
induced, or influenced to commit such violation or offense.
(b) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present,

share, percentage, or benefit, for himself or for any other person, in
connection with any contract or transaction between the Government
and any other part, wherein the public officer in his official capacity
has to intervene under the law.
(c) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present or

other pecuniary or material benefit, for himself or for another, from
any person for whom the public officer, in any manner or capacity,
has secured or obtained, or will secure or obtain, any Government
64

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
permit or license, in consideration for the help given or to be given,

without prejudice to Section thirteen of this Act.
(d) Accepting or having any member of his family accept employment

in a private enterprise which has pending official business with him
during the pendency thereof or within one year after its termination.
(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government,
or giving any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or
preference in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial
functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross
inexcusable negligence. This provision shall apply to officers and
employees of offices or government corporations charged with the
grant of licenses or permits or other concessions.
(f) Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request, without

sufficient justification, to act within a reasonable time on any matter
pending before him for the purpose of obtaining, directly or indirectly,
from any person interested in the matter some pecuniary or material
benefit or advantage, or for the purpose of favoring his own interest
or giving undue advantage in favor of or discriminating against any
other interested party.
(g) Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any contract or

transaction manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to the same,
whether or not the public officer profited or will profit thereby.
(h) Director or indirectly having financing or pecuniary interest in any

business, contract or transaction in connection with which he
intervenes or takes part in his official capacity, or in which he is
prohibited by the Constitution or by any law from having any interest.
(i) Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for personal gain, or

having a material interest in any transaction or act requiring the
approval of a board, panel or group of which he is a member, and
which exercises discretion in such approval, even if he votes against
the same or does not participate in the action of the board,
committee, panel or group.
Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against those public

officers responsible for the approval of manifestly unlawful,
inequitable, or irregular transactions or acts by the board, panel or
group to which they belong.
(j) Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit, privilege or

benefit in favor of any person not qualified for or not legally entitled to
such license, permit, privilege or advantage, or of a mere
representative or dummy of one who is not so qualified or entitled.
65

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
(k) Divulging valuable information of a confidential character,

acquired by his office or by him on account of his official position to
unauthorized persons, or releasing such information in advance of its
authorized release date.
The person giving the gift, present, share, percentage or benefit

referred to in subparagraphs (b) and (c); or offering or giving to the
public officer the employment mentioned in subparagraph (d); or
urging the divulging or untimely release of the confidential information
referred to in subparagraph (k) of this section shall, together with the
offending public officer, be punished under Section nine of this Act
and shall be permanently or temporarily disqualified in the discretion
of the Court, from transacting business in any form with the
Government.
Section 4. Prohibition on private individuals. (a) It shall be

unlawful for any person having family or close personal relation with
any public official to capitalize or exploit or take advantage of such
family or close personal relation by directly or indirectly requesting or
receiving any present, gift or material or pecuniary advantage from
any other person having some business, transaction, application,
request or contract with the government, in which such public official
has to intervene. Family relation shall include the spouse or relatives
by consanguinity or affinity in the third civil degree. The word “close
personal relation” shall include close personal friendship, social and
fraternal connections, and professional employment all giving rise to
intimacy which assures free access to such public officers.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to induce or cause

any public official to commit any of the offenses defined in Section 3
hereof.
Section 5. Prohibition on certain relatives. It shall be unlawful for

the spouse or for any relative, by consanguinity or affinity, within the
third civil degree, of the President of the Philippines, the Vice-
President of the Philippines, the President of the Senate, or the
Speaker of the House of Representatives, to intervene, directly or
indirectly, in any business, transaction, contract or application with
the Government: Provided, That this section shall not apply to any
person who, prior to the assumption of office of any of the above
officials to whom he is related, has been already dealing with the
Government along the same line of business, nor to any transaction,
contract or application already existing or pending at the time of such
assumption of public office, nor to any application filed by him the
approval of which is not discretionary on the part of the official or
officials concerned but depends upon compliance with requisites
provided by law, or rules or regulations issued pursuant to law, nor to
any act lawfully performed in an official capacity or in the exercise of
a profession.
66

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Section 7. Statement of assets and liabilities. Every public officer,

within thirty days after the approval of this Act or after assuming
office, and thereafter, on or before the fifteenth day of April following
the close of every calendar year, as well as upon the expiration of his
term of office, or upon his resignation or separation from office, shall
prepare and file with the office of the corresponding Department
Head, or in the case of a Head of Department or Chief of an
independent office, with the Office of the President, a true, detailed
and sworn statement of assets and liabilities, including a statement of
the amounts and sources of his income, the amounts of his personal
and family expenses and the amount of income taxes paid for the
next preceding calendar year:
Section 8. Dismissal due to unexplained wealth. If in accordance

with the provisions of Republic Act Numbered One thousand three
hundred seventy-nine, a public official has been found to have
acquired during his incumbency, whether in his name or in the name
of other persons, an amount of property and/or money manifestly out
of proportion to his salary and to his other lawful income, that fact
shall be a ground for dismissal or removal. Properties in the name of
the spouse and unmarried children of such public officials may be
taken into consideration, when their acquisition through legitimate
means cannot be satisfactorily shown.
Section 9. Penalties for violations. (a) Any public officer or private

person committing any of the unlawful acts or omissions enumerated
in Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of this Act shall be punished with
imprisonment for not less than six years and one month nor more
than fifteen years, perpetual disqualification from public office, and
confiscation or forfeiture in favor of the Government of any prohibited
interest and unexplained wealth manifestly out of proportion to his
salary and other lawful income.
Section 10. Competent court. Until otherwise provided by law, all

prosecutions under this Act shall be within the original jurisdiction of
the Sandiganbayan. (As amended by BP 195, March 16, 1982.)
Section 11. Prescription of offenses. All offenses punishable under

this Act shall prescribe in ten years.
Section 12.Termination of office. No public officer shall be allowed

to resign or retire pending an investigation, criminal or administrative,
or pending a prosecution against him, for any offense under this Act
or under the provisions of the Revised Penal Code on bribery.
Section 14. Exception. Unsolicited gifts or presents of small or

insignificant value offered or given as a mere ordinary token of
gratitude or friendship according to local customs or usage, shall be
excepted from the provisions of this Act.
67

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Presidential Decree No. 46

MAKING IT PUNISHABLE FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND
EMPLOYEES TO RECEIVE, AND FOR PRIVATE PERSONS TO
GIVE, GIFTS ON ANY OCCASION, INCLUDING CHRISTMAS
It is punishable for any public official or employee, whether of the

national or local governments, to receive, directly or indirectly, and for
private persons to give, or offer to give, any gift, present or other
valuable thing to any occasion, including Christmas, when such
gift, present or other valuable thing is given by reason of his official
position, regardless of whether or not the same is for past favor or
favors or the giver hopes or expects to receive a favor or better
treatment in the future from the public official or employee concerned
in the discharge of his official functions. Included within the
prohibition is the throwing of parties or entertainments in honor of the
official or employees or his immediate relatives.
For violation of this Decree, the penalty of imprisonment for not less
than one (1) year nor more than five (5) years and perpetual
disqualification from public office shall be imposed.
TITLE 8- CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
Art. 246. Parricide. – Any person who shall kill his father, mother or
child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of his ascendants, or
descendants, or his spouse, shall be guilty of parricide and shall be
punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death.
Elements:
1. A person is killed;
2. Accused killed the deceased; and
3. The deceased is the legitimate or illegitimate father, mother or
child, or legitimate ascendant or legitimate descendant or
legitimate spouse of the accused.
Art. 247. Death or physical Injuries inflicted under exceptional

circumstances. - Any legally married person who, having surprised
his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another
person, shall kill any of them or both of them in the act or immediately
thereafter, shall inflict upon them any serious physical injury shall
suffer the penalty of destierro.
If he shall inflict upon them physical injuries of any other kind
he shall be exempted from punishment.
68

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
These rules shall be applicable, under the same circumstance,

to parents, with respect to their daughters under 18 years of age, and
their seducer, while the daughters are living with their parents.
Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution of his
wife or daughter, or shall otherwise have consented to the infidelity of
the other spouse shall not be entitled to the benefits of this article.
Art. 248. Murder - Any person, who, not falling within the provisions
of Article 246, shall kill another, shall be guilty of murder and shall be
punished by reclusion perpetua to death if committed with any of the
following attendant circumstances.
a. With treachery
b. Taking advantage of superior strength
c. With the aid of armed men
d. Employing means to weaken defense
e. Employing means or persons to insure or afford impunity
f. In consideration of price reward or promise
g. By means of inundation
h. By means of fire
i. By means of poison
j. By means of explosion
k. By means of shipwreck
l. By means of stranding of a vessel
m. By means of derailment or assault upon a railroad
n. By means of fall of an airship
o. By means of motor vehicle
p. By the use of other means involving great waste and ruin
q. On the occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in letters g-
p.
r. On the occasion of an earthquake
s. On the occasion of eruption of volcano
t. On the occasion of destructive cyclone
u. On the occasion of epidemic
v. On the occasion of any other public calamity
w. With evident premeditation
x. With cruelty (by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the
suffering of the victim)
y. By outraging or scoffing at the person or corpse of a person.
Elements:
1. A person was killed;
2. The accused killed the deceased;
3. The killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstance
mentioned in article 248; and
4. The killing is not parricide, infanticide or homicide.
* Treachery must be alleged in the information so that it will qualify

the killing to murder.
69

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
* If treachery is not alleged in the information which charges

murder, but in the trial treachery was proven, the accused cannot
be convicted of murder. Homicide only would be the crime
* The act of Euthanasia or mercy Killing is considered as
murder. It is the practice of putting to death a person who is
suffering from some incurable disease. It may also be defined as
the acceleration of the death of a person who suffers from some
incurable disease.
Art. 249. Homicide- is a crime committed by any person who shall kill
another without the attendance of any of the circumstances
mentioned in article 248.15
Homicide, defined- the unlawful killing of another but which is not

parricide, murder or infanticide.
Elements:
1. A person was killed;
2. The accused killed the deceased;
3. The accused had the intent to kill;
4. The killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances
mentioned in article 248; and
5. The killing is not infanticide or parricide.
Accidental homicide, defined- This is a homicide that results

when the death of a person is brought about by a lawful act
performed with proper care and skill and absence of criminal
intent.
In People vs. Pugay 167 SCRA 439, the accused set on fire a
retard victim out of frolic and merrymaking. The Supreme Court
convicted him of Homicide thru Reckless Imprudence
Article 251. Death caused in a tumultuous affray.-

● At least four (4) persons must take part in the affray.
● There would be no tumultuous affray if the quarrel is between
two well known groups.
Tumultuous affray
It is one which takes place when a quarrel occurs among several
persons not composed of organized groups, and these persons
assault each other in a confused and tumultuous manner. It takes
place when a quarrel occurs between several persons who engaged
in a confused and tumultuous manner, in the course of which a
person is killed or wounded and the author thereof cannot be
ascertained.
15
70

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Article 252. Physical injuries in a tumultuous affray-
Article 253.Giving assistance to suicide- is committed by any

person who shall assist another to commit suicide, or lending his
assistance to another to the extent of doing the killing himself.
● One who commits or attempts to commit suicide is not liable
under the law. Nullum Crimen Nulla Poena sine lege.
Example: A pregnant woman attempted to commit suicide by

drinking poison. Instead of her dying, it was the unborn child who
died. Is the pregnant woman liable for the death of her unborn child?
Art. 254. (Illegal) Discharge of firearm - is committed by any

person who shall shoot at another with any firearm.
Elements of Discharge of Firearm:
1. A person discharges a firearm against another person; and

2. The offender has no intent to kill that person.
Art. 255. Infanticide- is the killing of a child less than three (3) days
old.
Elements of infanticide:
1. A child less than 3 days old (72 hours old or less) is killed; and
2. The accused killed said child.
Difference between Infanticide, Parricide, Murder and Homicide

INFANTICIDE PARRICIDE MURDER HOMICIDE
That a child That a person That a person That a person
was killed. is killed. was killed. was killed.
That the That the That the That the
deceased child deceased is accused killed accused killed
was less than killed by the him. him without any
three days accused. justifying
(72 hours) of circumstances.
age.
That the That the That the killing That the
accused killed deceased is the was attended accused had
the said child. father, mother, by any of the the intention to
or child, following kill, which is
whether qualifying presumed.
legitimate or circumstances
illegitimate, or a .
legitimate other
ascendant or
71

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
other
descendant, or
the legitimate
spouse of the
accused.
The killing is That the killing
not parricide was not
nor attended by any
infanticide. of the
qualifying
circumstances
of murder, or
by that of
parricide or
infanticide.
Art. 256. Intentional abortion- is committed by any person who shall

intentionally cause an abortion by:
1. using violence upon the person of the pregnant woman; or
2. acting without the consent of the woman but without using
violence;
3. acting with the consent of the woman
Elements:
1. Violence is exerted, or any drugs or beverages be administered or
the accused acts upon a pregnant woman;
2. As a result thereof, the fetus dies, in the womb or after having
been expelled therefrom; and
3. The act is intended.
Art. 257. Unintentional abortion- committed by any person who

shall cause an abortion by violence, but unintentionally
Elements:
1. There is a pregnant woman;
2. Violence is used against the woman but without intending an
abortion;
3. The violence is intentionally exerted; and
4. Fetus died.
● If there is no violence used; No intent to cause an abortion-

there is no abortion of any kind.
Art. 259. Abortion practiced by woman herself or by her

parents- this is committed by a woman who shall practice an
abortion upon herself or shall consent that any other person
should do so.
72

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 260. Abortion practiced by a physician or midwife and

dispensing of abortives. - is committed by a doctor or physician
who shall cause an abortion or assist in causing the same. Also a
pharmacist who without proper prescription from a physician shall
dispense any abortive.
Art. 260. Responsibility of participants in a duel.

Duel, defined- is a combat agreed between two parties in the
presence of seconds who makes the selection of arms.
LIABILITIES IN A DUEL
If the adversary is killed Reclusion temporal
Physical Injuries Consult Article 263 -266
No physical injuries whatsoever Both combatants shall suffer
was committed arresto mayor
Liability of seconds They are considered as
accomplices
Art. 261. Challenging to a duel- committed by any person who shall

challenge another, or incite another to give or accept a challenge to a
duel, or shall scoff at or decry another publicly for refusing to accept a
challenge to fight a duel.
Art. 262. Mutilation- committed by any person who shall intentionally

mutilate another by depriving him, either totally or partially, of some
essential organ of reproduction. Any other intentional mutilation is
also punished (known as mayhem).
Art. 263. Serious Physical Injuries- committed by any person who

shall wound, beat or assault another causing the offended party to
become:
1. insane, imbecile, impotent or blind;
2. the person injured has lost the use of speech, or the power to
hear or smell, or losses an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg
or shall have lost the use of such member, or shall have
become incapacitated for work which he was habitually
engaged.
3. deformed, lost any part of his body, or use thereof, or ill or
incapacitated for work he was habitually engaged for 90 days;
4. ill or incapacitated for labor for more than 30 days.
Art. 264. Administering injurious substances or beverages-

committed by any person who without intent to kill, shall inflict upon
another any serious physical injury, by knowingly administering to him
any injurious substances or beverages or by taking advantage of his
weakness of mind or credulity.
73

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Elements:
1. Offender inflicted any serious physical injuries;
2. By knowingly administering any injurious substances or
beverages; and
3. Accused had no intent to kill.
Art. 265. Less serious physical injuries- committed by any person

who shall inflict injuries upon another which shall incapacitate the
offended party for labor for 10 days or more, or shall require medical
attendance for the same period.
Art. 266. Slight Physical Injuries- committed by any person who

shall inflict physical injury upon another which shall incapacitate
another for labor from 1-9 days or shall require medical attendance
for the same period or any injury which does not prevent the offended
party from engaging in his habitual work nor require medical
attendance, or shall ill treat another by deed without causing any
injury (maltreatment).
Art. 266. Rape- is committed

1. by a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under
any of the following circumstances:
a. through force or intimidation;
b. woman is deprived of reason or unconscious;
c. fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority;
d. offended party is under 12 or is demented
2. By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned

in par. 1 shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his
penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice, or any
instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another
person.16
● RA 8353- October 22, 1997
Q: What are the qualifying/aggravating circumstances in the

crime of rape?17
A: If committed under any of the following circumstances:
1. When the victim is under 18 years of age and the offender is a
parent, ascendant, step parent, guardian relative within the 3 rd
degree, or the common law spouse of the parent of the victim.
2. When the victim is under the custody of the police or military
authorities or any law enforcement or penal institution
3. When the rape is committed in full view of the spouse, parent,
any of the children or other relatives within the 3 rd degree of
consanguinity
16
17
74

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
4. When the victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious

vocation personally known by the offender
5. When the victim is below 7
6. When the offender knows that he is afflicted with HIV or AIDS
7. When committed by any member of the AFP or paramilitary
units or PNP or any law enforcement agency or penal
institution.
8. When the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party
9. When the offender knew of the mental disability, emotional
disorder or physical handicap of the offended party.
● People vs. Cabalquinto

● People vs. Baleros
Q: What consummates the crime of rape?

A: The slightest penetration of the labia consummates the crime
of rape. The absence of sperm is not important. It is enough that
the labia of the female organ was penetrated.
Q: What is statutory rape?

A: The rape of a woman under 12 years of age.
Q: What is the “rape shield” concept in the crime of rape?

A: It means, in a prosecution for rape, evidence of complainants past
sexual conduct, opinions, and his or her reputation shall not be
admitted, unless the court finds it material.
Art. 266-C Effect of pardon - the subsequent valid marriage between

the parties shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed.
The forgiveness by the wife shall extinguish the criminal action or the
penalty.
Q: May a husband be guilty of rape against his own wife?

A: Yes.
RA 9775
AN ACT DEFINING THE CRIME OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY,
PRESCRIBING PENALTIES THEREFOR AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES
SECTION 1.Short Title. – This Act shall be known as the “Anti-

Child Pornography Act of 2009”.
SEC. 3.Definition of Terms. –
(a) “Children” refers to persons below eighteen (18) years of age or

those over but are unable to fully take care of themselves or protect
75

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination

because of a physical or mental disability or condition.
For the purpose of this Act, a child shall also refer to:
(1) a person regardless of age who is presented, depicted or believed

to be a child as defined herein; and
(2) a computer-generated, digitally or manually crafted images or

graphics of a person who is represented or who is made to appear to
be a child as defined herein.
(b) “Child pornography” refers to any public or

private representation, by whatever means, of a child engaged in
real or simulated explicit sexual activities or any representation of the
sexual parts of a child for primarily sexual purposes.
(c) “Child pornography materials” refers to the means

and methods by which child pornography is carried out:
(1) As to form:
(i) Visual depiction – which includes not only images of real

children but also digital image, computer image or computer-
generated image that is indistinguishable from that of real children
engaging in an explicit sexual activity. Visual depiction shall include:
(aa) undeveloped film and videotapes;
(bb) data and/or images stored on a computer disk or by

electronic means capable of conversion into a visual image;
(cc) photograph, film, video, picture, digital image or picture,

computer image or picture, whether made or produced by
electronic, mechanical or other means;
(dd) drawings, cartoons, sculptures or paintings depicting children; or
(ee) other analogous visual depiction; or
(ii) Audio representation of a person who is or is represented as

being a child and who is engaged in or is represented as being
engaged in explicit sexual activity, or an audio representation that
advocates, encourages or counsels any sexual activity with children
which is an offense under this Act.
Such representation includes audio recordings and live audio

transmission conveyed through whatever medium including real-time
internet communications; or
76

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
(iii) Written text or material that advocates or counsels explicit

sexual activity with a child and whose dominant characteristic is
the description, for a sexual purpose, of an explicit sexual activity
with a child.
(2) As to content:
(i) It includes representation of a person who is, appears to be, or is

represented as being a child, the dominant characteristic of which is
the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of:
(aa) the sexual organ or the anal region, or a representation thereof;

or
(bb) the breasts, or a representation of the breasts, of a female

person.
(d) “Explicit sexual activity” refers to actual or simulated –
(1) Sexual intercourse or lascivious act including, but not limited

to, contact involving genital to genital, oral to genital, anal to genital
or oral to anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite
sex;
(2) Bestiality;
(3) Masturbation;
(4) Sadistic or masochistic abuse;
(5) Exhibition of the genitals, buttocks, breast, pubic area and/or

anus; or
(6) Use of any object or instrument for lascivious acts.
SEC. 4.Unlawful or Prohibited Acts. – It shall be unlawful for a

person to commit any of the following acts:
(a) To hire, employ, use, persuade, induce or coerce a child to

perform in the creation or production of child pornography;
(b) To produce, direct, manufacture or create any form of

child pornography and child pornography materials;
(c) To sell, offer, advertise and promote child pornography and

child pornography materials;
(d) To possess, download, purchase, reproduce or make available

child pornography materials with the intent of selling or distributing
them;
77

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
(e) To publish, post, exhibit, disseminate, distribute, transmit

or broadcast child pornography or child pornography materials;
(f) To knowingly possess, view, download, purchase or in any

way take steps to procure, obtain or access for personal use child
pornography materials; and
(g) To attempt to commit child pornography by luring or grooming

a child.
SEC. 7.Duty to Provide Blocking System or Software. – The

following shall also have the duty to install blocking system or
software to prevent transmittal of or access to the child pornography
materials:
(a) Internet café establishments;
(b) Private and public educational institutions;
(c) Public and private offices; and
(d) Service providers such as telephone companies and others.
SEC. 8. Duty to Report.– Photo developers, information

technology (IT) professionals, credit card companies and banks, and
any person who has direct knowledge of any child pornography
activities shall have the duty to report any suspected child
pornography materials or transactions to the proper authorities within
seven (7) days from discovery thereof.
SEC. 9. Facilitating Unlawful or Prohibited Acts. – It shall be

unlawful for a person to knowingly facilitate the commission of any of
the prohibited or unlawful acts under any of the provisions of this Act.
SEC. 10. Providing Venue for Commission of Prohibited Acts. –

It shall be unlawful for a person to knowingly, willfully and
intentionally provide a venue for the commission of prohibited acts
such as, but not limited to, dens, private rooms, cubicles in Internet
cafes, cinemas, secluded areas in residential houses or in
establishments purporting to be a legitimate business.
REPUBLIC ACT No. 8049

AN ACT REGULATING HAZING AND OTHER FORMS OF
INITIATION RITES IN FRATERNITIES, SORORITIES, AND
ORGANIZATIONS AND PROVIDING PENALTIES THEREFORE
78

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
SECTION 1. HAZING DEFINED is an initiation rite or practice as a

prerequisite for admission into membership in a fraternity, sorority or
organization by placing the recruit, neophyte or applicant in some
embarrassing or humiliating situations such as forcing him/her to do
menial, silly, foolish and similar tasks or activities or otherwise
subjecting him/her to physical or psychological suffering or injury.
The term organization shall include any club or the Armed Forces of
the Philippines, Philippine National Police, Philippine Military
Academy, or cadet corps of the Citizens Military Training, or Citizens
Army Training. The physical, mental and psychological testing and
training procedure and practices to determine and enhance the
physical, mental and psychological fitness of prospective regular
members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine
National Police as approved by the secretary of National Defense
and the National Police Commission duly recommended by the Chief
of Staff, Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Director General of
the Philippine National Police shall not be considered as hazing for
the purpose of this act.
SECTION 2. No hazing or initiation rites in any form or manner by

a fraternity, sorority or organization shall be allowed without prior
written notice to the school authorities or head of organization seven
(7) days before the conduct of such initiations. The written notice
shall indicate the period of the initiation activities which shall not
exceed three (3) days, shall include the names of those to be
subjected to such activities, and shall further contain an undertaking
that no physical violence be employed by anybody during such
initiation rites.
SECTION 3. The head of the school or organization or their

representatives must assign at least two (2) representatives of the
school or organization, as the case may be, to be present during
initiation. It is the duty of such representatives to see to it that no
physical harm of any kind shall be inflicted upon a recruit, neophyte
or applicant.
SECTION 4. If the person subjected to hazing or other forms of

initiation rites suffers any physical injury or dies as a result thereof,
the officers and members of the fraternity, sorority or organization
who actually participated in the infliction of physical harm shall be
liable as principals.
The owner of the place where the hazing is conducted shall be liable
as an accomplice, when he/she has actual knowledge of the hazing
conducted therein but failed to take any action to prevent the same
from occurring. If the hazing is held in the home of one of the officers
or members of the fraternity, sorority, group, or organization, the
parent shall be held liable as principals when they have actual
79

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
knowledge of the hazing conducted therein but failed to take any

action to prevent the same from occurring.
The school authorities including faculty members who consent to the

hazing or who have actual knowledge thereof, but failed to take any
action to prevent the same from occurring shall be punished as
accomplices for the acts of hazing committed by the perpetrators.
The presence of any person during the hazing is prima facie

evidence of participation therein as a principal unless he prevented
the commission of the acts punishable herein.
Any person charged under this provision should not be entitled to the
mitigating circumstances that there was no intention to commit so
grave a wrong.
80

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
TITLE 9- CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY AND

SECURITY
Art. 267- KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION
Elements:
1. Offender is a private individual
2. He kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner deprives
the latter of his liberty
3. The act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal
4. That in the commission of the offense, any of the following
circumstances are present (becomes serious)
a. that the kidnapping/detention lasts for more than 3 days
b. that it is committed simulating public authority
c. that any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person
kidnapped or detained or threats to kill him are made, or
d. that the person kidnapped or detained is a minor (except if
parent is the offender), female or a public officer
Note: When death penalty is imposed:

a. If kidnapping is committed for the purpose of extorting ransom
either from the victim or from any other person even if none of
the aforementioned are present in the commission of the
offense (even if none of the circumstances are present)
b. When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of the
detention or is raped or is subjected to torture or dehumanizing
acts
Illustration:
If a private person commits the crime of kidnapping or
serious illegal detention, even though a public officer conspires
therein, the crime cannot be arbitrary detention. As far as that
public officer is concerned, the crime is also illegal detention.
In the actual essence of the crime, when one says kidnapping,

this connotes the idea of transporting the offended party from one
place to another. When you think of illegal detention, it connotes the
idea that one is restrained of his liberty without necessarily
transporting him from one place to another.
The crime of kidnapping is committed if the purpose of the

offender is to extort ransom either from the victim or from any other
person. But if a person is transported not for ransom, the crime can
be illegal detention. Usually, the offended party is brought to a place
other than his own, to detain him there.
81

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
When one thinks of kidnapping, it is not only that of transporting

one person from one place to another. One also has to think of the
criminal intent.
Forcible abduction -- If a woman is transported from one place to

another by virtue of restraining her of her liberty, and that act is
coupled with lewd designs.
Serious illegal detention – If a woman is transported just to restrain

her of her liberty. There is no lewd design or lewd intent.
Grave coercion – If a woman is carried away just to break her will, to

compel her to agree to the demand or request by the offender. If a
woman is carried against her will but without lewd design on the part
of the offender, the crime is grave coercion.
Difference between illegal detention and arbitrary detention

Illegal detention is committed by a private person who
kidnaps, detains, or otherwise deprives another of his liberty. Arbitrary
detention is committed by a public officer who detains a person
without legal grounds.
When the person is deprived of his liberty or is seized and

forcibly taken to another place, the inquiry would, be what is the
purpose of the offender in taking him or her away:
1. If the seizure is only to facilitate the killing of the victim the crime
committed would either be homicide or murder and the crime of
kidnapping is absorbed.
2. If the seizure or deprivation of liberty is only to compel the victim
to perform an act, be it right or wrong, the crime committed would
only be grave coercion. (People vs. Astorga, 283 SCRA 420).
3. If the deprivation of liberty is to take away the victim to satisfy the
lewd design of the offender, the crime would only be forcible
abduction.
4. If the seizure of the victim is solely to deprive him of his liberty, the
crime is illegal detention.
In the penultimate paragraph of Article 267, there is deprivation of

liberty but not for any for the purposes enumerated above. It is for the
purpose of extorting ransom from the victim or from any other person.
The law classifies the crime committed by the offender as serious
illegal detention even if none of the circumstances to make it serious
is present in the commission of the crime. In this particular mode of
committing the crime of serious illegal detention, demand for ransom
is an indispensable element. (People vs. Bustamante, G. R. No.
66427, Dec. 4, 1991)
82

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
If the victim was not kidnapped or taken away but was restrained
and deprived of his liberty, like in the case of a hostage incident
where the accused, who was one of the occupants of the house,
grabbed a child, poked a knife on the latter’s neck, called for media
people and demanded a vehicle from the authorities which he could
use in escaping, as it turned out that there was an unserved arrest
warrant against him, the proper charge is Serious Illegal Detention
(without kidnapping anymore) but likewise under Article 267 of the
Revised Penal Code.
Where after taking the victim with her car, the accused called the
house of the victim asking for ransom but upon going to their
safehouse saw several police cars chasing them, prompting them to
kill their victim inside the car, there were two crime committed –
Kidnapping for Ransom and Murder, not a complex crime of
Kidnapping with Murder as she was not taken or carried away to be
killed, killing being an afterthought . (People vs. Evanoria, 209 SCRA
577).
Art. 268- SLIGHT ILLEGAL DETENTION
Elements:
1. Offender is a private person;
2. He kidnaps or detains another or in any other manner deprives
him of his liberty / furnished place for the perpetuation of the
crime;
3. That the act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal; and
4. That the crime is committed without the attendant of any of the
circumstances enumerated in Art. 267.
One should know the nature of the illegal detention to know

whether the voluntary release of the offended party will affect the
criminal liability of the offender.
When the offender voluntarily releases the offended party from

detention within three days from the time the restraint of liberty
began, as long as the offender has not accomplished his purposes,
and the release was made before the criminal prosecution was
commenced, this would serve to mitigate the criminal liability of the
offender, provided that the kidnapping or illegal detention is not
serious.
If the illegal detention is serious, however, even if the offender

voluntarily released the offended party, and such release was within
three days from the time the detention began, even if the offender
has not accomplished his purpose in detaining the offended party,
83

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
and even if there is no criminal prosecution yet, such voluntary

release will not mitigate the criminal liability of the offender.
One who furnishes the place where the offended party is being
held generally acts as an accomplice. But the criminal liability in
connection with the kidnapping and serious illegal detention, as well
as the slight illegal detention, is that of the principal and not of the
accomplice.
The prevailing rule now is Asistio v. Judge, which provides that

voluntary release will only mitigate criminal liability if crime was slight
illegal detention. If serious, it has no effect.
Ransom Defined
It is the money, price or consideration paid or demanded for
redemption of a captured person or persons, a payment that releases
a person from captivity.
Art. 269- UNLAWFUL ARREST
Elements:
1. That the offender arrests or detains another person;
2. That the purpose of the offender is to deliver him to the proper
authorities; and
3. That the arrest or detention is not authorized by law or there is no
reasonable ground therefor.
Notes:
1. Offender is any person, so either a public officer or private
individual
The offender in this article can be a private individual or public

officer. In the latter case, the offender, being a public officer, has the
authority to arrest and detain a person, but the arrest is made without
legal grounds. For him to be punished under this article, the public
officer must make the arrest and detention without authority to do so;
or without acting in his official capacity.
This felony consists in making an arrest or detention without
legal or reasonable ground for the purpose of delivering the offended
party to the proper authorities.
The offended party may also be detained but the crime is not
illegal detention because the purpose is to prosecute the person
arrested. The detention is only incidental; the primary criminal
intention of the offender is to charge the offended party for a crime he
did not actually commit.
84

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Generally, this crime is committed by incriminating innocent

persons by planting evidence to justify the arrest – a complex crime
results, that is, unlawful arrest through incriminatory machinations
under Article 363.
2. Refers to warrantless arrests

If the arrest is made without a warrant and under circumstances
not allowing a warrantless arrest, the crime would be unlawful arrest.
If the person arrested is not delivered to the authorities, the

private individual making the arrest incurs criminal liability for illegal
detention under Article 267 or 268.
If the offender is a public officer, the crime is arbitrary detention

under Article 124.
If the detention or arrest is for a legal ground, but the public

officer delays delivery of the person arrested to the proper judicial
authorities, then Article 125 will apply.
Note: This felony may also be committed by public officers.
3. In art 125, the detention is for some legal ground while

here, the detention is not authorized by law
4. In art 125, the crime pertains to failure to deliver the person

to the proper judicial authority within the prescribed period
while here, the arrest is not authorized by law
Art. 270- KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO RETURN A MINOR
Elements:
1. That the offender is entrusted with the custody of a minor
person (whether over or under 7 but less than 18 yrs old)
2. That he deliberately fails to restore the said minor to his parents
If any of the foregoing elements is absent, the kidnapping of the
minor will then fall under Article 267.
If the accused is any of the parents, Article 267 does not apply;
Articles 270 and 271 apply.
If the taking is with the consent of the parents, the crime in

Article 270 is committed.
In People v. Generosa, it was held that deliberate failure to

return a minor under one’s custody constitutes deprivation of liberty.
Kidnapping and failure to return a minor is necessarily included in
85

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
kidnapping and serious illegal detention of a minor under Article

267(4).
In People v. Mendoza, where a minor child was taken by the

accused without the knowledge and consent of his parents, it was
held that the crime is kidnapping and serious illegal detention under
Article 267, not kidnapping and failure to return a minor under Article
270.
Art. 271- INDUCING A MINOR TO ABANDON HIS HOME
Elements:
1. That the minor (whether over or under 7) is living in the home of
his parents or guardians or the person entrusted with his
custody
2. That the offender induces a minor to abandon such home
Notes:
The inducement must be actually done with malice and a
determined will to cause damage. (People vs. Paalam, C.A., O.G.
8267-8268). But where the victims abandoned their respective homes
out of an irresponsible spirit of restlessness and adventure, the crime
is not committed.
1. Minor should not leave his home of his own free will
2. Mitigating if by father or mother
The article also punishes the father or mother who commits the
act penalized under the law. This arises when the custody of the
minor is awarded by the court to one of them after they have
separated. The other parent who induces the minor to abandon his
home is covered by this article.
Art. 272- SLAVERY
Elements:
1. That the offender purchases, sells kidnaps or detains a human
being.
2. That the purpose of the offender is to enslave such human
being.
Slavery is the treatment of a human being as a mere property,

stripped of dignity and human rights. The person is reduced to the
level of an ordinary animal, a mere chattel with material value
capable of pecuniary estimation and for which reason, the offender
purchases and sells the same.
86

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
This is distinguished from illegal detention by the purpose. If

the purpose of the kidnapping or detention is to enslave the offended
party, slavery is committed.
The crime is slavery if the offender is not engaged in the

business of prostitution. If he is, the crime is white slave trade under
Article 341.
Art. 273- EXPLOITATION OF CHILD LABOR
Elements:
1. That the offender retains a minor in his service.
2. That it is against the will of the minor.
3. That it is under the pretext of reimbursing himself of a debt
incurred by an ascendant, guardian or person entrusted with
the custody of such minor.
If the minor agrees to serve the accused, no crime is

committed, even if the service is rendered to pay an ascendant’s
alleged debt.
Art. 274- SERVICES RENDERED UNDER COMPULSION IN

PAYMENT OF DEBT
Elements:
1. That the offender compels a debtor to work for him, either as
household servant or farm laborer.
2. That it is against the debtor’s will.
3. That the purpose is to require or enforce the payment of a debt.
Involuntary servitude or service. In this article, no distinction is

made whether the offended is a minor or an adult.
Art. 275- ABANDONMENT OF PERSON IN DANGER AND

ABANDONMENT OF ONE’S OWN VICTIM
Acts punishable:
1. By failing to render assistance to any person whom the offender
finds in an inhabited place wounded or in danger of dying, when
he can render such assistance without detriment to himself, unless
such omission shall constitute a more serious offense
Elements
a. That place is not inhabited.
b. The accused found there a person wounded or in danger of
dying.
87

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
c. The accused can render assistance without detriment to

himself.
d. The accused fails to render assistance.
2. By failing to help or render assistance to another whom the

offender has accidentally wounded or injured
3. By failing to deliver a child, under 7 whom the offender has found
abandoned, to the authorities or to his family, or by failing to take
him to a safe place
Art. 276- ABANDONING A MINOR
Elements:
1. That the offender has the custody of a child.
2. That the child is under seven years of age.
3. That he abandons such a child.
4. That he has no intent to kill the child when the latter is
abandoned.
In order to hold one criminally liable under this article, the

offender must have abandoned the child with deliberate intent. The
purpose of the offender must solely be avoidance of the obligation of
taking care of the minor.
Art. 277- ABANDONMENT OF MINOR BY PERSON ENTRUSTED

WITH HIS CUSTODY; INDIFFERENCE OF PARENTS
Acts punished:
1. By delivering a minor to a public institution or other persons w/o
consent of the one who entrusted such minor to the care of the
offender or, in the absence of that one, without the consent of the
proper authorities.
Elements:
a. That the offender has been charged with the rearing or
education of a minor.
b. That he delivers said minor to a public institution or other
persons.
c. That the one who entrusted such a child to the offender has
not consented to such an act, or if the one who entrusted
such child to the offender is absent; the proper authorities
have not consented to it.
2. By neglecting his (offender’s) children by not giving them
education which their station in life requires and financial condition
permits.
Elements:
88

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
a. That the offender is a parent.

b. That he neglects his children by not giving them education.
c. That his station in life requires such education and his
financial condition permits it.
“Indifference of parents” – while they are financially capable of

supporting the needs of their children, they deliberately neglect to
support the educational requirements of these children through plain
irresponsibility caused by wrong social values.
Art. 278- EXPLOITATION OF MINORS

Acts punished:
1. By causing any boy or girl under 16 to perform any dangerous feat
of balancing, physical strength or contortion, the offender being
any person
2. By employing children under 16 who are not the children or
descendants of the offender in exhibitions of acrobat, gymnast,
rope-walker, diver, or wild-animal tamer or circus manager or
engaged in a similar calling
3. By employing any descendant under 12 in dangerous exhibitions
enumerated in the next preceding paragraph, the offender being
engaged in any of said callings
4. By delivering a child under 16 gratuitously to any person following
any of the callings enumerated in par 2 or to any habitual vagrant
or beggar, the offender being an ascendant, guardian, teacher or
person entrusted in any capacity with the care of such child
5. By inducing any child under 16 to abandon the home of its
ascendants; guardians, curators or teachers to follow any person
engaged in any of the callings mentioned in par 2 or to accompany
any habitual vagrant or beggar, the offender being any person
The offender is engaged in a kind of business that would place

the life or limb of the minor in danger, even though working for him is
not against the will of the minor.
Nature of the Business – This involves circuses which

generally attract children so they themselves may enjoy working there
unaware of the danger to their own lives and limbs.
Age – Must be below 16 years. At this age, the minor is still

growing.
If the employer is an ascendant, the crime is not committed,

unless the minor is less than 12 years old. Because if the employer
is an ascendant, the law regards that he would look after the welfare
and protection of the child; hence, the age is lowered to 12 years.
Below that age, the crime is committed.
89

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
But remember Republic Act No. 7610 (Special Protection of

Children against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination
Act). It applies to minors below 18 years old, not 16 years old as in
the Revised Penal Code. As long as the employment is inimical –
even though there is no physical risk – and detrimental to the child’s
interest – against moral, intellectual, physical, and mental
development of the minor – the establishment will be closed.
Article 278 has no application if the minor is 16 years old and

above. But the exploitation will be dealt with by Republic Act No.
7610.
If the minor so employed would suffer some injuries as a result

of a violation of Article 278, Article 279 provides that there would be
additional criminal liability for the resulting felony.
Art. 280- QUALIFIED TRESPASS TO DWELLING
Elements:
1. That the offender is a private person.
2. That he enters the dwelling of another.
3. That such entrance is against the latter’s will.
Notes:
Dwelling – This is the place that a person inhabits. It includes
the dependencies which have interior communication with the house.
It is not necessary that it be the permanent dwelling of the person.
So, a person’s room in a hotel may be considered a dwelling. It also
includes a room where one resides as a boarder.
1. Qualifying circumstance: if the offense is committed by means
of violence or intimidation, the penalty is higher
2. There must be an opposition to the entry of the accused
If the entry is made in a way not intended for entry, that is
presumed to be against the will of the occupant (example, entry
through a window). It is not necessary that there be a break.
Lack of permission to enter a dwelling does not amount to

prohibition. So, one who enters a building is not presumed to be a
trespasser until the owner tells him to leave the building. In such a
case, if he refuses to leave, then his entry shall now be considered to
have been made without the express consent of the owner. (People
vs. De Peralta, 42 Phil. 69)
Even if the door is not locked, for as long as it is closed, the

prohibition is presumed especially if the entry was done at the late
90

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
hour of the night or at an unholy hour of the day. (U. S. vs. Mesina, 21
Phil. 615)
3. Implied prohibition is present considering the situation – late at

night and everyone’s asleep or entrance was made through the
window
“Against the will” -- This means that the entrance is, either
expressly or impliedly, prohibited or the prohibition is presumed.
Fraudulent entrance may constitute trespass. The prohibition to enter
may be made at any time and not necessarily at the time of the
entrance.
To prove that an entry is against the will of the occupant, it is

not necessary that the entry should be preceded by an express
prohibition, provided that the opposition of the occupant is clearly
established by the circumstances under which the entry is made,
such as the existence of enmity or strained relations between the
accused and the occupant.
4. May be committed even by the owner (as against the actual

occupant)
Difference between qualified trespass to dwelling and violation

of domicile
Unlike qualified trespass to dwelling, violation of domicile may
be committed only by a public officer or employee and the violation
may consist of any of the three acts mentioned in Article 128 – (1)
entering the dwelling against the will of the owner without judicial
order; (2) searching papers or other effects found in such dwelling
without the previous consent of the owner thereof; and (3) refusing to
leave the dwelling when so requested by the owner thereof, after
having surreptitiously entered such dwelling.
5. Not applicable to:

a. entrance is for the purpose of preventing harm to himself, the
occupants or a third person
b. purpose is to render some service to humanity or justice
c. place is a café, tavern etc while open
Art. 281- OTHER FORMS OF TRESPASS
Elements:
1. That the offender enters the closed premises or the fenced estate
of another.
2. That the entrance is made while either of them is uninhabited.
3. That the prohibition to enter be manifest.
4. That the trespasser has not secured the permission of the owner
or the caretaker thereof.
91

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
THREATS AND COERCIONS
Art. 282- GRAVE THREATS
Acts punishable:
1. By threatening another with the infliction upon his person, honor or
property that of his family of any wrong amounting to a crime and
demanding money or imposing any other condition, even though
not unlawful and the offender (Note: threat is with condition)
Elements
a. That the offender threatens another person with the infliction
upon the latter’s person, honor or property, or upon that of
the latter’s family, of any wrong.
b. That such wrong amount to a crime.
c. That there is a demand for money or that any other condition
is imposed, even though not unlawful.
d. That the offender attains his purpose.
2. By making such threat without the offender attaining his purpose

3. By threatening another with the infliction upon his person, honor or
property or that of his family of any wrong amounting to a crime,
the threat not being subject to a condition (Note: threat is without
condition).
Elements
a. That the offender threatens another person with the infliction
upon the latter’s person, honor or property, or upon that of
the latter’s family, of any wrong.
b. That such wrong amount to a crime.
c. That the threat is not subject to a condition
Notes:
Intimidation is an indispensable element in the crime of
threat. The very essence of threat is to sow fear, anxiety and
insecurity in the mind of the offended party. It is done by threatening
to commit the crime upon the person, honor and property of the
offended party. There is a promise of some future harm or injury.
Threat is a declaration of an intention or determination to injure

another by the commission upon his person, honor or property or
upon that of his family of some wrong which may or may not amount
to a crime:
(1)Grave threats – when the wrong is threatened to be inflicted

amounts to a crime. The case falls under Article 282.
92

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
(2)Light threats – if it does not amount to a crime. The case falls

under Article 283.
But even if the harm intended is in the nature of a crime, if

made orally and in the heat of anger and after the oral threat, the
issuer of the threat did not pursue the act, the crime is only other light
threats under Article 285.
To constitute grave threats, the threats must refer to a future

wrong and is committed by acts or through words of such efficiency to
inspire terror or fear upon another. It is, therefore, characterized by
moral pressure that produces disquietude or alarm.
The greater perversity of the offender is manifested when the

threats are made demanding money or imposing any condition,
whether lawful or not, and the offender shall have attained his
purpose. So the law imposes upon him the penalty next lower in
degree than that prescribed for the crime threatened to be committed.
But if the purpose is not attained, the penalty lower by two degrees is
imposed. The maximum period of the penalty is imposed if the
threats are made in writing or through a middleman as they manifest
evident premeditation.
Difference between threat and coercion:

The essence of coercion is violence or intimidation. There is no
condition involved; hence, there is no futurity in the harm or wrong
done.
In threat, the wrong or harm done is future and conditional. In
coercion, it is direct and personal.
Difference between threat and robbery:

(1)As to intimidation – In robbery, the intimidation is actual and
immediate; in threat, the intimidation is future and conditional.
(2)As to the nature of intimidation – In robbery, the intimidation
is personal; in threats, it may be through an intermediary.
(3)As to subject matter – Robbery refers to personal property;
threat may refer to the person, honor or property.
(4)As to intent to gain – In robbery, there is intent to gain; in
threats, intent to gain is not an essential element.
(5)In robbery, the robber makes the danger involved in his threats
directly imminent to the victim and the obtainment of his gain
immediate, thereby also taking rights to his person by the
opposition or resistance which the victim might offer; in threat,
the danger to the victim is not instantly imminent nor the gain of
the culprit immediate.
Art. 283- LIGHT THREATS
93

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Elements:
1. That the offender makes a threat to commit a wrong.
2. That the wrong does not constitute a crime.
3. That there is a demand for money or that other condition is
imposed, even though not unlawful
4. That the offender has attained his purpose or, that he has not
attained his purpose
In order to convict a person of the crime of light threats, the

harm threatened must not be in the nature of crime and there is a
demand for money or any other condition imposed, even though
lawful.
Art. 284- BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR
The law imposes the penalty of bond for good behavior only in
case of grave and light threats. If the offender can not post the bond,
he will be banished by way of destierro to prevent him from carrying
out his threat.
Bond of good behavior means the posting of bond on the part of the
accused in order to guarantee that he will not molest the offended
party. It is in the nature of an additional penalty.
Bond to keep peace under Article 35 is applicable to all cases
and is treated as a distinct penalty. If the sentenced prisoner fails to
give the bond, he shall be detained for a period not exceeding six
months if the crime for which he was convicted is classified as a
grave felony or for a period not exceeding thirty days if convicted for a
light felony.
Art. 285- OTHER LIGHT THREATS
Elements:
1. Person shall threaten another with a weapon, or draw weapon in a
quarrel unless in self-defense.
2. In the heat of anger, a person orally threatens another with some
harm constituting a crime, without persisting in the idea involved in
the threat. Subsequent acts did not persist.
3. Person orally threatens another with harm not constituting a
felony.
In the crime of light threats, there is no demand for money

and the threat made is not planned or done with deliberate intent. So
threats which would otherwise qualify as grave threats, when made in
the heat of anger or which is a product of a spur of the moment are
generally considered as light threats.
Whether it is grave or light threats, the crime is committed even

in the absence of the person to whom the threat is directed.
94

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 286- GRAVE COERCIONS
Elements:
1. That a person prevented another from doing something OR not to
do something against his will, be it right or wrong;
2. That the prevention or compulsion be affected by violence, of
force as would produce intimidation and control the will.
3. That the person that restrained the will and liberty by another had
not the authority of law or the right to do so, or, in other words, that
the restraint shall not be made under authority of law or in the
exercise of any lawful right.
Acts punished
1. Preventing another, by means of violence, threats or intimidation,
from doing something not prohibited by law;
2. Compelling another, by means of violence, threats or intimidation,
to do something against his will, whether it be right or wrong.
In grave coercion, the act of preventing by force must be

made at the time the offended party was doing or was about to do the
act to be prevented.
Grave coercion arises only if the act which the offender
prevented another to do is not prohibited by law or ordinance. If the
act prohibited was illegal, he is not liable for grave coercion.
If a person prohibits another to do an act because the act is a

crime, even though some sort of violence or intimidation is employed,
it would not give rise to grave coercion. It may only give rise to threat
or physical injuries, if some injuries are inflicted. However, in case of
grave coercion where the offended party is being compelled to do
something against his will, whether it be wrong or not, the crime of
grave coercion is committed if violence or intimidation is employed in
order to compel him to do the act. No person shall take the law into
his own hands.
Art. 287- LIGHT COERCIONS
Elements:
1. That the offender must be a creditor.
2. That he seizes anything belonging to his debtor.
3. That the seizure of the thing be accomplished by means of
violence or a display of material force producing intimidation;
4. That the purpose of the offender is to apply the same to the
payment of the debt.
95

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
UNJUST VEXATION
In unjust vexation, any act committed without violence, but
which unjustifiably annoys or vexes an innocent person amounts to
light coercion.
As a punishable act, unjust vexation should include any human
conduct which, although not productive of some physical or material
harm would, however, unjustifiably annoy or vex an innocent person.
It is distinguished from grave coercion under the first paragraph
by the absence of violence.
Art. 288- OTHER SIMILAR COERCIONS
ELEMENTS OF NO. 1
Forcing or compelling, directly or indirectly, or knowingly permitting
the forcing or compelling of the laborer or employee of the offender to
purchase merchandise of commodities of any kind from him;
1. That the offender is any person, agent or officer of any association
or corporation.
2. That he or such firm or corporation has employed laborers or
employees.
3. That he forces or compels, directly or indirectly, or knowingly
permits to be forced or compelled, any of his or its laborers or
employees to purchase merchandise or commodities of any kind
from his or from said firm or corporation.
ELEMENTS OF NO. 2
Paying the wages due his laborer or employee by means of tokens or
objects other than the legal tender currency of the Philippines, unless
expressly requested by such laborer or employee.
1. That the offender pays the wages due a laborer or employee
employed by him by means of tokens or objects.
2. That those tokens or objects are other than the legal tender
currency to the Philippines.
3. That such employee or laborer does not expressly request that he
be paid by means of tokens or objects.
Under the Republic Act No. 602, known as the Minimum Wage Law,
wages of laborers must be paid in legal tender. Accordingly, it is
unlawful to pay the wages of the laborers in the form of promissory
notes, vouchers, coupons, tokens, or any other forms alleged to
represent legal tender.
96

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 289- FORMATION, MAINTENANCE, AND PROHIBITION OF

COMBINATION OF CAPITAL OR LABOR THROUGH
VIOLENCE OR THREATS
Elements:
1. That the offender employs violence or threats, in such a degree as
to compel or force the laborers or employers in the free and legal
exercise of their industry or work
2. The purpose is to organize, maintain or prevent coalitions of
capital or labor, strike of laborers or lockout of employees.
Peaceful picketing is part of the freedom of speech and is not

covered by this article.
Preventing employees or laborers from joining any registered
labor organization is punished under Art. 248 of the Labor Code.
DISCOVERY AND REVELATION OF SECRETS
Art. 290- DISCOVERING SECRETS THROUGH SEIZURE OF

CORRESPONDENCE
Elements:
1. That the offender is a private individual or even a public officer
not in the exercise of his official function,
2. That he seizes the papers or letters of another.
3. That the purpose is to discover the secrets of such another
person.
4. That offender is informed of the contents or the papers or
letters seized.
Art. 291- REVEALING SECRETS WITH ABUSE OF OFFICE
Elements:
1. That the offender is a manager, employee or servant.
2. That he learns the secrets of his principal or master in such
capacity.
3. That he reveals such secrets.
Art. 292- REVELATION OF INDUSTRIAL SECRETS
Elements:
1. That the offender is a person in charge, employee or workman
of a manufacturing or industrial establishment.
2. That the manufacturing or industrial establishment has a secret
of the industry which the offender has learned.
3. That the offender reveals such secrets.
4. That the prejudice is caused to the owner.
97

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
A business secret must not be known to other business

entities or persons. It is a matter to be discovered, known and used
by and must belong to one person or entity exclusively. One who
merely copies their machines from those already existing and
functioning cannot claim to have a business secret, much less, a
discovery within the contemplation of Article 292.
TITLE 10- CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
Art. 293- ROBBERY IN GENERAL
98

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Elements:
1. That there be personal property belonging to another.
2. That there is unlawful taking of that property.
3. That the taking must be with intent to gain, and
4. That there is violence against or intimidation of any person, or
force upon anything.
Notes:
Robbery – This is the taking or personal property belonging to
another, with intent to gain, by means of violence against, or
intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything.
Two kinds of robbery: 1) robbery with violence or intimidation and

2) robbery with force upon things.
1. Belonging to another – person from whom property was taken
need not be the owner, legal possession is sufficient
The property must be personal property and cannot refer to real
property.
2. Name of the real owner is not essential so long as the personal
property taken does not belong to the accused except if crime
is robbery with homicide
3. Taking of personal property – must be unlawful; if given in
trust – estafa
4. As to robbery with violence or intimidation – from the moment
the offender gains possession of the thing even if offender has
had no opportunity to dispose of the same, the unlawful taking
is complete
5. As to robbery with force upon things – thing must be taken out
of the building
6. Intent to gain – presumed from unlawful taking - Intent to gain
may be presumed from the unlawful taking of another’s
property. However, when one takes a property under the claim
of ownership or title, the taking is not considered to be with
intent to gain. (U. S. vs. Manluco, et al., 28 Phil. 360)
7. When there’s no intent to gain but there is violence in the taking
– grave coercion
8. Violence or intimidation must be against the person of the
offended party, not upon the thing
9. General rule: violence or intimidation must be present before
the “taking” is complete, Exception: when violence results in –
homicide, rape, intentional mutilation or any of the serious
physical injuries in par 1 and 2 of art 263, the taking of the
property is robbery complexed with any of these crimes under
art 294, even if taking is already complete when violence was
used by the offender
10. Use of force upon things – entrance to the building by
means described in arts 299 and 302 (offender must enter).
99

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
The other kind of robbery is one that is committed with the use
of force upon anything in order to take with intent to gain, the
personal property of another. The use of force here must refer to the
force employed upon things in order to gain entrance into a building
or a house. (People vs. Adorno, C. A. 40 O. G. 567)
11. When both violence or intimidation and force upon things

concur – it is robbery with violence
Robbery and Theft, compared.

1. Both robbery and theft involve unlawful taking as an element;
2. Both involve personal property belonging to another;
3. In both crimes, the taking is done with intent to gain;
4. In robbery, the taking is done either with the use of violence or
intimidation of person or the employment of force upon things;
whereas in theft, the taking is done simply without the knowledge
and consent of the owner.
Difference between Robbery with violence, Grave Threats and

Grave coercion
Robbery with Grave threats Grave coercion
violence
Intent to gain No intent to gain None
Immediate harm Intimidation; Intimidation (effect) is
promises some immediate and offended party
future harm or is compelled to do something
injury against his will (w/n right or
wrong)
Difference between Robbery and Bribery

Robbery Bribery
X didn’t commit crime but is X has committed a crime and
intimidated to deprive him of his gives money as way to avoid
property arrest or prosecution
Deprived of money thru force or Giving of money is in one
intimidation sense voluntary
Neither Transaction is voluntary and
mutual
Ex. defendant demands payment of
P2.00 with threats of arrest and
prosecution, therefore, robbery
because (a) intent to gain and (b)
immediate harm
ANTI – CARNAPPING ACT ( RA # 6539 )
100

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
“Carnapping” is the taking, with intent to gain, of a motor

vehicle belonging to another without the latter’s consent, or by means
of violence against or intimidation of persons, or by using force upon
things.
Any vehicle which is motorized using the streets which are

public, not exclusively for private use is covered within the concept of
motor vehicle under the Anti-Carnapping Law. A tricycle which is not
included in the enumeration of exempted vehicles under the
Carnapping Law is deemed to be motor vehicle as defined in the law,
the stealing of which comes within its penal sanction.
If the vehicle uses the streets with or without the required

license, the same comes within the protection of the law, for the
severity of the offense is not to be measured by what kind of street or
highway the same is used but by the nature of the vehicle itself and
the case to which it is devoted. (Izon, et al., vs. People, 107 SCRA
118).
Art. 294- ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR

INTIMIDATION OF PERSON
A. Acts punished as robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons
By reason or on occasion of the robbery, the following are
committed:
1. homicide
2. robbery accompanied with rape or intentional mutilation, SPI –
insane, imbecile, impotent or blind
3. SPI – lost the use of speech, hear, smell, eye, hand, foot, arm,
leg, use of any such member, incapacitated for work habitually
engaged in
4. Violence/intimidation shall have been carried to a degree clearly
unnecessary for the crime or when in the cause of its execution
– SPI/deformity, or shall have lost any part of the body or the
use thereof or shall have been ill or incapacitated for the
performance of the work for > 90 days; > 30 days
5. Any kind of robbery with less serious physical injuries or slight
physical injuries
Problem:
A, B, C and D robbed a bank. When they were
about to flee, policemen came, and they traded
shots with them. If one of the policemen was killed,
the offense is Robbery with Homicide. If one of the
robbers was the one killed, the remaining robbers
shall be charged also with Robbery with Homicide.
If a bank employee was the one killed either by the
robbers or by the policemen in the course of the
101

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
latter’s action of arresting or trying to arrest the

robbers, the crime is still Robbery with Homicide.
As long as the criminal intent is to rob, that is, robbery was the
real motive, the offense would still be classified as Robbery with
Homicide even if the killing preceded or was done ahead of the
robbing. (People vs. Tolentino, 165 SCRA 490). Thus, as a member
of the “agaw-armas” gang whose plan and design is to rob a
policeman of his service revolver, but because he fears that said
policeman may beat him to the draw, first shoots the policeman fatally
and only after when the latter lies dead, does he get the gun – the
crime is still considered Robbery with Homicide.
This is a crime against property, and therefore, you contend not

with the killing but with the robbery.
The term “homicide” is used in the generic sense, and the

complex crime therein contemplated comprehends not only robbery
with homicide in its restricted sense, but also with robbery with
murder. So, any kind of killing by reason of or on the occasion of a
robbery will bring about the crime of robbery with homicide even if the
person killed is less than three days old, or even if the person killed is
the mother or father of the killer, or even if on such robbery the
person killed was done by treachery or any of the qualifying
circumstances. In short, there is no crime of robbery with parricide,
robbery with murder, robbery with infanticide – any and all forms of
killing is referred to as homicide.
Illustration 1:
The robbers enter the house. While entering through the
window, one of the robbers stepped on a child less than three days
old. The crime is not robbery with infanticide because there is no
such crime. The word homicide as used in defining robbery with
homicide is used in the generic sense. It refers to any kind of death.
Although it is a crime against property and treachery is an

aggravating circumstance that applies only to crimes against persons,
if the killing in a robbery is committed with treachery, the treachery
will be considered a generic aggravating circumstance because of the
homicide.
When two or more persons are killed during the robbery, such should
be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance.
As long as there is only one robbery, regardless of the persons

killed, you only have one crime of robbery with homicide. Note,
however, that “one robbery” does not mean there is only one taking.
102

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Illustration 2:
Robbers decided to commit robbery in a house, which
turned out to be a boarding house. Thus, there were different
boarders who were offended by parties in the robbery. There is only
one count of robbery. If there were killings done to different boarders
during the robbery being committed in a boarder’s quarter, do not
consider that as separate counts of robbery with homicide because
when robbers decide to commit robbery in a certain house, they are
only impelled by one criminal intent to rob and there will only be one
case of robbery. If there were homicide or death committed, that
would only be part of a single robbery. That there were several
killings done would only aggravate the commission of the crime of
robbery with homicide.
In robbery with homicide as a single indivisible offense, it

is immaterial who gets killed. Even though the killing may have
resulted from negligence, you will still designate the crime as
robbery with homicide.
Illustration 3:
On the occasion of a robbery, one of the offenders placed
his firearm on the table. While they were ransacking the place, one
of the robbers bumped the table. As a result, the firearm fell on the
floor and discharged. One of the robbers was the one killed. Even
though the placing of the firearm on the table where there is no safety
precaution taken may be considered as one of negligence or
imprudence, you do not separate the homicide as one of the products
of criminal negligence. It will still be robbery with homicide, whether
the person killed is connected with the robbery or not. He need not
also be in the place of the robbery.
Note that the person killed need not be one who is identified
with the owner of the place where the robbery is committed or one
who is a stranger to the robbers. It is enough that the homicide was
committed by reason of the robbery or on the occasion thereof.
Illustration 4:
There are two robbers who broke into a house and carried
away some valuables. After they left such a house these two
robbers decided to cut or divide the loot already so that they could go
after them. So while they were dividing the loot the other robber
noticed that the one doing the division was trying to cheat him and so
he immediately boxed him. Now this robber who was boxed then
pulled out his gun and fired at the other one killing the latter. Would
that bring about the crime of robbery with homicide? Yes. Even if the
robbery was already consummated, the killing was still by reason of
the robbery because they quarreled in dividing the loot that is the
subject of the robbery.
103

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Remember also that intent to rob must be proved. But there

must be an allegation as to the robbery not only as to the intention to
rob. If the motive is to kill and the taking is committed thereafter, the
crimes committed are homicide and theft. If the primordial intent of
the offender is to kill and not to rob but after the killing of the victims a
robbery was committed, then there will be two separate crimes.
Illustration 5:
If a person had an enemy and killed him and after killing
him, saw that he had a beautiful ring and took this, the crime
would not be robbery with homicide because the primary
criminal intent is to kill. So, there will be two crimes: one for the
killing and one for the taking of the property after the victim was killed.
Now this would bring about the crime of theft and it could not be
robbery anymore because the person is already dead.
For robbery with homicide to exist, homicide must be committed

by reason or on the occasion of the robbery, that is, the homicide
must be committed “in the course or because of the robbery.”
Robbery and homicide are separate offenses when the homicide is
not committed “on the occasion” or “by reason” of the robbery.
Robbery with homicide need not be committed inside a

building. What constitutes the crime as robbery with homicide is the
killing of a person on the occasion or by reason of the taking of
personal property belonging to another with intent to gain.
The killing on the occasion of robbery may come in

different forms.
1) It may be done by the offender for the purpose of
suppressing evidence, like when the victim is killed because he
happens to know the person of the offender; or
2) When the killing is done in order to prevent or remove any
opposition which the victim may put up as regards the taking of his
personal belongings.
3) The killing may also result from the offender’s defense of his
possession of the stolen goods. 4) Or it may be resorted to by the
offender to facilitate his escape after the commission of the robbery.
Robbery with Rape

a. Intent to commit robbery must precede rape.
b. Prosecution of the crime need not be by the offended party –

fiscal can sign the information.
104

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
c. When rape and homicide co-exist, rape should be considered

as aggravating only and the crime is still robbery with homicide.
The rape committed on the occasion of the robbery is not

considered a private crime because the crime is robbery, which is a
crime against property. So, even though the robber may have
married the woman raped, the crime remains robbery with rape. The
rape is not erased. This is because the crime is against property
which is a single indivisible offense.
If the woman, who was raped on the occasion of the robbery,

pardoned the rapist who is one of the robbers, that would not erase
the crime of rape. The offender would still be prosecuted for the
crime of robbery with rape, as long as the rape is consummated.
If the rape is attempted, since it will be a separate charge and

the offended woman pardoned the offender that would bring about a
bar to the prosecution of the attempted rape. If the offender married
the offended woman, that would extinguish the criminal liability
because the rape is the subject of a separate prosecution.
The intention must be to commit robbery and even if the rape is

committed before the robbery, robbery with rape is committed. But if
the accused tried to rape the offended party and because of
resistance, he failed to consummate the act, and then he snatched
the vanity case from her hands when she ran away, two crimes are
committed: attempted rape and theft.
The Revised Penal Code does not differentiate whether rape

was committed before, during or after the robbery. It is enough that
the robbery accompanied the rape. Robbery must not be a mere
accident or afterthought.
If the two (2) crimes were separated both by time and

place, there is no complex crime of Robbery with Rape. Thus,
when complainant went out of her room about 1:30 a.m. to urinate,
one of the accused grabbed her, poked an icepick on her neck , and
dragged her out of the house and was made to board a taxi; and
before boarding, she saw the two (2) companions of the man carrying
her typewriter and betamax and then joining them in the taxi, and that
after alighting from the taxi, the two (2) companions left her, and the
man who had grabbed her brought her to a motel, where by means of
force and intimidation he was able to have sex with her, the crimes
committed are Robbery and Forcible Abduction with Rape. The Rape
committed cannot be complexed with Robbery. (People vs. Angeles,
222 SCRA 451).
105

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
If rape was the primary objective of the accused and the taking
of her jewelries was not done with intent to gain but as a token of her
supposed consent to the sexual intercourse, the accused is guilty of
two distinct crimes: rape and unjust vexation. (People vs. Villarino, C.
A. G. R. No. 6342-R, Nov. 26, 1951)
d. robbery with intimidation – acts done by the accused which by

their own nature or by reason of the circumstances inspire fear
in the person against whom they are directed
In the taking of personal property, it is necessary that violence

must be employed by the offender in order that the taking may be
considered as robbery. So, where the taking is without violence or
intimidation and the same is complete, but the victim pursued the
offender in order to recover the personal property taken and by the
reason thereof, he suffers less serious or slight physical injuries in the
hands of the offender, the violence employed on the victim which
resulted to his injuries will not convert the taking of his personal
property to robbery. In such a case, the offender is liable for two
crimes, namely, theft and less serious or slight physical injuries.
The intimidation must be present at the time of the taking

before it is completed. If the taking is completed without intimidation
and it is employed by the offender only to prevent the owner from
recovering his stolen property, two crimes are committed by the
offender: theft and grave threat.
If violence is employed against the offended party in order to

deprive him of his personal property and the violence resulted in the
infliction of less serious or slight physical injuries, the crime
committed would only be robbery. Hence, there is no crime of robbery
with less serious or slight injuries. (U. S. vs. Barroga, 21 Phil 161)
On robbery with physical injuries

To be considered as such, the physical injuries must always be
serious. If the physical injuries are only less serious or slight, they
are absorbed in the robbery. The crime becomes merely robbery.
But if the less serious physical injuries were committed after the
robbery was already consummated, there would be a separate
charge for the less serious physical injuries. It will only be absorbed
in the robbery if it was inflicted in the course of the execution of the
robbery. The same is true in the case of slight physical injuries.
Illustration 1:
After the robbery had been committed and the robbers were
already fleeing from the house where the robbery was
committed, the owner of the house chased them and the robbers
106

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
fought back. If only less serious physical injuries were inflicted,

there would be separate crimes: one for robbery and one for
less serious physical injuries.
But if after the robbery was committed and the robbers were already
fleeing from the house where the robbery was committed, the owner
or members of the family of the owner chased them, and they fought
back and somebody was killed, the crime would still be robbery with
homicide. But if serious physical injuries were inflicted and the
serious physical injuries rendered the victim impotent or insane or the
victim lost the use of any of his senses or lost a part of his body, the
crime would still be robbery with serious physical injuries. The
physical injuries (serious) should not be separated regardless of
whether they were retorted in the course of the commission of the
robbery or even after the robbery was consummated.
On robbery with arson

Another innovation of Republic Act No. 7659 is the
composite crime of robbery with arson if arson is committed by
reason of or on occasion of the robbery. The composite crime
would only be committed if the primordial intent of the offender
is to commit robbery and there is no killing, rape, or intentional
mutilation committed by the offender during the robbery.
Otherwise, the crime would be robbery with homicide, or
robbery with rape, or robbery with intentional mutilation, in that
order, and the arson would only be an aggravating
circumstance. It is essential that robbery precedes the arson, as
in the case of rape and intentional mutilation, because the
amendment included arson among the rape and intentional
mutilation which have accompanied the robbery.
Moreover, it should be noted that arson has been made a

component only of robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons in said Article 294, but not of robbery by the use of force
upon things in Articles 299 and 302.
So, if the robbery was by the use of force upon things and
therewith arson was committed, two distinct crimes are committed.
QUALIFIED ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION

Qualifying circumstances in robbery with violence or
intimidation of persons, if any of the offenses defined in subdivisions
3, 4 and 5 of Art 294 is committed:
a. in an uninhabited place or
b. by a band or
c. by attacking a moving train, street car, motor vehicle or airship,
or
107

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
d. by entering the passenger’s compartments in a train, or in any

manner taking the passengers thereof by surprise in the
respective conveyances, or
e. on a street, road, highway or alley and the intimidation is made
with the use of firearms, the offender shall be punished by the
max period of the proper penalties prescribed in art 294
Notes:
1. Must be alleged in the information

2. Can’t be offset by generic mitigating
3. Art 295 will not apply to: robbery w/ homicide, rape or SPI
under par 1 of art 263
ROBBERY BY A BAND
Notes:
Band is defined as consisting of at least four armed
malefactors organized with the intention of carrying out any unlawful
design. Their participation in the commission of the crime must be
actual. The offender must be principal by direct participation, so that,
a principal by inducement cannot be convicted of this crime where the
aggravating circumstance of band shall be appreciated against him,
since the law requires as a condition to its commission the actual
participation of the offender in the execution of the crime. In such a
case, the conviction of a principal by inducement will only be limited
to his criminal liability as a co-conspirator.
1. Liability for the acts of the other members of the band:

a. he was a member of the band
b. he was present at the commission of a robbery by that
band
c. other members of the band committed an assault
d. he did not attempt to prevent the assault
2. Conspiracy to commit robbery with homicide – even if less

than 4 armed men.
3. Conspiracy to commit robbery only but homicide was

committed also on the occasion thereof – all members of the
band are liable for robbery with homicide.
Even if the agreement refers only to the robbery, nonetheless,

where the robbery is committed by a band and a person is killed, any
member who was present at the commission of the robbery and who
did not do anything to prevent the killing of the victim on the occasion
of the robbery shall be held liable for the crime of robbery with
homicide. (People vs. Cinco, 194 SCRA 535)
108

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
4. Conspiracy is presumed when 4 or more armed persons

committed robbery.
5. Unless the others attempted to prevent the assault – guilty of

robbery by band only.
Band is a generic aggravating circumstance in the crime of

robbery with homicide or rape. But in the other circumstances
provided under Article 294 particularly paragraphs 3, 4 and 5, band is
a special aggravating circumstance which must be alleged in the
information.
Band is a special aggravating circumstance if the robbery

results in the infliction of serious physical injuries.
The arms contemplated under this article refers to any deadly
weapon and is not limited to firearms, whether long or short.
ATTEMPTED OR FRUSTRATED ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE

Notes:
1. Whether robbery is attempted or frustrated, penalty is the same
When the robbery is attempted or frustrated, Art. 294 has no

application because the robbery and the homicide must be both
consummated.
Where the homicide is only attempted or frustrated, Article 297

does not apply. In the same manner, where the attempted or
frustrated robbery results in the commission of serious physical
injuries, Article 297 has no application. In such a case, the crime shall
be treated under the provisions of Article 48 on ordinary complex
crimes. Consequently, the penalty prescribed by Article 48 shall be
observed.
EXECUTION OF DEEDS BY MEANS OF VIOLENCE OR

INTIMIDATION
Elements:
1. That the offender has intent to defraud another.
2. That the offender compels him to sign, execute, or deliver any
public instrument or document.
3. That the compulsion is by means of violence or intimidation.
The element of intent to gain or fraudulent intent is what

distinguishes this felony from grave coercion. Although both crimes
share a common element which is the compelling of any person to do
something against his will, nonetheless, in coercion, the fear created
in the mind of the offended party is not immediate but remote. In this
109

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
type of robbery, the fear is immediate and not remote. In coercion,

there is no intent to gain whereas in this form of robbery, intent to
gain is an indispensable element.
ROBBERY IN AN INHABITED HOUSE OR PUBLIC BUILDING OR

EDIFICE DEVOTED TO WORSHIP
Elements:
1. That the offender entered (a) an inhabited house, or (b) public
buildings, or (c) edifice devoted to religious worship.
2. That the entrance was affected by any of the following means:
a. Through an opening not intended for entrance or egress.
b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or breaking any door or
window.
c. By using false keys, picklocks or similar tools or.
d. By using any fictitious name or pretending to exercise public
authority.
3. Once inside the building, the offender took personal property
belonging to another with intent to gain.
Notes:
In this kind of Robbery, no violence or intimidation against
persons is ever used.
1. Includes dependencies (stairways, hallways, etc.)

A small store located on the ground floor of a house is a dependency
of the house, there being no partition between the store and the
house and in going to the main stairway, one has to enter the store
which has a door. (U.S. vs. Ventura, 39 Phil. 523).
2. Inhabited house – any shelter, ship or vessel constituting the

dwelling of one or more persons even though temporarily
absent – dependencies, courts, corals, barns, etc.
3. NOT INCLUDED – ORCHARD, LANDS FOR CULTIVATION.
4. Important for robbery by use of force upon things, it is

necessary that the offender enters the building or where objects
may be found. (NO ENTRY, NO ROBBERY)
In the absence of evidence to show how bandits effected an
entrance into the convent which they robbed, there can be no
conviction under this article. The act would be treated as Theft.
( U.S. vs. Callotes, 2 PHIL 16).
"Force upon things" has a technical meaning in law. Not any

kind of force upon things will characterize the taking as one of
robbery. The force upon things contemplated requires some element
of trespass into the establishment where the robbery was committed.
110

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
In other words, the offender must have entered the premises where
the robbery was committed. If no entry was effected, even though
force may have been employed actually in the taking of the property
from within the premises, the crime will only be theft.
The term force upon things has a legal meaning. It means the
employment of force to effect entrance into the house or building by
destroying the door, window, roof, wall or floor of the aforesaid house
or building. In other words, the force upon things has no reference to
personal property but to a house or building which is ordinarily
classified as real property.
5. Entrance is necessary – mere insertion of hand is not

enough (whole body); not to get out but to enter – therefore,
evidence to such effect is necessary
Two predicates that will give rise to the crime as robbery:

1. By mere entering alone, a robbery will be committed if any
personal property is taken from within;
2. The entering will not give rise to robbery even if something is
taken inside. It is the breaking of the receptacle or closet or
cabinet where the personal property is kept that will give rise to
robbery, or the taking of a sealed, locked receptacle to be
broken outside the premises.
If by mere entering, that would already qualify the taking of any

personal property inside as robbery, it is immaterial whether the
offender stays inside the premises. The breaking of things inside the
premises will only be important to consider if the entering by itself will
not characterize the crime as robbery with force upon things.
Modes of entering that would give rise to the crime of robbery

with force upon things if something is taken inside the premises:
entering into an opening not intended for entrance or egress, under
Article 299 (a).
Illustration 1:
The entry was made through a fire escape. The fire escape was
intended for egress. The entry will not characterize the taking as one
of robbery because it is an opening intended for egress, although it
may not be intended for entrance. If the entering were done through
the window, even if the window was not broken, that would
characterize the taking of personal property inside as robbery
because the window is not an opening intended for entrance.
Illustration 2:
At a sari-sari store, a vehicle bumped the wall. The wall
collapsed. There was a small opening there. At night, a man
entered through that opening without breaking the same. The
111

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
crime will already be robbery if he takes property from within

because that is not an opening intended for the purpose.
Even if there is a breaking of a wall, roof, floor or window, but the

offender did not enter, it would not give rise to robbery with force
upon things.
Note that in the crime of robbery with force upon things, what should
be considered is the means of entrance and means of taking the
personal property from within. If those means do not come within the
definition under the Revised Penal Code, the taking will only give rise
to theft.
Those means must be employed in entering. If the offender had

already entered when these means were employed, anything taken
inside, without breaking of any sealed or closed receptacle, will not
give rise to robbery.
Illustration 3:
A found B inside his (A’s) house. He asked B what the latter was
doping there. B claimed he is an inspector from the local city
government to look after the electrical installations. By the time
B was chanced upon by A, he had already entered. So anything
he took inside without breaking any sealed or closed receptacle
will not give rise to robbery because the simulation of public
authority was made not in order to enter but when he has
already entered.
P v. Lamahang – intent to rob being present is necessary
Place: house or building; not car
Public building – every building owned, rented or used by the

government (though owned by private persons) though
temporarily vacant
Not robbery – passing through an open door but getting out of

a window.
If the accused entered the house through a door, and it was while
escaping that he broke any wall, floor or window after taking personal
property inside the house – there is no Robbery committed, only
Theft.
Outside door must be broken, smashed. Theft – if the lock

is merely removed or the door was merely pushed.
112

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Breaking of the door under Article 299 (b) – Originally, the

interpretation was that in order that there be a breaking of the
door in contemplation of law, there must be some damage to the
door.
Before, if the door was not damaged but only the lock attached to the
door was broken, the taking from within is only theft. But the ruling is
now abandoned because the door is considered useless without the
lock. Even if it is not the door that was broken but only the lock, the
breaking of the lock renders the door useless and it is therefore
tantamount to the breaking of the door. Hence, the taking inside is
considered robbery with force upon things.
False keys – genuine keys stolen from the owner or any keys
other than those intended by the owner for use in the lock
Picklocks – specially made, adopted for commission of

robbery
Key – stolen not by force, otherwise, it’s robbery by violence

and intimidation against persons
False key – used in opening house and not furniture inside,

otherwise, theft (for latter to be robbery., must be broken and
not just opened)
Use of picklocks or false keys refers to the

entering into the premises – If the pick lock or false key
was used not to enter the premises because the offender
had already entered but was used to unlock an interior
door or even a receptacle where the valuable or personal
belonging was taken, the use of false key or pick lock will
not give rise to the robbery with force upon things
because these are considered by law as only a means to
gain entrance, and not to extract personal belongings
from the place where it is being kept.
Gen. Rule: outside door. Exception: inside door in a separate

dwelling
If in the course of committing the robbery within the premises

some interior doors are broken, the taking from inside the room
where the door leads to will only give rise to theft. The breaking of
doors contemplated in the law refers to the main door of the house
and not the interior door.
113

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
But if it is the door of a cabinet that is broken and the valuable

inside the cabinet was taken, the breaking of the cabinet door would
characterize the taking as robbery. Although that particular door is
not included as part of the house, the cabinet keeps the contents
thereof safe.
E.g. pretending to be police to be able to enter (not pretending

after entrance)
When the robbery is committed in a house which is inhabited,

or in a public building or in a place devoted to religious worship, the
use of fictitious name or pretension to possess authority in order to
gain entrance will characterize the taking inside as robbery with force
upon things.
If A and B told the occupant of the house that they were the
nephews of the spouse of the owner of the house, and because of
that, the closed door was opened, or that they were NBI agents
executing a warrant of arrest, and so the occupant opened the door,
any taking personal property thereat with intent to gain, would be
Robbery.
ELEMENTS OF ROBBERY WITH FORCE UPON SUBDIVISION (B)

OR ART. 299
1. That the offender is inside a dwelling house, public building, or
edifice devoted to religious worship, regardless of the
circumstances under which he entered it
2. That the offender takes personal property belonging to another
with intent to gain, under any of the following circumstances.
a. by the breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other
kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle, or
b. by taking such furniture or objects away to be broken or
forced open outside the place of the robbery.
Notes:
1. Entrance ( no matter how done)
If the entering does not characterize the taking inside as one of
robbery with force upon things, it is the conduct inside that would give
rise to the robbery if there would be a breaking of sealed, locked or
closed receptacles or cabinet in order to get the personal belongings
from within such receptacles, cabinet or place where it is kept.
2. Offender may be servants or guests

A friend who has been invited in a house and who enters a
room where he finds a closed cabinet where money is kept, is guilty
of robbery if he forcibly opens the said cabinet and takes the money
contained therein.
114

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
3. When a sealed box is taken out for the purpose of breaking

it, no need to open – already consummated robbery.
4. Estafa – if the box is in the custody of the accused.
5. Theft – if a box is found outside and forced open.
ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE AND BY A BAND

When the robbery with force upon things is committed in an
uninhabited place and by a band, the robbery becomes qualified. In
the same manner, where robbery with violence against or intimidation
of persons is committed by a band or in an uninhabited place, the
crime becomes qualified.
The place is considered uninhabited when it is not used as a
dwelling. It may refer to a building or a house which is not used as a
dwelling.
If a house is inhabited and its owners or occupants temporarily
leave the place to take a short vacation in another place, their casual
absence will not make the place or house uninhabited. (U. S. vs.
Ventura, 39 Phil. 523)
WHAT IS AN INHABITED HOUSE, PUBLIC BUILDING OR

BUILDING DEDICATED TO RELIGIOUS WORSHIP AND THEIR
DEPENDENCIES
Inhabited house – Any shelter, ship, or vessel constituting the

dwelling of one or more persons, even though the inhabitants thereof
shall temporarily be absent therefrom when the robbery is committed.
Public building – Includes every building owned by the government
or belonging to a private person but used or rented by the
government, although temporarily unoccupied by the same.
1. Dependencies – are all interior courts, corrals, warehouses,
granaries or enclosed places:
a. contiguous to the building
b. having an interior entrance connected therewith
c. which form part of the whole
2. Garage – must have 3 requirements. Exception: orchards/lands
ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE OR IN A PRIVATE

BUILDING
Elements:
1. That the offender entered an uninhabited place or a building which
was not a dwelling house, not a public building, or not an edifice
devoted to religious worship.
2. that any of the following circumstances was present:
a. That entrance was effected through an opening not intended for
entrance or egress.
b. A wall, roof, floor, or outside door or window was broken.
115

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
c. The entrance was effected through the use of false keys,

picklocks or other similar tools.
d. A door, wardrobe, chest, or any sealed or closed furniture or
receptacle was broken or
e. A closed or sealed receptacle was removed, even if the same
be broken open elsewhere.
3. That with intent to gain the offender took therefrom personal
property belonging to another.
Nota Bene:
1. Second kind of robbery with force upon things
It must be taken note of, that the entrance by using any
fictitious name or pretending the exercise of public authority is not
among those mentioned in Article 302 because the place is
Uninhabited and therefore without a person present. Likewise, in this
class of Robbery, the penalty depends on the amount taken
disregarding the circumstances of whether the robbers are armed or
not as in the case in Robbery in Inhabited Place.
2. Uninhabited place – is an uninhabited building (habitable, not
any of the 3 places mentioned)
3. Ex. warehouse, freight car, store. Exception: pigsty
A store may or may not be an inhabited place depending upon
the circumstances of whether or not it is usually occupied by any
person lodging therein at night. Although it may be used as a
dwelling to sustain a conviction under Article 299, the information
must allege that the same was used and occupied as a dwelling
(People vs. Tubog, 49 Phil. 620), otherwise Art. 302 is applicable.
4. Same manner as 299 except that was entered into was an

uninhabited place or a building other than the 3 mentioned in
299. Exception: does not include use of fictitious name or
pretending the exercise of public authority
5. Breaking of padlock (but not door) is only theft
6. False keys – genuine keys stolen from the owner or any other
keys other than those intended by the owner for use in the lock
forcibly opened
ROBBERY OF CEREALS, FRUITS OR FIREWOOD IN AN

UNINHABITED PLACE OR PRIVATE BUILDING
Under Article 303, if the robbery under Article 299 and 302
consists in the taking of cereals, fruits, or firewood, the penalty
imposable is lower.
The word cereals however must be understood to mean
“seedlings” or “semilla.” It does not include hulled rice. It may include
palay or unhulled palay.
While the law uses the term uninhabited place, it however
refers to uninhabited building and its dependencies. If the cereals,
fruits or firewood were taken outside a building and its dependencies,
116

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
the crime committed would only be theft even though the taking was
done in an uninhabited place.
Art. 304- ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF PICKLOCKS OR SIMILAR

TOOLS
Elements:
1. That the offender has in his possession picklocks or similar tools.
2. That such picklocks or similar tools are specially adapted to the
commission of robbery.
3. That the offender does not have lawful cause for such possession.
Nota Bene: Actual use of the same is not necessary

The law also prohibits the manufacture or fabrication of such
tools. If the manufacturer or maker or locksmith himself is the
offender, a higher penalty is prescribed by law.
Supposing that in the crime of robbery, the offender used a pick
lock to enter a building. Can he be charged with illegal possession of
picklocks or similar tools? The answer is NO since the same
possession of these tools is already absorbed in the graver crime of
robbery.
Art. 305- FALSE KEYS

What constitutes false keys?
1. Picklocks, etc.
2. Genuine key stolen from owner.
3. Any key other than those intended by owner for use in the lock
forcibly opened by the offender
Nota Bene:
1. Possession of false keys here not punishable
2. If key was entrusted and used to steal, not robbery (not
stolen)
BRIGANDAGE
Brigandage – This is a crime committed by more than three armed
persons who form a band of robbers for the purpose of committing
robbery in the highway or kidnapping persons for the purpose of
extortion or to obtain ransom, or for any other purpose to be attained
by means of force and violence.
Art. 306- WHO ARE BRIGANDS

Brigands – more than three armed persons forming a band
Elements of brigandage:
1. There are least four armed persons;
2. They formed a band of robbers;
117

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
3. The purpose is any of the following:

a. To commit robbery in the highway;
b. To kidnap persons for the purpose of extortion or to obtain
ransom; or
c. To attain by means of force and violence any other purpose.
Presumption of Brigandage:
a. if members of lawless band and possession of unlicensed
firearms (any of them)
b. possession of any kind of arms (not just firearm)
Difference between Brigandage and Robbery in Band

BRIGANDAGE ROBBERY IN BAND
Purposes are given Only to commit robbery, not necessarily in
hi-way
Mere formation of a If the purpose is to commit a part robbery
band for the above
purpose
Necessary to prove that band actually
committed robbery
There is no need for the band robbers to execute the object of

their association in order to hold them criminally liable for the crime of
brigandage.
The primary object of the law on brigandage is to prevent the

formation of bands of robbers. Hence, if the formed band commits
robbery with the use of force upon persons or force upon things, their
criminal liability shall be limited to the commission of such crimes.
Likewise, if the offenders are charged with robbery but the same is
not established by the evidence and what appears clear are the
elements of brigandage where the allegation in the information
necessarily includes such offense, the offender can be convicted of
the crime of brigandage.
It does not mean however that to constitute violation of P.D.

532, there must be a band. One or two persons can be held liable
under this law if they perpetrated their acts of depredation in
Philippine Highways against persons who are not predetermined
victims.
If the agreement among more than three armed men is to

commit a particular robbery, brigandage is not committed because
the latter must be an agreement to commit robbery in general or
indiscriminately.
118

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Art. 307- AIDING AND ABETTING A BAND OF BRIGANDS
Elements:
1. That there is a band of brigands.
2. That the offender knows the band to be of brigands.
3. That the offender does any of the following acts:
a. he in any manner aids, abets or protects such band of
brigands, or
b. he gives them information of the movements of the police or
other peace officers of the government or
c. He acquires or receives the property taken by such brigands.
PD 532 – Brigandage.
1. Seizure of any person for:
(a) ransom;
(b) extortion or other unlawful purpose;
(c) taking away of property by violence or intimidation or force
upon things or other unlawful means
2. Committed by any person
3. On any Phil hi-way
Distinction between brigandage under the Revised Penal Code

and highway robbery/brigandage under Presidential Decree No.
532:
(1)Brigandage as a crime under the Revised Penal Code refers to
the formation of a band of robbers by more than three armed
persons for the purpose of committing robbery in the highway,
kidnapping for purposes of extortion or ransom, or for any other
purpose to be attained by force and violence. The mere forming of
a band, which requires at least four armed persons, if for any of
the criminal purposes stated in Article 306, gives rise to
brigandage.
(2)Highway robbery/brigandage under Presidential Decree No.

532 is the seizure of any person for ransom, extortion or for any
other lawful purposes, or the taking away of the property of
another by means of violence against or intimidation of persons or
force upon things or other unlawful means committed by any
person on any Philippine highway.
Art. 308- THEFT
Elements:
1. That there be taking of personal property.
2. That said property belongs to another.
119

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
3. That the taking be done with intent to gain.

4. That the taking be done without the consent of the owner.
5. That the taking be accomplished without the use of violence
against or intimidation of persons or force upon things.
PERSONS LIABLE:
1. Those who:
a) with intent to gain
b) But without violence against or intimidation of persons nor force
upon things
c) take personal property of another
d) without the latter’s consent
The taking from an enclosed corral of a carabao belonging to

another, after force is employed to destroy a part of the corral to enter
the same, is considered merely as theft because corral is not a
building nor a dependency of a building. (U. S. vs. Rosales, et al., 1
Phil. 300)
2. Those who
a) having found lost property
b) fail to deliver the same to local authorities or its owner
Nota Bene:
1. Retention of money/property found is theft. Retention is

failure to return (intent to gain)
The word “lost” is used in the generic sense. It embraces loss

by stealing or any act of a person other than the owner, as well as the
act of the owner, or through some casual occurrence. (People vs.
Rodrigo, 16 SCRA 475)
The felony is not limited to the actual finder. Theft of a lost

property may be committed even by a person who is not the actual
finder. (People vs. Avila, 44 Phil. 720)
2. Knowledge of owner is not required, knowledge of loss is

enough
It is not necessary that the owner of the lost property be known

to the accused. What is important is that he knows or has reason to
know that the property was lost and for this fact alone, it is his duty to
turn it over to the authorities. If he does otherwise, like, if he sells the
thing to another, then the crime of theft is committed.
3. Finder in law is liable
Hidden Treasure
120

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Under Article 438 and 439 of the Civil Code, the finder of
hidden treasure on the property of another and by chance is entitled
to one-half of the treasure that he found. His duty is to tell the owner
about the treasure. If he appropriates the other half pertaining to the
owner of the property, he is liable for theft as to that share. (People
vs. Longdew, C. A. G. R. No. 9380-R, June 4, 1953)
3. Those who
a) after having maliciously damaged the property of another
b) remove or make use of the fruits or object of the damage
caused by them
Theft of damaged property occurs only after the accused has

committed the crime of malicious mischief. In malicious mischief, the
offender destroys the property of another because of hatred,
resentment or other evil motive against the owner. So, a neighbor
who shoots and kills a goat which has destroyed his flower plants and
thereafter slaughters and eats the meat of the wandering goat is
guilty of theft.
4. Those who
a) enter an enclosed estate or a field where
b) trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another and, without
the consent of its owner
c) hunts or fish upon the same or gather fruits, cereals or other
forest or farm products
Nota Bene:
1. Theft is consummated when offender is able to place the

thing taken under his control and in such a situation as he
could dispose of it at once (though no opportunity to
dispose) i.e, the control test
In the crime of theft, the law makes only the term “taking”
and not “taking away.” The non-inclusion of the word “away” is
significant because it means that as soon as the culprit takes
possession of the things taken by him, the crime of theft is already
consummated since the law does not require that the thief be able to
carry away the thing taken from the owner. (People vs. Jaranilla, 55
SCRA 563)
The consummation of the crime of theft takes place upon the

voluntary and malicious taking of the property belonging to another
which is realized by the material occupation of the thing. The property
need not be actually taken away by the thief. It is enough that he has
obtained, at some particular moment, complete control and
121

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
possession of the thing desired, adverse to the right of the lawful

owner. (People vs. Naval, 46 O. G. 2641)
2. P v. Dino – applies only in theft of bulky goods (meaning there

has to be capacity to dispose of the things). Otherwise, P v.
Espiritu – full possession is enough.
3. Servants using cars without permission deemed qualified theft

through the use was temporary.
4. Reyes says: there must be some character of permanency in

depriving the owner of the use of the object and making himself
the owner, therefore must exclude “joyride”.
5. Theft: if after custody (only material possession) of an object

was given to the accused, it is actually taken by him (no intent
to return) e.g. felonious conversion. But it is estafa if juridical
possession is transferred e.g., by contract of bailment
Juridical possession of a thing is transferred to another when

he receives the thing in trust or on commission or for administration,
or under a quasi-contract or a contract of bailment. When possession
by the offender is under any of these circumstances and he
misappropriated the thing received, he cannot be held guilty of theft
but of estafa because here, he has both the physical and juridical
possession of the property.
6. Includes electricity and gas
a. inspector misreads meter to earn
b. one using a jumper
Personal Property
Personal property in the crime of theft includes electric

current or properties that may have no material or concrete
appearance. The test is not whether the subject is corporeal or
incorporeal but whether it is incapable of appropriation by another
from the owner. Hence, checks, promissory notes, and any other
commercial documents may be the object of theft because while they
may not be of value to the accused, they are without doubt of value to
the offended party. (U. S. vs. Raboy, 25 Phil. 1) In such a case, the
penalty shall be based on the amount of money represented by the
checks or promissory note since, while it may not be of value to the
thief, it is undoubtedly of value to the offended party. (People vs. Koc
Song, 63 Phil. 369).
7. Selling shares with a co-partner is not theft.
The personal property must belong to another.
122

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
⮚ A joint owner or partner who sells the palay to other persons or

a co-owner or co-heir who appropriates the whole property
cannot be guilty of theft since the property cannot be said to
belong to another. (U. S. Reyes, 6 Phil. 441)
⮚ One who takes away the property pledged by him to another

without the latter’s consent, does not commit theft for the simple
reason that he is the owner of the thing taken by him. (L. B.
Reyes)
8. Salary must be delivered first to employee; prior to this, taking

of Php is theft
9. If the offender claims property as his own (in good faith) – not
theft (though later found to be untrue. If in bad faith – theft)
10. Gain is not just Php – satisfaction, use, pleasure desired,

any benefit (e.g. joyride)
Gain means the acquisition of a thing useful for the purpose of

life. It includes the benefit which in any other sense may be derived or
expected from the act performed.
11. Actual gain is not necessary (intent to gain necessary)
12. Allege lack of consent in info is important
Consent as an element of the crime of theft must be in the

concept of consent that is freely given and not one which is inferred
from mere lack of opposition on the part of the owner.
Where the charge of theft under the first sentence of Article

308, the information must allege lack of consent. The allegation of
“lack of consent” is indispensable under the first paragraph of Article
308 since the language or epigraph of the law expressly requires that
the (unlawful) taking should be done without the consent of the
owner. In view of the clear text of the law, an information which does
not convey “lack of consent of the owner” would render the allegation
insufficient and the information may be quashed for failure to allege
an essential element of the crime. (Pua Yi Kun vs. People, G. R. No.
26256, June 26, 1968)
Robbery and Theft distinguished.

For robbery to exist, it is necessary that personal property be
taken against the will of the owner; whereas in theft, it is sufficient
that consent on the part of the owner is lacking.
123

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Presumption:
A person found in possession of a thing taken in the recent
doing of a wrongful act is the taker of the thing and the doer of
the whole act.
Possession is not limited to actual personal custody. One who

deposits stolen property in a place where it cannot be found may be
deemed to have such property in his possession.
ELEMENTS OF HUNTING, FISHING OR GATHERING FRUITS,

ETC.
IN ENCLOSED ESTATE
(PAR. NO.3, ART. 308)
1. That there is an enclosed estate or a field where trespass is
forbidden or which belongs to another;
2. That the offender enters the same.
3. That the offender hunts or fishes upon the same or gathers fruits,
cereals or other forest or farm products, and
4. That the hunting or fishing or gathering of products is without the
consent of the owner.
Nota Bene: Fish not in fishpond, otherwise, qualified
Fencing under Presidential Decree No. 1612 is a distinct crime

from theft and robbery. If the participant who profited is being
prosecuted with the person who robbed, the person is prosecuted as
an accessory. If he is being prosecuted separately, the person who
partook of the proceeds is liable for fencing.
Burden of proof is upon fence to overcome presumption; if

explanation insufficient or unsatisfactory, court will convict. This is a
malum prohibitum so intent is not material. But if prosecution is
under the Revised Penal Code, as an accessory, the criminal intent is
controlling.
When there is notice to person buying, there may be fencing

such as when the price is way below ordinary prices; this may serve
as notice. He may be liable for fencing even if he paid the price
because of the presumption.
Cattle Rustling and Qualified Theft of Large Cattle – The

crime of cattle-rustling is defined and punished under Presidential
Decree No. 533, the Anti-Cattle Rustling law of 1974, as the taking by
any means, method or scheme, of any large cattle, with or without
intent to gain and whether committed with or without violence against
or intimidation of person or force upon things, so long as the taking is
without the consent of the owner/breed thereof. The crime includes
124

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
the killing or taking the meat or hide of large cattle without the
consent of the owner.
Since the intent to gain is not essential, the killing or destruction

of large cattle, even without taking any part thereof, is not a crime of
malicious mischief but cattle-rustling.
The Presidential Decree, however, does not supersede the

crime of qualified theft of large cattle under Article 310 of the Revised
Penal Code, but merely modified the penalties provided for theft of
large cattle and, to that extent, amended Articles 309 and 310. Note
that the overt act that gives rise to the crime of cattle-rustling is the
taking or killing of large cattle. Where the large cattle was not taken,
but received by the offender from the owner/overseer thereof, the
crime is not cattle-rustling; it is qualified theft of large cattle.
Where the large cattle was received by the offender who

thereafter misappropriated it, the crime is qualified theft under Article
310 if only physical or material possession thereof was yielded to
him. If both material and juridical possession thereof was yielded to
him who misappropriated the large cattle, the crime would be estafa
under Article 315 (1b).
PENALTIES FOR QUALIFIED THEFT

The basis of the penalty is the value of the things stolen.
If the property has some value but is not proven with reasonable
certainty, the minimum penalty shall be imposed under par. 6 of
Art. 309 (People vs. Reyes, 58 Phil. 964).
When there is no evidence as to the value of the property stolen, the

court is allowed to take judicial knowledge of the value of such
property. (People vs. dela Cruz, 43 O. G. 3206)
When the resulting penalty for the accessory to the crime of theft has
no medium period, the court can impose the penalty which is
found favorable to the accused. (Cristobal vs. People, 84 Phil.
473).
Art 310- QUALIFIED THEFT
THEFT IS QUALIFIED WHEN:

1. Committed by domestic servant, or
2. With grave abuse of confidence, or
3. Property stolen is:
a. motor vehicle
b. mail matter
125

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
c. large cattle
d. coconut from plantation
e. fish from fishpond or fishery, or
4. On occasion of calamities and civil disturbance.
Nota Bene:
When the theft is committed by a domestic servant, the

offended party may either be the employer where the offender is
working as a household help, or a third person as a guest in the
house. The roomboy in a hotel is embraced within the term
“domestic servant.”
1. “Grave abuse” – high degree of confidence e.g. guests
In the case of abuse of confidence, the latter must be “grave” in

order to comply with the requirement of the law because abuse of
confidence is not enough. There must be an allegation in the
information that there is a relation between the accused and the
offended party wherein the latter confided his security as to his
person, life and property to the accused with such degree of
confidence and that the accused abused the same.
Abuse of confidence is determined from the trust reposed by

the offended party to the offender. It may also refer to the nature of
the work of the offender which must necessarily involve trust and
confidence.
Abuse of confidence is also an element of estafa. To avoid confusion

between theft with abuse of confidence (qualified theft) and estafa
with abuse of confidence, where the offender misappropriates
anything after he receives it from the victim, the student must
remember that in qualified theft, only the physical or material
possession of the thing is transferred. If the offender acquires the
juridical as well as the physical possession of the thing and he
misappropriated it, the crime committed is estafa. Juridical
possession of the thing is acquired when one holds the thing in trust,
or on commission, or for administration or under any other obligation
involving the duty to deliver or to return the thing received. If the
possession of the offender is not under any of these concepts, the
crime is qualified theft.
2. No confidence, not qualified theft

3. Theft – material possession’ estafa – juridical possession
Where only the material possession is transferred, conversion

of the property gives rise to the crime of theft. Where both the
material and juridical possession is transferred, misappropriation of
126

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
the property would constitute estafa. When the material and juridical
possession of the thing transfers ownership of the property to the
possessor, any misappropriation made by the possessor will not
result in the commission of any crime, either for theft of estafa.
4. Qualified: if done by one who has access to place where

stolen property is kept e.g., guards, tellers
5. Novation theory applies only if there’s a relation
6. Industrial partner is not liable for QT (estafa)
7. When accused considered the deed of sale as sham
(modus) and he had intent to gain, his absconding is QT
8. Motor vehicle in kabit system sold to another-theft. Motor
vehicle not used as PU in kabit system but under K of
lease-estafa
On carnapping and theft of motor vehicle

When the subject is a motor vehicle, the Theft becomes
qualified. Under R.A. 6539, Anti-Carnapping Act of 1972, the term
motor vehicle includes, within its protection, any vehicle which uses
the streets, with or without the required license, or any vehicle which
is motorized using the streets, such as a motorized tricycle. (Izon vs.
People, 107 SCRA 123)
The taking with intent to gain of a motor vehicle belonging

to another, without the latter’s consent, or by means of violence
or intimidation of persons, or by using force upon things is
penalized as carnapping under Republic Act No. 6539 (An Act
Preventing and Penalizing Carnapping), as amended.
The overt act which is being punished under this law as

carnapping is also the taking of a motor vehicle under circumstances
of theft or robbery. If the motor vehicle was not taken by the offender
but was delivered by the owner or the possessor to the offender, who
thereafter misappropriated the same, the crime is either qualified theft
under Article 310 of the Revised Penal Code or estafa under Article
315 (b) of the Revised Penal Code. Qualified theft of a motor vehicle
is the crime if only the material or physical possession was yielded to
the offender; otherwise, if juridical possession was also yielded, the
crime is estafa.
9. Mail matter – private mail to be QT, Not postmaster – Art. 226

10. Theft of large cattle
Art. 312- OCCUPATION OF REAL PROPERTY

OR USURPATION OF REAL RIGHTS IN PROPERTY
Acts punished:
1. Taking possession of any real property belonging to another by
means of violence against or intimidation of persons;
127

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
2. Usurping any real rights in property belonging to another by means

of violence against or intimidation of persons.
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender takes possession of any real property or usurps
any real rights in property.
2. That the real property or real rights belong to another.
3. That violence against or intimidation of persons is used by the
offender in occupying real property or usurping real rights in
property.
4. That there is intent to gain.
Since this is a crime against property, there must be intent to

gain. In the absence of the intent to gain, the act may constitute
Coercion.
Use the degree of intimidation to determine the degree of the

penalty to be applied for the usurpation.
Usurpation under Article 312 is committed in the same way as

robbery with violence or intimidation of persons. The main
difference is that in robbery, personal property is involved; while in
usurpation of real rights, it is real property. (People v. Judge
Alfeche, July 23, 1992)
The possession of the land or real rights must be done by

means of violence or intimidation. So, if the evidence of the
prosecution shows that the accused entered the premises by means
of strategy, stealth or methods other than the employment of
violence, no crime was committed by the offender. (People vs.
Alfeche, Jr., 211 SCRA 770)
Usurpation of real rights and property should not be complexed

using Article 48 when violence or intimidation is committed. There is
only a single crime, but a two-tiered penalty is prescribed to be
determined on whether the acts of violence used is akin to that in
robbery in Article 294, grave threats or grave coercion and an
incremental penalty of fine based on the value of the gain obtained by
the offender.
There is no crime of threat and usurpation of real property since

threat is an indispensable element of usurpation of real rights. Hence,
where threats are uttered to the owner of real property by one illegally
occupying it, the crime committed is not the complex crime of
usurpation of real property with grave threats because making a
threat is an inherent element of usurpation of real property.
(Castrodes vs. Cubelo, 83 SCRA 670)
128

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
The complainant must be the person upon whom violence was

employed. If a tenant was occupying the property and he was
threatened by the offender, but it was the owner who was not in
possession of the property who was named as the offended party, the
same may be quashed as it does not charge an offense. The owner
would, at most, be entitled to civil recourse only.
On squatting
According to the Urban Development and Housing Act, the following
are squatters:
1. Those who have the capacity or means to pay rent or for legitimate
housing but are squatting anyway;
2. Also the persons who were awarded lots but sold or lease them
out;
3. Intruders of lands reserved for socialized housing, pre-empting
possession by occupying the same.
Note that violation of Article 312 is punishable only with fine.

So, if physical injuries are inflicted on the victim due to the violence
employed by the offender in the usurpation of real rights, the latter
shall be punished separately for the crime of physical injuries.
Violence employed results in the death of the offended party.

When such eventuality does occur, then the crime may rightfully be
denominated as usurpation of real rights resulting to homicide,
murder, parricide, or infanticide as the case may be.
Art. 313- ALTERING BOUNDARIES OR LANDMARKS
Elements:
1. That there be boundary marks or monuments of towns, provinces,
or estates, or any other marks intended to designate the
boundaries of the same.
2. That the offender alters said boundary marks.
Art. 314- FRAUDULENT INSOLVENCY (culpable insolvency)
ELEMENTS
1. That the offender is a debtor; that is, he has obligations due and
payable.
2. That he absconds with his property.
3. That there be prejudice to his creditors.
To be liable for fraudulent insolvency, the disposal of the

merchandise must be done with malice. The mere circumstance that
a person has disposed of his merchandise by removing them from
the place where they were kept would necessarily imply fraud. What
is required is actual prejudice to the creditor. The intention of the
129

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
accused alone is not enough. (People vs. Guzman, C. A. 40 O. G.

2655)
The law does not require the offender to be a merchant. The

law says “any person,” and this refers to anyone who becomes a
debtor and performs the acts made punishable by the law.
Art. 315- SWINDLING AND OTHER DECEITS

Estafa is an embezzlement under common law. It is a well-
known crime to lawyers and businessmen. It is a continuing crime
unlike theft. Being a public crime, it can be prosecuted de officio.
ESTAFA
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA IN GENERAL
1. That the accused defrauded another (a.) by abuse of confidence,
or (b) or means of deceit and
2. That damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is
caused to the offended party or third person.
The concept of damage under this article does not mean actual
or real damage. It may consist in mere disturbance of the property
rights of the offended party. However, the damage must be capable of
pecuniary estimation. This requirement is important because in
estafa, the penalty is dependent on the value of the property.
Since estafa is a material crime, it can be divided into
consummated, attempted or frustrated stages. In the latter case, the
damage can be in the form of temporary prejudice or suffering, or
inconvenience capable of pecuniary estimation.
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA WITH UNFAITHFULNESS

1. That the offender has an onerous obligation to deliver something
of value.
2. That he alters its substance, quantity, or quality.
3. That damage or prejudice is caused to another.
The accused does not receive the goods but delivers a thing
under an onerous obligation which is not in accordance with the
substance, quantity or quality agreed upon. It is the altering of the
substance, quality or quantity of the thing delivered which makes the
offender liable for the crime of estafa.
The word “onerous” means that the offended party has fully
complied with his obligations to pay. So, if the thing delivered whose
substance was altered is not yet fully or partially paid, then the crime
of estafa is not committed.
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE UNDER

SUBDIVISION NO.1 PAR. (B)
1. That money, goods, or other personal property be received by the
offender in trust, or on commission, or for administration, or under
130

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
any other obligation involving the duty to make delivery of or to

return, the same.
2. That there be misappropriation or conversion of such money or
property by the offender, or dental on his part of such receipt.
3. that such misappropriation or conversion or dental is to the
prejudice of another and
4. That there is a demand made by the offended party to the
offender.
(The fourth element is not necessary when there is evidence of

misappropriation of the goods by the defendant. [Tubb v. People, et
al., 101 Phil. 114] ).
It is necessary in this kind of estafa, for the money, goods or

personal property to have been received by the offender in trust, or
on commission or for administration. He must acquire both material or
physical as well as juridical possession of the thing received. In these
instances, the offender, who is the transferee, acquires a right over a
thing which he may set up even against the owner.
A money market transaction however partakes of the nature of

a loan, and non-payment thereof would not give rise to criminal
liability for Estafa through misappropriation or conversion. In money
market placements, the unpaid investor should institute against the
middleman or dealer, before the ordinary courts, a simple action for
recovery of the amount he had invested, and if there is allegation of
fraud, the proper forum would be the Securities and Exchange
Commission. (Sesbreno vs. Court of Appeals, et al., 240 SCRA 606).
2ND ELEMENT OF ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE

UNDER PARAGRAPH (B), SUBDIVISION N0.1, ART. 315 = 3 WAYS
OF COMMITTING
1. By misappropriating the thing received.
2. By converting the thing received.
3. By denying that the thing was received.
Nota Bene:
1. Unfaithfulness or Abuse of Confidence
a. by altering the substance
b. existing obligation to deliver – even if it is not a subject of lawful
commerce
c. thing delivered has not been fully or partially paid for – not
estafa
d. no agreement as to quality – No estafa if delivery is
unsatisfactory
2. By misappropriating and converting
131

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
a. Thing is received by offender under transactions transferring

juridical possession, not ownership
b. Under PD 115 (Trust Receipts Law) – failure to turn over to the
bank the proceeds of the sale of the goods covered by TR –
Estafa
c. Same thing received must be returned otherwise estafa; sale
on credit by agency when it was to be sold for cash – estafa
d. Estafa – not affected by Novation of Contract because it is a
public offense
e. Novation must take place before criminal liability was incurred
or perhaps prior to the filing of the criminal information in court
by state prosecutors
f. Misappropriating – to take something for one’s own benefit
g. Converting – act of using or disposing of another’s property as
if it was one’s own; thing has been devoted for a purpose or use
different from that agreed upon
h. There must be prejudice to another – not necessary that
offender should obtain gain
There is no estafa through negligence. There is likewise no

estafa where the accused did not personally profit or gain from
the misappropriation.
i. Partners – No estafa of money or property received for the

partnership when the business is commercial and profits
accrued. BUT if property is received for a specific purpose and
is misappropriated – estafa!
j. Failure to account after the DEMAND is circumstantial evidence
of misappropriation
k. DEMAND is not a condition precedent to existence of estafa

when misappropriation may be established by other proof
l. In theft, upon delivery of the thing to the offender, the owner
expects an immediate return of the thing to him – otherwise,
Estafa
m. Servant, domestic or employee who misappropriated a thing he
received from his master is NOT guilty of estafa but of qualified
theft
3. When in the prosecution for malversation the public officer is

acquitted, the private individual allegedly in conspiracy with
him may be held liable for estafa.
Difference between Estafa with Abuse of Confidence and

Malversation
ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF MALVERSATION
CONFIDENCE
Offenders are entrusted with funds Offenders are entrusted with
132

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
or property and are continuing funds or property and are

offenses. continuing offenses.
Funds: always private Funds: public funds or property
Offender: private individual, or Offender: public officer
public officer not accountable accountable for public funds
Committed by misappropriating, Committed by appropriating,
converting, denying having taking, misappropriating
received money.
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY TAKING UNDUE ADVANTAGE OF

THE SIGNATURE IN BLANK
1. That the paper with the signature of the offended party be blank.
2. That the offended party should have delivered it to the offender.
3. That above the signature of the offended party a document is
written by the offender without authority to do so.
4. That the document so written creates a liability of, or causes
damage to, the offended party or any third person.
Note: If the paper with signature in blank was stolen –

Falsification if by making it appear that he participated in a
transaction when in fact he did not participate.
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY MEANS OF DECEIT

1. that there must be a false pretense, fraudulent means must be
made or executed prior to or
2. That such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means must
be made or executed prior to or simultaneously with the
commission of the fraud.
3. That the offended party must have relied on the false pretense,
fraudulent act, or fraudulent means, that is, he was induced to part
with his money or property because of the false pretense,
fraudulent act, or fraudulent means.
4. That as a result thereof, the offended party suffered damage.
Nota Bene:
1. False pretenses or fraudulent acts – executed prior to or
simultaneously with delivery of the thing by the complainant
2. There must be evidence that the pretense of the accused that he

possesses power/influence is false
The representation that accused possessed influence, to deceive and

inveigle the complainant into parting with his money must however be
false to constitute deceit under No. 2 of Article 315, RPC. (Dela Cruz
vs. Court of Appeals, et al., 265 SCRA 299).
133

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY MEANS OF FALSE PRETENSES

Acts punished under paragraph (a)
1. Using fictitious name;
2. Falsely pretending to possess power, influence, qualifications,
property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions; or
3. By means of other similar deceits.
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY POSTDATING A CHECK OR ISSUING

A CHECK IN PAYMENT OF AN OBLIGATION
1. That the offender postdated a check, or issued a check in
payment of an obligation.
2. That such postdating or issuing a check was done when the
offender had no funds in the bank or his funds deposited therein
were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check.
Note that this only applies if:

(1) The obligation is not pre-existing;
(2) The check is drawn to enter into an obligation;
(Remember that it is the check that is supposed to be the sole

consideration for the other party to have entered into the obligation.
For example, Rose wants to purchase a bracelet and draws a check
without insufficient funds. The jeweler sells her the bracelet solely
because of the consideration in the check.)
(3) It does not cover checks where the purpose of drawing the
check is to guarantee a loan as this is not an obligation
contemplated in this paragraph
The check must be genuine. If the check is falsified and is

cashed with the bank or exchanged for cash, the crime is estafa thru
falsification of a commercial document.
The general rule is that the accused must be able to obtain

something from the offended party by means of the check he
issued and delivered. Exception: when the check is issued not in
payment of an obligation.
If the checks were issued by the defendant and he received

money for them, then stopped payment and did not return the money,
and he had an intention to stop payment when he issued the check,
there is estafa.
Deceit is presumed if the drawer fails to deposit the amount

necessary to cover the check within three days from receipt of
notice of dishonor or insufficiency of funds in the bank.
1. If check was issued in payment of pre-existing debt – no

estafa
134

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
It is therefore essential that the check be issued in payment of a

simultaneous obligation. The check in question must be utilized by
the offender in order to defraud the offended party. So, if the check
was issued in payment of a promissory note which had matured and
the check was dishonored, there is no estafa since the accused did
not obtain anything by means of said check. (People vs. Canlas, O.
G. 1092)
If a bouncing check is issued to pay a pre-existing obligation, the

drawer is liable under B. P. Blg. 22 which does not make any
distinction as to whether a bad check is issued in payment of an
obligation or to guarantee an obligation. (Que vs. People, 73217-18,
Sept. 21, 1987)
2. Offender must be able to obtain something from the

offended party by means of the check he issues and
delivers
The check must be issued in payment of an obligation. If the check
was issued without any obligation or if there is lack of consideration
and the check is subsequently dishonored, the crime of estafa is not
committed.
3. If postdating a check issued as mere guarantee/promissory

note – no estafa
ELEMENTS OF OFFENSE DEFINED IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH

OF SECTION 1: BP 22
1. That a person makes or draws and issues any check.
2. That the check is made or drawn and issued to apply on account
or for value.
3. That the person who makes or draws and issues the check knows
at the time of issue that he does not have sufficient funds in or
credit with the drawee bank for the payment of such check in full
upon its presentment.
4. That the check is subsequently dishonored by the drawee bank for
insufficiency of funds or credit, or would have been dishonored for
the same reason had not the drawee, without any valid reason,
ordered the bank to stop payment.
Note: Failure to make good within 5 banking days prima facie

evidence of knowledge of lack and insufficiency.
ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSE DEFINED IN THE SECOND

PARAGRAPH OF SECTION 1: BP 22
1. That a person has sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee
bank when he makes or draws and issues a check.
135

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
2. That he fails to keep sufficient funds or to maintain a credit to

cover the full amount of the check if presented within a period of
90 days from the date appearing thereon.
3. That the check is dishonored by the drawee bank.
Distinction between estafa under Article 315 (2) (d) of the

Revised Penal Code and violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22:
(1)Under both Article 315 (2) (d) and Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, there
is criminal liability if the check is drawn for non-pre-existing
obligation.
If the check is drawn for a pre-existing obligation, there is criminal
liability only under Batas Pambansa Blg. 22.
(2)Estafa under Article 315 (2) (d) is a crime against property while
Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 is a crime against public interest. The
gravamen for the former is the deceit employed, while in the latter,
it is the issuance of the check. Hence, there is no double
jeopardy.
(3)In the estafa under Article 315 (2) (d), deceit and damage are
material, while in Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, they are immaterial.
(4)In estafa under Article 315 (2) (d), knowledge by the drawer of
insufficient funds is not required, while in Batas Pambansa Blg. 22,
knowledge by the drawer of insufficient funds is required.
On issuance of a bouncing check

The issuance of a check with insufficient funds may be held
liable for estafa and Batas Pambansa Blg. 22. Batas Pambansa
Blg. 22 expressly provides that prosecution under said law is
without prejudice to any liability for violation of any provision in
the Revised Penal Code. Double Jeopardy may not be invoked
because a violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 is a malum
prohibitum and is being punished as a crime against the public
interest for undermining the banking system of the country, while
under the Revised Penal Code, the crime is malum in se which
requires criminal intent and damage to the payee and is a crime
against property.
In estafa, the check must have been issued as a reciprocal

consideration for parting of goods. There must be concomitance.
The deceit must be prior to or simultaneous with damage done, that
is, the seller relied on check to part with goods. If it is issued after
parting with goods as in credit accommodation only, there is no
estafa. If the check is issued for a pre-existing obligation, there is no
estafa as damage has already been done. The drawer is liable under
Batas Pambansa Blg. 22.
136

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
For criminal liability to attach under Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, it

is enough that the check was issued to "apply on account or for
value" and upon its presentment it was dishonored by the drawee
bank for insufficiency of funds, provided that the drawer had been
notified of the dishonor and in spite of such notice fails to pay the
holder of the check the full amount due thereon within five days from
notice.
Under Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, a drawer must be given

notice of dishonor and given five banking days from notice within
which to deposit or pay the amount stated in the check to negate the
presumption that the drawer knew of the insufficiency. After this
period, it is conclusive that drawer knew of the insufficiency, thus
there is no more defense to the prosecution under Batas Pambansa
Blg. 22.
The mere issuance of any kind of check regardless of the intent

of the parties, whether the check is intended to serve merely as a
guarantee or as a deposit, makes the drawer liable under Batas
Pambansa Blg. 22 if the check bounces. As a matter of public policy,
the issuance of a worthless check is a public nuisance and must be
abated.
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY INDUCING ANOTHER TO SIGN

ANY DOCUMENTS
1. That the offender induced the offended party to sign a document.
2. That deceit was employed to make him sign the document.
3. That the offended party personally signed the document.
4. That prejudice is caused.
Note: If offended party willingly signed the document and there

was deceit as to the character or contents of the document –
falsification; but where the accused made representation to mislead
the complainants as to the character of the documents - estafa
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY REMOVING, CONCEALING

OR DESTROYING DOCUMENTS
1. That there be court records, office files, documents or any other
papers.
2. That the offender removed, concealed or destroyed any of them.
3. That the offender had intent to defraud another.
In order to commit a crime, the offender must have the intention

to defraud. In other words, the removal, concealment or destruction of
the court record should be done with the intent to defraud the victim.
This is distinguished from the crime of removal, concealment or
destruction of documents under Article 226 wherein fraud is not an
137

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
element of the crime, and which is committed only by public officers.

What is punished under this Article is the damage to public interest.
If the act of removing, concealing or destroying results from

hatred, revenge, or other evil motive, the crime committed is
malicious mischief under Article 327.
Syndicated Estafa
A syndicate of five or more persons formed with intent to carry
out an unlawful or illegal act, transaction or scheme and defraudation
which results in misappropriation of money contributed by
stockholders or members of rural banks, cooperatives, samahang
nayon or former’s association; or funds contributed by corporations or
associations for the general welfare.
DAMAGE OR PREJUDICE CAPABLE OF PECUNIARY
ESTIMATION: (315) (second element of any form of estafa)
THE ELEMENTS OF DAMAGE OR PREJUDICE MAY CONSIST OF

THE FF:
1. The offender party being deprived of his money or property, as a
result of the defraudation.
2. Disturbance in property right or
3. Temporary prejudice.
ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING (PAR.1) BY CONVEYING, SELLING,

ENCUMBERING, OR MORTGAGING ANY REAL PROPERTY,
PRETENDING TO BE THE OWNER OF THE SAME
1. That the thing be immovable, such as a parcel of land or a
building.
2. That the offender who is not the owner of said property
represented that he is the owner thereof.
3. That the offender should have executed an act of ownership
(selling, leasing, encumbering or mortgaging the real property).
4. That the act be made to the prejudice of the owner or a third
person.
Difference between Estafa and Infidelity in the custody of

Documents
ESTAFA INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF
DOCUMENTS
Private individual was Public officer entrusted
entrusted
Intent to defraud No intent to defraud
ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING (PAR. 2) BY DISPOSING OF REAL

PROPERTY AS FREE FROM ENCUMBRANCE, ALTHOUGH SUCH
ENCUMBRANCE BE NOT RECORDED
1. That the thing disposed of is real property.
138

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
2. That the offender knew that the real property was encumbered,
whether the encumbrance is recorded or not.
3. That there must be express representation by the offender that the
real property is free from encumbrance.
4. That the act of disposing of the real property be made to the
damage of another.
ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING (PAR.3) BY WRONGFULLY TAKING

BY THE OWNER HIS PERSONAL FROM ITS LAWFUL
POSSESSOR
1. That the offender is the owner of personal property.
2. That said, personal property is in the lawful possession of another.
3. That the offender wrongfully takes it from its lawful possessor.
4. That prejudice is thereby caused to the possessor or third person.
ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING (PAR. 6) BY SELLING,

MORTGAGING OR ENCUMBERING REAL PROPERTY OR
PROPERTIES WITH WHICH THE OFFENDER GUARANTEED THE
FULFILLMENT OF HIS OBLIGATION AS SURETY
1. That the offender is a surety in a bond given in a criminal or civil
action.
2. That he guaranteed the fulfillment of such obligation with his real
property or properties.
3. That he sells, mortgages, or, in any other manner encumbers said
real property.
4. That such sale, mortgage or encumbrance is (a) without express
authority from the court, or (b) made before the cancellation of his
bond, or (c) before being relieved from the obligation contracted by
him.
Art. 317- ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING A MINOR

1. That the offender takes advantage of the inexperience or emotions
or feelings of a minor.
2. That he induces such minor (a) to assume an obligation, or (b) to
give release, or (c) to execute a transfer of any property right.
3. That the consideration is (a) some loan of money (b) credit or (c)
other personal property.
4. That the transaction is to the detriment of such minors.
The property referred to in this article is not real property. It is

limited to personal property since a minor cannot convey real
property without judicial intervention. So, if what is involved is real
property, the crime of swindling a minor under this article is not
committed even if the offender succeeds in inducing the minor to deal
with such real property since no damage or detriment is caused
against the minor.
Art. 318- ELEMENTS OF OTHER DECEITS
139

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
1. not mentioned above;

2. interpretation of dreams, forecast, future-telling for profit or gain.
The meaning of other deceits under this article has reference to a

situation wherein fraud or damage is done to another by any other
form of deception which is not covered by the preceding articles.
Another form of deceit would be in the nature of interpreting dreams,

or making forecasts, telling fortunes or simply by taking advantage of
the credulity of the public by any other similar manner, done for profit
or gain.
Art. 319- CHATTEL MORTGAGE

A. SELLING OR PLEDGING PERSONAL PROPERTY ALREADY
PLEDGED
ELEMENTS:
1. That personal property is already pledged under the terms of the
chattel mortgage law.
2. That the offender, who is the mortgagee of such property, sells or
pledges the same or any part thereof.
3. That there is no consent of the mortgagee written on the back of
the mortgage and noted on the record thereof in the office of the
register of deeds.
KNOWINGLY REMOVING MORTGAGED PERSONAL PROPERTY
ELEMENTS:
1. that personal property is mortgaged under the chattel mortgage
law.
2. That the offender knows that such property is so mortgaged.
3. That he removes such mortgaged personal to any province or city
other than the one in which it was located at the time of the
execution of the mortgage.
4. that the removal is permanent.
5. That there is no written consent of the mortgagee or his executors,
administration or assigns to such removal.
ARSON AND OTHER CRIMES INVOLVING DESTRUCTIONS

(Note: PD 1613 expressly repealed or amended Arts 320-326, but PD
1744 revived Art 320)
A. ELEMENTS OF ARSONS OF PROPERTY OF SMALL VALUES

1. That an uninhabited hut, storehouse, barn, shed or any other
property is burned
2. That the value of the property burned does not exceed 25 pesos
3. That the burning was done at a time or under circumstances which
clearly exclude all danger of the fire spreading
140

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
B. ELEMENTS OF CRIME INVOLVING DESTRUCTION

1. That the offender causes destruction of the property
2. That the destruction was done by means of:
a. explosion
b. discharge of electric current
c. inundation
d. sinking or stranding of a vessel
e. damaging the engine of the vessel
f. taking up rails from the railway track
g. destroying telegraph wires and posts or those of any other
system
h. other similar effective means of destruction
C. ELEMENTS OF BURNING ONE’S PROPERTY AS A MEANS TO

COMMIT ARSON
1. That the offender set fire to or destroyed his own property
2. That the purpose of the offender in doing so was to commit arson
or to cause a great destruction
3. That the property belonging to another was burned or destroyed
D. ELEMENTS OF ARSON
1. That the property burned is the exclusive property of the offender
2. That (a) the purpose of the offender is burning it is to defraud or
cause damage to another or (b) prejudice is actually caused, or (c)
the thing burned is a building in an inhabited place
Legal effect if death results from arson.

The crime committed is still arson. Death is absorbed in the
crime of arson but the penalty to be imposed ranges from
reclusion perpetua to death. (Sec. 5, P.D. No. 1613)
How arson is established.

Arson is established by proving the corpus delicti, usually in the
form of circumstantial evidence such as the criminal agency, meaning
the substance used, like gasoline, kerosene or other form of bustible
materials which caused the fire. It can also be in the form of electrical
wires, mechanical, chemical or electronic contrivance designed to
start a fire; ashes or traces of such objects which are found in the
ruins of the burned premises.
Nota Bene:
If the crime of arson was employed by the offender as a
means to kill the offended party, the crime committed is murder. The
burning of the property as the means to kill the victim is what is
contemplated by the word “fire” under Article 248 which qualifies the
crime to murder. (People vs. Villarosa, 54 O. G. 3482)
141

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
When the burning of the property was done by the

offender only to cause damage but the arson resulted in the death of
a person, the crime committed is still arson because the death of the
victim is a mere consequence and not the intention of the offender.
(People vs. Paterno, 47 O. G. 4600)
There is no special complex crime of arson with homicide.

What matters in resolving cases involving intentional arson is the
criminal intent of the offender.
There is such a crime as reckless imprudence resulting in

the commission of arson. When the arson results from reckless
imprudence and it leads to death, serious physical injuries and
damage to the property of another, the penalty to be imposed shall
not be for the crime of arson under P. D. No. 1613 but rather, the
penalty shall be based on Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code as a
felony committed by means of culpa.
Art. 327- MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
ELEMENTS
1. That the offender deliberately caused damage to the property of
another.
2. That such act does not constitute arson or other crimes involving
destruction.
3. That the act damaging another’s property be committed merely for
the sake of damaging it.
Nota Bene:
1. Malicious mischief – willful damaging of another’s property for
the sake of causing damage due to hate, revenge or other evil
motive
2. No negligence
3. Example. Killing the cow as revenge
4. If no malice – only civil liability
Meaning of “damage” in malicious mischief.

It means not only loss but a diminution of the value of one’s property.
It includes defacing, deforming or rendering it useless for the purpose
for which it was made.
5. But after damaging the thing, he used it = theft
There is destruction of the property of another but there is no

misappropriation. Otherwise, it would be theft if he gathers the
effects of destruction.
142

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
6. Damage is not incident of a crime (breaking windows in

robbery)
Art. 328- SPECIAL CASES OF MALICIOUS MISCHIEF

1. Obstruct performance of public functions.
2. Using poisonous or corrosive substances.
3. Spreading infection or contagious disease among cattle.
4. Damage to property of national museum or library, archive,
registry, waterworks, road, promenade, or any other thing used in
common by the public.
The cases of malicious mischief enumerated in this article are

so-called qualified malicious mischief. The crime becomes qualified
either because of the nature of the damage caused to obstruct a
public; or because of the kind of substance used to cause the
damage. The crime is still malicious mischief because the offender
has no intent to gain but derives satisfaction from the act because of
hate, revenge or other evil motive.
Note: Qualified malicious mischief – no uprising or sedition (#1)
Art. 329- OTHER MISCHIEF

ELEMENTS:
1. Not included in Art. 328
a. scattering human excrement
b. killing of cow as an act of revenge
The offender is punished according to the value of the damage

caused to the offended party. If the damages cannot be estimated,
the minimum penalty is arresto menor or a fine of not more than 200
pesos shall be imposed on the offender.
Art. 330- DAMAGE AND OBSTRUCTION TO MEANS OF

COMMUNICATION
done by damaging railways, telegraph, telephone lines, electric wires,
traction cables, signal system of railways
Notes:
1. Removing rails from tracks is destruction (Art 324)
2. Not applicable when telegraph/phone lines don’t pertain to
railways (example: for transmission of electric power/light)
3. People killed as a result:
a. murder – if derailment is means of intent to kill
b. none – Art 48
If the damage was intended to cause derailment only without any

intention to kill, it will be a crime involving destruction under Article
324. If the derailment is intentionally done to cause the death of a
person, the crime committed will be murder under Article 248.
143

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
4. Circumstance qualifying the offense if the damage shall result in

any derailment of cars, collision or other accident – a higher
penalty shall be imposed.
Art. 331- DESTROYING OR DAMAGING STATUES, PUBLIC

MONUMENTS OR PAINTINGS
EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN CRIMES AGAINST
PROPERTY
Persons exempt from criminal liability
1. Spouse, ascendants and descendants or relatives by affinity in
the same line
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the property w/c belonged
to the deceased spouse before the same passed into the
possession of another
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, if
living together
Offenses involved in the exemption

1. Theft ( not robbery )
2. Swindling
3. Malicious mischief
Notes:
1. Exemption is based on family relations
For the exemption to apply insofar as brothers and sisters, and

brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law are concerned, they must be living
together at the time of the commission of the crime of theft, estafa or
malicious mischief.
2. Parties to the crime not related to the offended party still

remains criminally liable
3. Persons exempt include:

a. stepfather/mother (ascendants by affinity)
b. adopted children (descendants)
c. concubine/paramour (spouse)
d. common law spouse (property is part of their earnings)
Only the relatives enumerated incur no liability if the crime

relates to theft (not robbery), swindling, and malicious mischief. Third
parties who participate are not exempt. The relationship between the
spouses is not limited to legally married couples; the provision applies
to live-in partners.
144

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Title 11- CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
The crimes of adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction and

acts of lasciviousness are the so-called private crimes. They cannot
be prosecuted except upon the complaint initiated by the offended
party. The law regards the privacy of the offended party here as more
important than the disturbance to the order of society. For the law
gives the offended party the preference whether to sue or not to sue.
But the moment the offended party has initiated the criminal
complaint, the public prosecutor will take over and continue with
prosecution of the offender. That is why under Article 344, if the
offended party pardons the offender, that pardon will only be valid if it
comes before the prosecution starts. The moment the prosecution
starts, the crime has already become public and it is beyond the
offended party to pardon the offender.
Art. 333- ADULTERY
ELEMENTS
1. That the woman is married (even if marriage subsequently
declared void)
2. That she has sexual intercourse with a man not her husband.
3. That as regards the man with whom she has sexual intercourses,
he must know her to be married.
Nota Bene:
There are two reasons why adultery is made punishable by law.
Primarily, it is a violation of the marital vow and secondarily, it paves
the way to the introduction of a spurious child into the family.
Adultery is a crime not only of the married woman but also of
the man who had intercourse with a married woman knowing her to
be married. Even if the man proves later on that he does not know
the woman to be married, at the beginning, he must still be included
in the complaint or information. This is so because whether he knows
the woman to be married or not is a matter of defense and it's up to
him to ventilate that in formal investigations or a formal trial.
145

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
If after preliminary investigation, the public prosecutor is

convinced that the man did not know that the woman is married, then
he could simply file the case against the woman.
The acquittal of the woman does not necessarily result in the

acquittal of her co-accused.
In order to constitute adultery, there must be a joint physical act.

Joint criminal intent is not necessary. Although the criminal intent
may exist in the mind of one of the parties to the physical act, there
may be no such intent in the mind of the other party. One may be
guilty of the criminal intent, the other innocent, and yet the joint
physical act necessary to constitute the adultery may be complete.
So, if the man had no knowledge that the woman was married, he
would be innocent insofar as the crime of adultery is concerned but
the woman would still be guilty; the former would have to be acquitted
and the latter found guilty, although they were tried together.
A husband committing concubinage may be required to support

his wife committing adultery under the rule in pari delicto.
For adultery to exist, there must be a marriage although it be

subsequently annulled. There is no adultery, if the marriage is void
from the beginning.
Adultery is an instantaneous crime which is consummated and

completed at the moment of the carnal union. Each sexual
intercourse constitutes a crime of adultery. Adultery is not a
continuing crime unlike concubinage.
Illustration 1:
Madame X is a married woman residing in Pasay City. He met a
man, Y, at Roxas Boulevard. She agreed to go with Baguio City,
supposedly to come back the next day. When they were in Bulacan,
they stayed in a motel, having sexual intercourse there. After that,
they proceeded again and stopped at Dagupan City, where they went
to a motel and had sexual intercourse.
There are two counts of adultery committed in this instance: one

adultery in Bulacan, and another adultery in Dagupan City. Even if it
involves the same man, each intercourse is a separate crime of
adultery.
1. Mitigated if wife was abandoned without justification by the

offended spouse (man is entitled to this mitigating
circumstance)
146

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Abandonment without justification is not an exemption but only a

mitigating circumstance. One who invokes abandonment in the crime
of adultery hypothetically admits criminal liability for the crime
charged. (U. S. vs. Serrano, et al., 28 Phil. 230)
While abandonment is peculiar only to the accused who is related to

the offended party and must be considered only as to her or him as
provided under Article 62, paragraph 3, nonetheless, judicially
speaking, in the crime of adultery, there is only one act committed
and consequently both accused are entitled to this mitigating
circumstance. (People vs. Avelino, 40 O.G. Supp. 11, 194)
2. Attempted: caught disrobing a lover
There is no frustrated adultery because of the nature of the

offense.
In the case of People vs. Pontio Guinucud, et al., (58 Phil. 621), a
private agreement was entered into between the husband and wife
for them to separate from bed and board and for each of them to go
his and her own separate way. Thereafter, the wife Rosario Tagayum
lived with her co-accused Pontio Guinucud in a nearby barangay.
Their love affair ultimately embroiled the spouses’ conservative and
reputable families in a human drama exposed in legal battles and
whispers of unwanted gossip. In dismissing the complaint, the Court
ruled that while a private agreement between the husband and wife
was null and void, the same was admissible proof of the express
consent given by the condescending husband to the prodigal wife, a
license for her to commit adultery. Such agreement bars the husband
from instituting a criminal complaint for adultery.
After filing the complaint for adultery and while the case is pending
trial and resolution by the trial court, the offended spouse must not
have sexual intercourse with the adulterous wife since an act of
intercourse subsequent to the adulterous conduct is considered as
implied pardon. (People vs. Muguerza, et al., 13 C.A. Rep. 1079)
It is seldom the case that adultery is established by direct evidence.

The legal tenet has been and still is “circumstantial and corroborative
evidence that will lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and
just man to the conclusion that the criminal act of adultery has been
committed will bring about conviction for the crime.” (U. S. vs.
Feliciano, 36 Phil. 753)
Art 334-CONCUBINAGE
ELEMENTS:
1. That the man must be married.
2. That he committed any of the following acts:
147

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
a. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling.

b. Having sexual intercourse under scandalous circumstances
with a woman who is not his wife.
c. Cohabiting with her in any other place.
3. That as regards the woman she must know him to be married.
Note: “Scandal” consists in any reprehensible word/deed that

offends public conscience, redounds to the detriment of the feelings
of honest persons and gives occasions to the neighbor’s spiritual
damage and ruin
With respect to concubinage the same principle applies: only the

offended spouse can bring the prosecution. This is a crime
committed by the married man, the husband. Similarly, it includes the
woman who had a relationship with the married man.
It has been asked why the penalty for adultery is higher than
concubinage when both crimes are infidelity to the marital vows. The
reason given for this is that when the wife commits adultery, there is a
probability that she will bring a stranger into the family. If the
husband commits concubinage, this probability does not arise
because the mother of the child will always carry the child with her.
So even if the husband brings with him the child, it is clearly known
that the child is a stranger. Not in the case of a married woman who
may bring a child to the family under the guise of a legitimate child.
This is the reason why in the former crime the penalty is higher than
the latter.
Unlike adultery, concubinage is a continuing crime.
If the charges consist in keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling,

there is no need for proof of sexual intercourse. The conjugal
dwelling is the house of the spouse even if the wife happens to be
temporarily absent therefrom. The woman however must be brought
into the conjugal house by the accused husband as a concubine to
fall under this article. Thus, if the co-accused was voluntarily taken
and sheltered by the spouses in their house and treated as an
adopted child being a relative of the complaining wife, her illicit
relations with the accused husband does not make her a mistress.
(People vs. Hilao, et al., (C.A.) 52 O.G. 904).
It is only when a married man has sexual intercourse with a woman

elsewhere that “scandalous circumstances” becomes an element
of crime.
For the existence of the crime of concubinage by having sexual

intercourse under scandalous circumstances, the latter must be
148

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
imprudent and wanton as to offend modesty and sense of morality

and decency.
When spies are employed to chronicle the activities of the accused

and the evidence presented to prove scandalous circumstances are
those taken by the detectives, it is obvious that the sexual intercourse
done by the offenders was not under scandalous circumstances.
(U.S. vs. Campos-Rueda, 35 Phil. 51)
Causal sexual intercourse with a woman in a hotel is not

concubinage. Likewise, keeping a mistress in a townhouse procured
and furnished by a married man who does not live or sleep with her in
said townhouse does not constitute concubinage since there is no
cohabitation.
The rule is that, if a married man’s conduct with a woman who is not
his wife was not confined to occasional or transient interview for
carnal intercourse but is carried on in the manner of husband and
wife and for some period of time, then such association is sufficient to
constitute cohabitation. (People vs. Zuniga, CA 57 O.G. 2497)
If the evidence of the prosecution consists of a marriage contract

between the offender and the offended party, and the additional fact
of the birth certificate of a child showing the accused to be the father
of the child with the alleged concubine, the same will not be sufficient
to convict the accused of concubinage since the law clearly states
that the act must be one of those provided by law.
Art. 336- ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS

ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness.
2. That it is done under any of the following circumstances:
a. by using force or intimidation, or
b. when the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious, or
c. when the offended party is under 12 years of age.
3. That the offended party is another person of either sex.
Note that there are two kinds of acts of lasciviousness under the
Revised Penal Code: (1) under Article 336, and (2) under Article
339.
1. Article 336. Acts of Lasciviousness
Under this article, the offended party may be a man or a woman. The
crime committed, when the act performed with lewd design was
perpetrated under circumstances which would have brought about
149

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
the crime of rape if sexual intercourse was effected, is acts of

lasciviousness under this article. This means that the offended
party is either –
(1)under 12 years of age; or

(2)being over 12 years of age, the lascivious acts were committed on
him or her through violence or intimidation, or while the offender
party was deprived of reason, or otherwise unconscious.
2. Article 339. Acts of Lasciviousness with the Consent of the

Offended Party:
Under this article, the victim is limited only to a woman. The

circumstances under which the lascivious acts were committed
must be that of qualified seduction or simple seduction, that is, the
offender took advantage of his position of ascendancy over the
offender woman either because he is a person in authority, a
domestic, a househelp, a priest, a teacher or a guardian, or there
was a deceitful promise of marriage which never would really be
fulfilled.
Always remember that there can be no frustration of acts of

lasciviousness, rape or adultery because no matter how far the
offender may have gone towards the realization of his purpose, if his
participation amounts to performing all the acts of execution, the
felony is necessarily produced as a consequence thereof.
Intent to rape is not a necessary element of the crime of acts of

lasciviousness. Otherwise, there would be no crime of attempted
rape.
In the crime of acts of lasciviousness, the intention of the wrongdoer

is not very material. The motive that impelled the accused to commit
the offense is of no importance because the essence of lewdness is
in the act itself.
What constitutes lewd or lascivious conduct must be determined from

the circumstances of each case. The demarcation line is not always
easy to determine but in order to sustain a conviction for acts of
lasciviousness, it is essential that the acts complained of be prompted
by lust or lewd designs and the victim did not consent to nor
encouraged the act.
To be guilty of this crime however, the acts of lasciviousness

must be committed under any of the circumstances that had there
been sexual intercourse, the crime would have been Rape. Where
circumstances however are such, indicating a clear intention to lie
with the offended party, the crime committed as Attempted Rape.
150

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
This crime (Art. 336) can be committed by either sex unlike in

Acts of Lasciviousness with Consent under Article 339. Thus, a
lesbian who toyed with the private part of an eleven-year-old girl who
enjoyed it since she was given $50 dollars before the act, is guilty of
Act of Lasciviousness under this Article as the victim is below twelve
year old; and had sexual intercourse been possible and done, the act
would have been Rape.
SEDUCTION
Art 337- QUALIFIED SEDUCTION

Two classes of qualified seduction:
1. Seduction of a virgin over 12 and under 18 years of age by
certain persons, such as a person in authority, priest, teachers
etc and
2. Seduction of a sister by her brother or descendant by her
ascendant, regardless of her age or reputation (incestuous
seduction)
Elements:
1. That the offended party is a virgin, (presumed if she is unmarried
and of good reputation.)
2. That she must be over 12 and under 18 years of age.
3. That the offender has sexual intercourse with her.
4. That there is abuse of authority, confidence or relationship on the
part of the offender ( person entrusted with education or custody
of victim; person in public authority, priest; servant)
Persons liable:
1. Those who abuse their authority:
a. persons in public authority
b. guardian
c. teacher
d. person who, in any capacity, is entrusted with the education
or custody of the woman seduced
2. Those who abused the confidence reposed in them:

a. priest
b. house servant
c. domestic
3. Those who abused their relationship:

a. brother who seduced his sister
b. ascendant who seduced his descendant
151

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
This crime also involves sexual intercourse. The offended woman

must be over 12 but below 18 years.
The distinction between qualified seduction and simple seduction lies

in the fact, among others, that the woman is a virgin in qualified
seduction, while in simple seduction, it is not necessary that the
woman be a virgin. It is enough that she is of good repute.
For purposes of qualified seduction, virginity does not mean physical

virginity. It means that the offended party has not had any experience
before.
The virginity referred to here, is not to be understood in so

material a sense as to exclude the idea of abduction of a virtuous
woman of a good reputation. Thus, when the accused claims he had
prior intercourse with the complainant, the latter is still to be
considered a virgin (U.S. vs. Casten, 34 Phil. 808). But if it was
established that the girl had a carnal relationship with other men,
there can be no crime of Seduction as she is not a virgin.
Although in qualified seduction, the age of the offended woman is

considered, if the offended party is a descendant or a sister of the
offender – no matter how old she is or whether she is a prostitute –
the crime of qualified seduction is committed.
Illustration:
If a person goes to a sauna parlor and finds there a descendant
and despite that, had sexual intercourse with her, regardless of
her reputation or age, the crime of qualified seduction is
committed.
In the case of a teacher, it is not necessary that the offended woman

be his student. It is enough that she is enrolled in the same school.
Deceit is not necessary in qualified seduction. Qualified seduction is

committed even though no deceit intervened or even when such
carnal knowledge was voluntary on the part of the virgin. This is
because in such a case, the law takes for granted the existence of
the deceit as an integral element of the crime and punishes it with
greater severity than it does the simple seduction, taking into account
the abuse of confidence on the part of the agent. Abuse of
confidence here implies fraud.
The fact that the offended party gave her consent to the sexual
intercourse is not a defense. Lack of consent on the part of the
complainant is not an element of the crime.
152

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
The term domestic refers to a person usually living under the same
roof with the offended party. It includes all those persons residing with
the family and who are members of the same household, regardless
of the fact that their residence may only be temporary or that they
may be paying for their board and lodging.
A domestic worker should not be confused with a house servant. A

domestic is not necessarily a house servant.
Where the offended party is below 12 years of age, regardless of

whether the victim is a sister or a descendant of the offender, the
crime committed is rape.
If the offended party is married and over 12 years of age, the crime
committed will be adultery.
An essential element of a qualified seduction is virginity (doncella). It

is a condition existing in a woman who has had no sexual intercourse
with any man. It does not refer to the condition of the hymen as being
intact.
One who is charged with qualified seduction can be convicted of

rape. But one who is charged with rape cannot be convicted of
qualified seduction under the same information. (People vs. Ramirez,
69 SCRA 144)
Even if the woman has already lost her virginity because of rape, in
the eyes of the law, she remains a virtuous woman even if physically
she is no longer a virgin.
Art 338- SIMPLE SEDUCTION
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offended party is over 12 and under 18 years of age.
2. That she must be of good reputation, single or widow.
3. That the offender has sexual intercourse with her.
4. That it is committed by means of deceit.
Deceit generally takes the form of an unfulfilled promise to marry.

The promise of marriage must serve as the inducement. The woman
must yield on account of the promise of marriage or other forms of
inducement. (People vs. Hernandez, 29 Phil. 109)
Where the accused failed to have sex with this sweetheart over
twelve (12) but below eighteen (18) years old because the latter
refused as they were not yet married, and the accused procured the
performance of a fictitious marriage ceremony because of which the
girlfriend yielded, he is guilty of Simple Seduction. (U.S. vs.
153

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Hernandez, 29 Phil. 109). Here, there was deceit employed. This act
may now be considered Rape under R.A. 8353, Sec. 2 par. 6.
A promise of material things in exchange for the woman’s

surrender of her virtue does not constitute deceit.
If a woman under 18 years of age but over 12 agrees to a sexual

intercourse with a man who promised her precious jewels but the
man reneges on his promise, there is no seduction that the woman is
of loose morals. (Luis B. Reyes)
Promise of marriage must precede sexual intercourse.
A promise of marriage made by the accused after sexual
intercourse had taken place, or after the woman had yielded her body
to the man by mutual consent will not render the man liable for simple
seduction.
The offended woman must be under 18 but not less than 12 years
old; otherwise, the crime is statutory rape.
Unlike in qualified seduction, virginity is not essential in this crime.
What is required is that the woman be unmarried and of good
reputation. Simple seduction is not synonymous with loss of virginity.
If the woman is married, the crime will be adultery.
Art 339- ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS WITH THE CONSENT OF

THE OFFENDED PARTY
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender commits acts of lasciviousness or lewdness.
2. That the acts are committed upon a woman who is virgin or single
or widow of good reputation, under 18 years of age but over 12
years, or a sister or descendant regardless of her reputation or
age.
3. That the offender accomplishes the acts by abuse of authority,
confidence, relationship, or deceit.
When the act of lasciviousness is committed with the use of

force or intimidation or when the offended party is under 12 years of
age, the object of the crime can either be a woman or a man.
Where the acts of the offender were limited to acts of lewdness

or lasciviousness, and no carnal knowledge was had; but had there
been sexual intercourse, the offense would have been Seduction, he
is guilty of Acts of Lasciviousness under this article.
The crime of acts of lasciviousness under Article 339 is one that

is done with the consent of the offended party who is always a
woman. The lewd acts committed against her are with her consent
only because the offender took advantage of his authority, or there
154

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
was abuse of confidence, or the employment of deceit, or the

offender is related to the victim.
In the commission of the acts of lasciviousness either by force

or intimidation, or with the consent of the offended party, there must
be no sexual intercourse, or the acts performed are short of sexual
intercourse. In the first situation, the crime would either be qualified
seduction or simple seduction if the offender succeeds in having
sexual intercourse with the victim. In these two cases, there is
consent but the same is procured by the offender through the
employment of deceit, abuse of confidence, abuse of authority or
because of the existence of blood relationship.
Art. 340- CORRUPTION OF MINORS
Act punishable:
By promoting or facilitating the prostitution or corruption of persons
underage to satisfy the lust of another
It is not required that the offender be the guardian or custodian
of the minor.
It is not necessary that the minor be prostituted or corrupted as
the law merely punishes the act of promoting or facilitating the
prostitution or corruption of said minor and that he acted in order to
satisfy the lust of another.
A single act of promoting or facilitating the corruption or
prostitution of a minor is sufficient to constitute violation of this article.
What the law punishes is the act of a pimp (bugaw) who

facilitates the corruption of a minor. It is not the unchaste act of the
minor which is being punished. So, a mere proposal to promote or
facilitate the prostitution or corruption of a minor is sufficient to
consummate the crime.
Young minors should enjoy a good reputation. Apparently, a

prostitute above 12 and under 18 years of age cannot be the victim in
the crime of corruption of minors.
Art. 341- WHITE SLAVE TRADE

Acts penalized:
1. Engaging in the business of prostitution
2. Profiting by prostitution
3. Enlisting the service of women for the purpose of prostitution
The person liable under Article 341 is the one who maintains or
engages in the trade of prostitution. A white slave is a woman held
unwillingly for purposes of commercial prostitution. A white slaver on
the other hand is one engaged in white slave traffic, procurer of white
slaves or prostitutes.
155

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
The most common way of committing this crime would be

through the maintenance of a bar or saloon where women engage in
prostitution. For each intercourse, the women pay the maintainer or
owner of a certain amount in this case, the maintainer of owner of the
bar or saloon is liable for white slave trade. (People vs. Go Lo, 56
O.G. 4056)
ABDUCTION
Art. 342- FORCIBLE ABDUCTION

ELEMENTS:
1. That the person abducted is any woman, regardless of her age,
civil status, or reputation.
2. That the abduction is against her will.
3. That the abduction is with lewd designs.
Note: Sexual intercourse is NOT necessary.
Crimes against chastity where age and reputation of victim are

immaterial: rape, acts of lasciviousness, qualified seduction of
sister/descendant, forcible abduction
Forcible abduction defined.

It is the taking away of any woman against her will, from her
house or the place where she may be, for the purpose of carrying her
to another place with intent to marry or corrupt her.
A woman is carried against her will or brought from one place to
another against her will with lewd design.
Unlike in Rape and Seduction, in the crime of Abduction,
whether Forcible or Consented, there is no sexual intercourse. The
acts are limited to taking away from a place the victim, but the same
must be with lewd designs, that is, with unchaste design manifested
by kissing and touching the victim’s private parts.
If the element of lewd design is present, the carrying of the
woman would qualify as abduction; otherwise, it would amount to
kidnapping. If the woman was only brought to a certain place in order
to break her will and make her agree to marry the offender, the crime
is only grave coercion because the criminal intent of the offender is to
force his will upon the woman and not really to restrain the woman of
her liberty.
Where lewd design was not proved or shown, and the victim
was deprived of her liberty, the crime is Kidnapping with Serious
Illegal Detention under this Article 267, RPC.
The element of lewd designs, which is essential to the crime of
abduction through violence refers to the intention to abuse the
abducted woman. If such intention is lacking or does not exist, the
crime may be illegal detention. It is necessary to establish the
156

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
unchaste design or purpose of the offender. But it is sufficient that the

intent to seduce the girl is present. The evil purpose of the offender
may be established or inferred from the overt acts of the accused.
If the offended woman is under 12 years old, even if she
consented to the abduction, the crime is forcible abduction and not
consented abduction.
Where the offended woman is below the age of consent, even
though she had gone with the offender through some deceitful
promises revealed upon her to go with him and they live together as
husband and wife without the benefit of marriage, the ruling is that
forcible abduction is committed by the mere carrying of the woman as
long as that intent is already shown. In other words, where the man
cannot possibly give the woman the benefit of an honorable life, all
that man promised are just machinations of a lewd design and,
therefore, the carrying of the woman is characterized with lewd
design and would bring about the crime of abduction and not
kidnapping. This is also true if the woman is deprived of reason and
if the woman is mentally retardate. Forcible abduction is committed
and not consented abduction.
Lewd designs may be demonstrated by the lascivious acts
performed by the offender on her. Since this crime does not involve
sexual intercourse, if the victim is subjected to this, then a crime of
rape is further committed and a complex crime of forcible abduction
with rape is committed.
Lewd design does not include sexual intercourse. So, if sexual
intercourse is committed against the offended party after her forcible
abduction, the offender commits another crime separate and distinct
from forcible abduction. In this case, the accused should be charged
with forcible abduction with rape. (People vs. Jose, et al., 37 SCRA
450)
If the accused carried or took away the victim by means of force
and with lewd design and thereafter raped her, the crime is Forcible
Abduction with Rape, the former being a necessary means to commit
the latter. The subsequent two (2) other sexual intercourse
committed against the will of the complainant would be treated as
independent separate crimes of Rape. (People vs. Bacalso, 210
SCRA 206).
If the main object of the offender is to rape the victim, and the
forcible abduction was resorted to by the accused in order to facilitate
the commission of the rape, then the crime committed is only rape.
(People vs. Toledo, 83 Phil. 777)
Where the victim was taken from one place to another, solely
for the purpose of killing him and not detaining him for any legal
length of time, the crime committed is murder. (People vs. Ong, 62
SCRA 174)
True intention of the offender should be ascertained. If the
detention is only incidental, the same should be considered as
157

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
absorbed. Otherwise, it should be treated as a separate offense.

When such a situation arises, we should consider the application of
Article 48 on complex crimes.
The taking away of the woman may be accomplished by means
of deceit at the beginning and then by means of violence and
intimidation later.
The virginity of the complaining witness is not a determining
factor in forcible abduction.
In order to demonstrate the presence of the lewd design, illicit
criminal relations with the person abducted need not be shown. The
intent to seduce a girl is sufficient.
If there is a separation in fact, the taking by the husband of his
wife against her will constitutes grave coercion.
Distinction between Forcible Abduction and Illegal Detention:

When a woman is kidnapped with lewd or unchaste designs,
the crime committed is forcible abduction.
When the kidnapping is without lewd designs, the crime committed is
illegal detention.
But where the offended party was forcibly taken to the house of
the defendant to coerce her to marry him, it was held that only grave
coercion was committed and not illegal detention.
Forcible abduction must be distinguished from the crime of
kidnapping. When the violent taking of a woman is motivated by lewd
design, the crime committed is forcible abduction. But if the motive of
the offender is to deprive the woman of her liberty, the crime
committed is kidnapping. Abduction is a crime against chastity while
kidnapping is a crime against personal liberty.
Art. 343- CONSENTED ABDUCTION

ELEMENTS:
1. That the offended party must be a virgin.
2. That she must be over 12 and under 18 years of age.
3. That the taking away of the offended party must be with her
consent, after solicitation or cajolery from the offender.
4. That the taking away of the offended party must be with lewd
designs.
Virginity may be presumed from the fact that the offended party
is unmarried and has been leading a moral life. Virginity or
maidenhood should not be understood in such a matter of fact as to
completely exclude a woman who has had previous sexual
intercourse. If the previous sexual intercourse was the result of the
crime of rape, the intercourse committed with her against he will and
over her violent objection should not render her unchaste and a
woman of bad reputation.
158

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
If the virgin is under 12 years old, the crime committed is

forcible abduction because of the theory that a child below 12 years
of age has no will of her own.
The purpose of the law on consented abduction is to punish the
offender for causing disgrace and scandal to the family of the
offended party. The law does not punish the offender for the wrong
done to the woman since in the eyes of the law, she consented to her
seduction.
The deceit which is termed by the law as solicitation or cajolery

may be in the form of honeyed promises of marriage.
In consented Abduction, it is not necessary that the young
victim, (a virgin over twelve and under eighteen) be personally
taken from her parent’s home by the accused; it is sufficient that
he was instrumental in her leaving the house. He must however
use solicitation, cajolery or deceit, or honeyed promises of marriage
to induce the girl to escape from her home.
In consented abduction, the taking away of the virgin must be
with lewd design. Actual sexual intercourse with the woman is not
necessary. However, if the same is established, then it will be
considered as strong evidence to prove lewd design.
Art. 344- PROSECUTION OF ADULTERY, CONCUBINAGE,

SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION RAPE AND ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS
1. Adultery and concubinage must be prosecuted upon
complaint signed by the offended spouse
2. Seduction, abduction, rape or acts of lasciviousness must be
prosecuted upon complaint signed by:
a. offended party
b. by her parents
c. grandparents
d. guardians in the order in which they are named above
The crimes of adultery and concubinage must be prosecuted

upon a complaint signed by the offended spouse. In the complaint,
the offended party must include both guilty parties if they are both
alive.
The word guardian as mentioned in the law refers to the
guardian appointed by the court. (People vs. Formento, et al., 60 Phil.
434)
What is the meaning of “shall have consented” which bars the
institution of criminal action for adultery or concubinage?
The term “consent” has reference to the tie prior to the commission of
the crime. In other words, the offended party gives his or her consent
to the future infidelity of the offending spouse.
159

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
And so, while consent refers to the offense prior to its

commission, pardon refers to the offense after its commission.
(People vs. Schnekenburger, et al., 73 Phil. 413)
Note: Marriage of the offender with the offended party extinguishes

the criminal action or remit the penalty already imposed upon him.
This applies as well to the accomplices, accessories-after-the-fact.
But marriages must be in good faith. This rule does not apply in case
of multiple rape
In the crimes involving rape, abduction, seduction, and acts of
lasciviousness, the marriage by the offender with the offended
woman generally extinguishes criminal liability, not only of the
principal but also of the accomplice and accessory. However, the
mere fact of marriage is not enough because it is already decided
that if the offender marries the offended woman without any intention
to perform the duties of a husband as shown by the fact that after the
marriage, he already left her, the marriage would appear as having
been contracted only to avoid the punishment. Even with that
marriage, the offended woman could still prosecute the offender and
that marriage will not have the effect of extinguishing the criminal
liability.
Pardon by the offended woman of the offender is not a manner
of extinguishing criminal liability but only a bar to the prosecution of
the offender. Therefore, that pardon must come before the
prosecution is commenced. When the prosecution is already
commenced or initiated, pardon by the offended woman will no longer
be effective because pardon may preclude prosecution but not
prevent the same.
Pardon in crimes against chastity, is a bar to prosecution. But it
must come before the institution of the criminal action. (See the cases
of People vs. Villorente, 210 SCRA 647; People vs. Avila, 192 SCRA
635) To be effective, it must include both accused.
How about a pardon declared by the offended party during

the trial of the case? Such a declaration is not a ground for the
dismissal of the case. Pardon is a matter of defense which the
accused must plead and prove during the trial. (People vs. Riotes,
C.A., 49 O.G.3403).
ART. 345- CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS GUILTY OF RAPE,

SEDUCTION OR ABDUCTION
1. To indemnify the offended women;
2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law should prevent him
from doing so; and
3. In every case to support the offspring.
The civil liability of the adulterer and the concubine is limited to

indemnity for damages caused to the offended spouse. The law does
160

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
not mention the adulteress in the crime of adultery such that only the
adulterer shall be held civilly liable.
There is likewise no mention of the offender in the crime of acts
of lasciviousness, as being held liable for civil damages under Article
345, the law only mentioned the crimes of rape, seduction and
abduction.
Under Article 2219 of the Civil Code, moral damages may be
recovered in seduction, abduction, rape or other lascivious acts. The
crimes of adultery and concubinage are also included.
In the crimes of rape, abduction and seduction, if the offended
woman had given birth to the child, among the liabilities of the
offender is to support the child. This obligation to support the child
may be true even if there are several offenders. As to whether all of
them will acknowledge the child, that is a different question because
the obligation to support here is not founded on civil law but is the
result of a criminal act or a form of punishment.
It has been held that where the woman who was the victim of
the said crime could not possibly conceive anymore, the trial court
should not provide in its sentence that the accused, in case a child is
born, should support the child. This should only be proper when
there is a probability that the offended woman could give birth to an
offspring.
Title 12- CRIMES AGAINST CIVIL STATUS OF PERSON
Art. 347- SIMULATION OF BIRTHS, SUBSTITUTION OF ONE

CHILD FOR ANOTHER, AND CONCEALMENT OR
ABANDONMENT OF A LEGITIMATE CHILD
Acts Punished:
1. Simulation of births
2. Substitution of one child for another
3. Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child with the intent to
cause such child to lose its civil status
Requisites:
1. The child must be legitimate;
2. The offender conceals or abandons such child; and
3. The offender has the intent to cause the child to lose its civil
status.
Elements of Simulation of Birth

1. Child is baptized or registered in the Registry of birth as hers
2. Child loses its real status and acquires a new one
3. Actor’s purpose was to cause the loss of any trace as to the
child’s true filiation
161

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Simulation of birth takes place when a woman pretends to be

pregnant when in fact she is not and on the day of the supposed
delivery, she takes the child of another and declares the child to be
her own. This is done by entering in the birth certificate of the child
that the offender is the alleged mother of the child when in fact the
child belongs to another.
Art. 348- USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS

Committed by a person who represents himself as another and
assumes the filiation or rights pertaining to such person
Notes:
1. There must be criminal intent to enjoy the civil rights of
another by the offender knowing he is not entitled thereto.
The term "civil status" includes one's public station, or the rights,
duties, capacities and incapacities which determine a person to a
given class. It seems that the term "civil status" includes one's
profession.
2. Committed by assuming the filiation, or the parental or

conjugal rights of another.
Usurpation is committed by assuming the filiation or parental (when

maternal, paternal or conjugal) claim of another. To be liable for
usurpation of civil status, the offender must have the intent to enjoy
the rights arising from the civil status of another.
3. Circumstances qualifying the offense: penalty is heavier when the

purpose of the impersonation is to defraud the offended party or
his heirs
Art. 349- BIGAMY

ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender has been legally married.
2. That the marriage has not been legally dissolved or, in case his
or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse could not yet be
presumed dead according to the civil code.
3. That he contracts a second or subsequent marriage.
4. That the second or subsequent marriage has all the essential
requisites for validity.
Nota Bene:
1. The crime does not fall within the category of private crimes that
can be prosecuted only at the instance of the offended party
PUBLIC CRIME
162

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
● For the crime of bigamy to prosper the first marriage must

be valid. If the first marriage is void from the beginning, such
nullity of the marriage is not a defense in a charge of bigamy.
Consequently, when raised as a defense, the accused should
be convicted since until and unless annulled, the bond of
matrimony remains or is maintained.
● Need for judicial declaration of nullity
● The second marriage must have all the essential
requisites for validity were it not for the existence of the first
marriage.
2. A simulated marriage is not marriage at all and can be used as a

defense for bigamy
Good faith is a defense in bigamy.

One who, although not yet married before, knowingly consents to be
married to one who is already married is guilty of bigamy knowing
that the latter’s marriage is still valid and subsisting.
3. There must be a summary proceeding to declare the absent

spouse presumptively dead for purposes of remarriage
4. Failure to exercise due diligence to ascertain the whereabouts of
the 1st wife is bigamy through reckless imprudence
5. A judicial declaration of the nullity of a marriage void ab initio is
now required
6. One convicted for bigamy may be prosecuted for concubinage as
both are distinct offenses
7. One who vouches that there is no legal impediment knowing that
one of the parties is already married is an accomplice
Distinction between bigamy and illegal marriage:

Bigamy is a form of illegal marriage. The offender must have a
valid and subsisting marriage. Despite the fact that the marriage is
still subsisting, he contracts a subsequent marriage.
Illegal marriage includes also such other marriages which are

performed without complying with the requirements of law, or such
premature marriages, or such marriage which was solemnized by one
who is not authorized to solemnize the same.
Art. 350- MARRIAGE CONTRACTED AGAINST PROVISIONS OF

LAWS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender contracted marriage.
2. That he knew at the time that
a. the requirement of the law were not complied with, or
b. The marriage was in disregard of a legal impediment.
163

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Note: Circumstance qualifying the offense: if either of the

contracting parties obtains the consent of the other by means of
violence, intimidation or fraud
The requirements of the law for a valid marriage are:

1. The legal capacity of the contracting parties;
2. Their consent freely given;
3. Authority of the person performing the marriage; and
4. Marriage license, except in marriage under exceptional
circumstances.
The law further provides that for accused to be liable under this
article, he should not be guilty of bigamy because otherwise, the
crime punished under Article 350 is deemed absorbed in the bigamy.
Marriages contracted against the provisions of laws

1. The marriage does not constitute bigamy.
2. The marriage is contracted knowing that the requirements of the
law have not been complied with or in disregard of legal
impediments.
3. One where the consent of the other was obtained by means of
violence, intimidation or fraud.
4. If the second marriage is void because the accused knowingly
contracted it without complying with legal requirements as the
marriage license, although he was previously married.
5. Marriage solemnized by a minister or priest who does not have the
required authority to solemnize marriages.
Art. 351- PREMATURE MARRIAGE

Acts punished:
1. A widow who within 301 days from death of husband, got married
or before her delivery, if she was pregnant at the time of his death
2. A woman whose marriage having been dissolved or annulled,
married before her delivery or within 301 days after the legal
separation
Art. 352- PERFORMANCE OF ILLEGAL MARRIAGE CEREMONY

Act punished:
performance of any illegal marriage ceremony by a priest or minister
of any religious denomination or sect or by civil authorities
164

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Title 13- CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
Art. 353- LIBEL

ELEMENTS:
1. That there must be an imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect,
real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or
circumstances.
2. That the imputation must be made publicly.
3. That it must be malicious.
4. That the imputation must be directed at a natural or juridical
person, or one who is dead.
5. That the imputation must tend to cause the dishonor, discredit or
contempt of the person defamed.
Libel is a public and malicious imputation of a crime, or a vice or

defect, real or imaginary or any act, commission, condition, status
or circumstances tending to cause the dishonor, discredit or
contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory
of one who is dead
Character of the words used to make it defamatory.
Words calculated to induce suspicion are more effective in

destroying reputation than false charges directly made. Ironical and
metaphorical language is a favored vehicle for slander. A charge is
sufficient if the words are calculated to induce the hearer to suppose
and understand that the person against whom they are uttered is
guilty of certain offenses, or are sufficient to impeach his honesty,
virtue or reputation, or to hold him up to public ridicule. (U.S. vs.
O’Connell, 37 Phil. 767)
Malice has been defined as a term used to indicate the fact that
the defamer is prompted by personal ill or spite and speaks not in
response to duty but merely to injure the reputation of the person
defamed.
Kinds of Malice.
Malice in law – This is assumed and is inferred from the defamatory
character of an imputation. The presumption of malice attaches to
the defamatory statement especially if it appears to be insulting
165

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
per se. The law presumes that the defamer made the imputation
without good intention or justifiable motive.
Malice in fact – This refers to malice as a fact. The presence and

existence of personal ill-will or spite may still appear even if the
statement is not defamatory. So, where the defamatory acts may
be presumed from the publication of the defamatory acts imputed
refer to the private life of the individual, malice may be presumed
from the publication of the defamatory statement because no one
has a right to invade another’s privacy.
Distinction between malice in fact and malice in law

Malice in fact is the malice which the law presumes from every
statement whose tenor is defamatory. It does not need proof. The
mere fact that the utterance or statement is defamatory negates a
legal presumption of malice.
In the crime of libel, which includes oral defamation, there is no
need for the prosecution to present evidence of malice. It is enough
that the alleged defamatory or libelous statement be presented to the
court verbatim. It is the court which will prove whether it is
defamatory or not. If the tenor of the utterance or statement is
defamatory, the legal presumption of malice arises even without
proof.
Malice in fact becomes necessary only if the malice in law has
been rebutted. Otherwise, there is no need to adduce evidence of
malice in fact. So, while malice in law does not require evidence,
malice in fact requires evidence.
Malice in law can be negated by evidence that, in fact, the
alleged libelous or defamatory utterance was made with good
motives and justifiable ends or by the fact that the utterance was
privileged in character.
In law, however, the privileged character of a defamatory
statement may be absolute or qualified.
When the privileged character is said to be absolute, the
statement will not be actionable whether criminal or civil because that
means the law does not allow prosecution on an action based
thereon.
In libel cases, the question is not what the offender means
but what the words used by him mean. ( Sazon vs. CA, 255 SCRA
692)
Praises undeserved are slander in disguise.
Where the comments are worded in praise of the plaintiff, like

describing him with qualities which plaintiff does not deserve because
of his social, political and economic status in the community which is
too well known to all concerned, are which intended are intended to
166

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
ridicule rather than praise him, the publication is deemed libelous

(Jimenez vs. Reyes, 27 SCRA 52)
Even if what was imputed is true, the crime of libel is committed
unless one acted with good motives or justifiable end. Proof of truth
of a defamatory imputation is not even admissible in evidence, unless
what was imputed pertains to an act which constitutes a crime and
when the person to whom the imputation was made is a public officer
and the imputation pertains to the performance of official duty. Other
than these, the imputation is not admissible.
When proof of truth is admissible?

1. When the act or omission imputed constitutes a crime regardless
of whether the offended party is a private individual or a public
officer;
2. When the offended party is a government employee, even if the
act or omission imputed does not constitute a crime, provided if it's
related to the discharge of his official duties.
Requisites of defense in defamation:

1. If it appears that the matter charged as libelous is true;
2. It was published with good motives;
3. It was for justifiable ends.
If a crime is a private crime, it cannot be prosecuted de officio. A

complaint from the offended party is necessary.
Difference between libel and perjury

Libel Perjury
-false accusation need not be made -false accusation is made
under oath under oath
Art. 355- LIBEL BY MEANS OF WRITING OR SIMILAR MEANS

A libel may be committed by means of – Writing; Printing;
Lithography; Engraving; Radio; Photograph; Painting; Theatrical
exhibition; Cinematographic exhibition; or Any similar means.
Art. 356- THREATENING TO PUBLISH LIBEL AND OFFER TO

PREVENT SUCH PUBLICATION FOR A COMPENSATION
Acts punished
1. Threatening another to publish a libel concerning him, or his
parents, spouse, child, or other members of his family;
2. Offering to prevent the publication of such libel for compensation

or money consideration.
167

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
It involves the unlawful extortion of money by appealing to the

fear of the victim, through threats of accusation or exposure. It
contemplates two offenses: a threat to establish a libel and an offer to
prevent such publication. The gravamen of the crime is the intent to
extort money or other things of value.
Blackmail – In its metaphorical sense, blackmail may be defined as

any unlawful extortion of money by threats of accusation or exposure.
Two words are expressive of the crime – hush money. (US v. Eguia,
et al., 38 Phil. 857) Blackmail is possible in (1) light threats under
Article 283; and (2) threatening to publish, or offering to prevent the
publication of, a libel for compensation, under Article 356.
Art. 357- PROHIBITED PUBLICATION OF ACTS REFERRED TO IN

THE COURSE OF OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a reporter, editor or manager of a newspaper,
daily or magazine.
2. That he publishes facts connected with the private life of another.
3. That such facts are offensive to the honor, virtue and reputation of
said person.
Note:
Even though made in connection with or under the pretext that
it is necessary in the narration of any judicial or administrative
proceedings wherein such facts have been mentioned.
With its provisions, Article 357 has come to be known as the
“Gag Law.” It prohibits reporters, editors or managers of newspapers
from publishing articles containing facts connected with the private
life of an individual; facts which are offensive to the honor, virtue and
reputation of persons. But these must refer to facts which are
intimately related to the offended party’s family and home.
Occasionally, it involves conjugal troubles and quarrels because of
infidelity, adultery or crimes involving chastity.
Art. 358- ORAL DEFAMATION / SLANDER

Two Kinds of Oral Defamation:
1. Action of a serious and insulting nature (Grave slander)
2. Light insult or defamation – not serious in nature (simple slander)
Factors that determine gravity of the offense:

a) Expressions used
b) Personal relations of the accused and the offended party
c) CIrcumstances surrounding the case
Notes:
168

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
The gravity of oral defamation depends not only on the

expressions but also on the personal relation of the accused with the
offended party. Other circumstances like the presence of important
people when the crime was committed, the social standing and
position of the offended party are factors which may influence the
gravity and defamatory imputation (Victorio vs. Court of Appeals, 173
SCRA 645).
Note that slander can be committed even if the defamatory
remark was done in the absence of the offended party. (People vs.
Clarin, C.A., 37 O.G. 1106)
If the utterances were made publicly and were heard by many
people and the accused at the same time levelled his finger at the
complainant, oral defamation is committed (P v Salleque)
The word “puta ” does not imply that the complainant is a
prostitute. (People vs. Atienza, G.R. No. L-19857, Oct. 26, 1968 ) It is
a common expression of anger or displeasure. It is seldom taken in
its literal sense by the hearer. It is viewed more as a threat on the part
of the accused to manifest and emphasize a point. (Reyes vs.
People, 27 SCRA 686)
Art. 359- SLANDER BY DEED

ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender performs any act not included in any other crime
against honor.
2. That such act is performed in the presence of another person or
persons.
3. That such act casts dishonor, discredit or contempt upon the
offended party.
Notes:
Slander by deed is a defamation committed by the offender
against the complainant through the performance of any act which
casts dishonor, discredit or contempt upon another person.
Slander by deed refers to performance of an act, not use of
words.
Two kinds of slander by deed:

1. Simple slander by deed; and
2. Grave slander by deed, that is, which is of a serious nature.
Whether a certain slanderous act constitutes slander by deed of

a serious nature or not, depends on the social standing of the
offended party, the circumstances under which the act was
committed, the occasion, etc.
The acts of slapping and boxing the woman, a teacher, in the
presence of many people has put her to dishonor, contempt and
ridicule. (P v Costa)
169

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
If the acts committed against the offended party caused her

physical injury which did not require medical attendance, then the
crime would be maltreatment which is classified as slight physical
injuries.
Distinctions:
a. Unjust Vexation-irritation or annoyance/anything that annoys or
irritates without justification.
b. Slander by Deed-irritation or annoyance + attendant publicity
and dishonor or contempt.
c. Acts of lasciviousness-irritation or annoyance + any of 3
circumstance provided in Art335 of RPC on rape
i. use of force or intimidation
ii. deprivation of reason or rendering the offended unconscious
iii. offended party under 12 yrs of age+lewd designs
Art. 360- PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR LIBEL

Who are liable:
a. person who publishes, exhibits or causes the publication or
exhibition of any defamation in writing or similar means(par.1)
b. author or editor of a book or pamphlet
c. editor or business manager of a daily newspaper magazine or
serial publication(par.2)
d. owner of the printing plant which publishes a libelous article
with his consent and all other persons who in any way participate
in or have connection with its publication (US v Ortiz)
Art. 362- LIBELOUS REMARKS

Libelous remarks or comments on privileged matters (under Art.
354) if made with malice in fact will not exempt the author and editor.
*This article is a limitation to the defense of privileged communication.
INCRIMINATORY MACHINATIONS
Art. 363- INCRIMINATING INNOCENT PERSON
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender performs an act.
2. That by such act he directly incriminates or imputes to an
innocent person the commission of a crime.
3. That such act does not constitute perjury.
Two Kinds:
a. making a statement which is
i. defamatory or
ii. perjurious (if made under oath and is false)
b. planting evidence
170

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Note: Article is limited to planting evidence and the like.
This crime cannot be committed through verbal incriminatory

statements. It is defined as an act and, therefore, to commit this
crime, more than a mere utterance is required.
If the incriminating machination is made orally, the crime may
be slander or oral defamation.
If the incriminatory machination was made in writing and under
oath, the crime may be perjury if there is a willful falsity of the
statements made.
If the statement in writing is not under oath, the crime may be
falsification if the crime is a material matter made in a written
statement which is required by law to have been rendered.
As far as this crime is concerned, this has been interpreted to
be possible only in the so-called planting of evidence.
There is such a crime as incriminating an innocent person
through unlawful arrest. (People vs. Alagao, et al., G.R. No. L-20721,
April 30, 1966)
Art. 364- INTRIGUING AGAINST HONOR

How committed:
-by any person who shall make any intrigue which has for its
principal purpose to blemish the honor or reputation of another
person
Notes:
The crime is committed by resorting to any form of scheme or
plot designed to blemish the reputation of a person. The offender
does not employ written or spoken words, pictures or caricatures to
ridicule the victim. Rather, he uses some ingenious, crafty and secret
ploy which produces the same effect.
Intriguing against honor is referred to as gossiping. The
offender, without ascertaining the truth of a defamatory utterance,
repeats the same and passes it on to another, to the damage of the
offended party. Who started the defamatory news is unknown.
Where the source of polluted information can be traced and
pinpointed, and the accused adopted as his own the information he
obtained, and passed it to another in order to cause dishonor to the
complainant’s reputation, the act is Slander and not Intriguing Against
Honor. But where the source or the author of the derogatory
information can not be determined and the accused borrows the
same, and without subscribing to the truth thereof, passes it to others,
the act is one of Intriguing Against Honor.
Distinction between intriguing against honor and slander:
171

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
When the source of the defamatory utterance is unknown and the

offender simply repeats or passes the same, the crime is intriguing
against honor.
If the offender made the utterance, where the source of the

defamatory nature of the utterance is known, and offender makes a
republication thereof, even though he repeats the libelous statement
as coming from another, as long as the source is identified, the
crime committed by that offender is slander.
Distinction between intriguing against honor and incriminating

an innocent person:
In intriguing against honor, the offender resorts to an intrigue for the
purpose of blemishing the honor or reputation of another person.
In incriminating an innocent person, the offender performs an act by

which he directly incriminates or imputes to an innocent person the
commission of a crime.
R.A. 4200 The Anti - Wire Tapping Act

Acts punished:
1) any person, not authorized by all the parties to any private
communication or spoken word
a) taps any wire of cable OR
b) uses any other device or arrangement, to secretly overhear,
intercept, or record such communication or spoken word by
using a device commonly known as a dictaphone or dictagraph
or walkie talkie or tape recorder
2) any person, whether or not a participant in the above-mentioned

acts:
a) knowingly possesses any tape record, wire record, disc
record, or any other such record or copies thereof of any
communication or spoken word
b) replays the same for any other person
c)communicates the contents thereof, whether complete or
partial, to any other person
Notes:
Peace officer is exempt if acts done under lawful order of the
court. You can only use the recording for the case for which it was
validly requested.
Information obtained in violation of the Act is inadmissible in
evidence in any hearing or investigation.
172

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Title 14- Quasi Offenses

CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
ELEMENTS OF RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE:

1. That the offender does or fails to do an act.
2. That the doing of or the failure to do that act is voluntary.
3. That it be without malice.
4. That material damage results.
5. That there is inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the
offender, taking into consideration
a. his employment or occupation
b. degree of intelligence, physical condition, and
c. other circumstances regarding persons, time and place.
ELEMENTS OF SIMPLE IMPRUDENCE:

1. That there is lack of precaution on the part of the offender.
2. That the damage impending to be caused is not immediate or the
danger is not clearly manifest.
Quasi-offenses punished:
1. Committing through reckless imprudence any act which, had it
been intentional, would constitute a grave or less grave felony or
light felony;
2. Committing through simple imprudence or negligence an act which
would otherwise constitute a grave or a less serious felony;
3. Causing damage to the property of another through reckless
imprudence or simple imprudence or negligence;
4. Causing through simple imprudence or negligence some wrong
which, if done maliciously, would have constituted a light felony.
Distinction between reckless imprudence and negligence

The two are distinguished only as to whether the danger that
would be impending is easily perceivable or not. If the danger that
may result from the criminal negligence is clearly perceivable, the
imprudence is reckless. If it could hardly be perceived, the criminal
negligence would only be simple.
There is no more issue on whether culpa is a crime in itself or
only a mode of incurring criminal liability. It is practically settled that
criminal negligence is only a modality in incurring criminal liability.
This is so because under Article 3, a felony may result from dolo or
culpa.
173

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Nota Bene:
Test for determining whether or not a person is negligent

of doing an act which results in injury or damages to another
person or his property.
Would a prudent man in the position of the person to whom
negligence is attributed, foresee harm to the person injured? If so, the
law imposes on the doer, the duty to refrain from the course of action,
or to take precaution against such result. Failure to do so constitutes
negligence. Reasonable foresight of harm, followed by ignoring the
admonition borne of these provisions, is the constitutive fact of
negligence. (Picart vs. Smith, 37 Phil. 809, 813)
Test of Negligence.
Did the defendant, in doing the alleged negligent act, use the
reasonable care and caution which an ordinary prudent person would
have used in the same situation? If not, then he is guilty of
negligence.
The penalties under Article 365 has no application in the
following cases:
1. When the penalty provided for the offense is equal or lower than
that provided in pars.1 and 2 of Article 365. In this case, the
penalty shall be that which is next lower in degree than that which
should be imposed, in the period which the court may deem
proper to apply.
2. When by imprudence or negligence and with violation of the
Automobile Law, the death of a person is caused, the penalty is
prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.
1) Art. 64 on mitigating and aggravating circumstances not

applicable.
2) Failure to lend on the spot assistance to the victim of his
negligence: penalty next higher in degree.
3) Abandoning usually punishable under Art 275, if charged under
Art 365 is only qualifying and if not alleged cannot even be an
aggravating circumstance.
4) Contributory negligence—not a defense, only mitigating.
The defense of contributory negligence does not apply in

criminal cases committed through reckless imprudence. It is
against public policy to invoke the negligence of another to
escape criminal liability. (People vs. Quiñones, C.A., 44 O.G. 1520)
The above-mentioned doctrine should be reconciled with the doctrine

of “concurrent proximate cause of two negligent drivers.”
174

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
In the case of People vs. Desalis, et al., C.A., 57 O.G. 8689, the two
accused were drivers of two speeding vehicles which overtook
vehicles ahead of them and even encroached on the other’s lane
without taking due precaution as required by the circumstances. The
court found the concurrent or successive negligent act or omission of
the two drivers as the direct and proximate cause of the injury caused
to the offended party. The court could not determine in what
proportion each driver contributed to the injury. Both were declared
guilty for the injury suffered by the third person.
When negligence does not result in any injury to persons or damage

to property, then no crime is committed. Negligence becomes
punishable when it results in the commission of a crime. (Lantok, Jr.
vs. Hon. Gorgonio, L-37396, April 30, 1979, 75 O.G. 7763)
Last clear chance doctrine

The contributory negligence of the injured party will not defeat
the action if it be shown that the accused might, by the exercise of
reasonable care and prudence, have avoided the consequences of
the negligence of the injured party
Emergency rule
An automobile driver, who, by the negligence of another, is
suddenly placed in an emergency and compelled to act instantly to
avoid a collision or injury is not guilty of negligence if he makes a
choice which a person of ordinary prudence placed in such a position
might make even though he did not make the wisest choice.
Doctrine of Preemption
It is a rule in collision cases for the driver of a motor vehicle to make a
full stop when crossing a thru-street. Any accident therefore which
takes place in said corner gives rise to the presumption of negligence
on the part of the driver of the motor vehicle running thru-street has
already reached the middle part of the intersection. In such a case,
the other driver who has the right of way has the duty to stop his
motor vehicle in order to avoid a collision. (People vs. Taradji, 3 C.A.
Rep. [25] 460)
If the criminal negligence resulted, for example, in homicide,

serious physical injuries and slight physical injuries, do not join only
the homicide and serious physical injuries in one information for the
slight physical injuries. You are not slightly complex when you join it
with the same information. It is just that you are not splitting the
criminal negligence because the real basis of the criminal liability is
the negligence.
175

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
If you split the criminal negligence, that is where double

jeopardy would arise.
Accused is not criminally liable for the death or injuries caused

by his negligence to trespassers whose presence in the premises he
was not aware of. In the case of People vs. Cuadra, C.A., 53 O.G.
7265, accused was a truck driver. Unknown to him, several persons
boarded his truck and while driving along a slippery road which has a
declination of 25 degrees, the left front wheel of the truck fell into a
ditch. In his effort to return the truck to the center of the road, the
truck turned turtle, throwing off two of the passengers who boarded
the truck without his knowledge. As a consequence, one of them
died. Cuadra was acquitted of the crime of reckless imprudence
resulting in homicide and physical injuries.
Overtaking another vehicle is a normal occurrence in

driving. But when the overtaking is done from right, it shows
recklessness and disregard of traffic laws and regulations. It is
likewise so when the overtaking is done while another vehicle is
approaching from the opposite direction. This is a violation of Section
59 (b) of the Motor Vehicle Law (People vs. Songalla, C.A., 67 O.G.
8330)
Driving within the speed limit is not a guarantee of due

care. Speed limits impose the maximum speed which should not be
exceeded. The degree of care required of a motorist is not governed
by speed limits but by the circumstances and conditions obtained in
the place at the particular time. So, if the maximum speed limit is 80
kilometers per hour and the vehicle is driven at 30 kilometers per
hour, but because of the very slow pace of the vehicle, an accident
occurs, the observation of the speed limit will not be acceptable
evidence of due care. (people vs. Caluza, C.A., 58 O.G. 8060)
IMPRUDENCE VS. NEGLIGENCE

• Imprudence involves lack of skill. Negligence involves lack of
foresight
• Imprudence involves a deficiency of action. Negligence
indicates a deficiency of perception.
• Failure to make precaution/pag-iingat is imprudence. Failure to
use diligence is negligence.
Title 15- FINAL PROVISIONS
Art. 366. Application of laws enacted prior to this Code.
176

lOMoARcPSD|38274473
Without prejudice to the provisions contained in Article 22 of

this Code, felonies and misdemeanors committed prior to the date of
effectiveness of this Code shall be punished in accordance with the
Code or Acts in force at the time of their commission.
Art. 367. Repealing Clause.

Except as is provided in the next preceding article, the present Penal
Code, the Provisional Law for the application of its provisions, and
Acts Nos. 277, 282 ,480, 518, 519, 899, 1121, 1438, 1523, 1559,
1692, 1754, 1955, 1773, 2020, 2036, 2071, 2142, 2212, 2293, 2298,
2300, 2364, 2549, 2557, 2595, 2609, 2718, 3103, 3195, 3244, 3298,
3309, 3313, 3397, 3559, and 3586, are hereby repealed.
Compiled by: Rey Nino B Abucay
177

Criminal Law Book 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Law Book 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

lOMoARcPSD|38274473

Criminal LAW BOOK 2

Criminology (Capitol University)

Scan to open on Studocu

Studocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

CRIMINAL LAW BOOK 2

Title 1 CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE LAW

Art. 114 TREASON

Any person who, owing allegiance to (the Philippine), not being

No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the

Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippines Islands, who

Downloaded by Ape, Janna Mae A. (jannaape4@gmail.com)

TREASON is a breach of allegiance, which is the obligation of fidelity

PERSONS LIABLE FOR TREASON

TWO MODES OF COMMITTING TREASON

ADHERENCE TO THE ENEMY – a citizen intellectuality or

AID OR COMFORT – an act which strengthens or tends to

EVIDENCE NEEDED FOR CONVICTION IN TREASON

Downloaded by Ape, Janna Mae A. (jannaape4@gmail.com)

rule refers to that portion of the provision which requires testimonies

“OVERT ACT” – we mean acts committed in different places at

So, even if there several witnesses testifying on the treasonous

EXCEPTION: When the accused himself pleads guilty to the

NOTE: The confession of guilt mentioned in this rule is not a

The confession referred to here is a plea of guilty in open court.

So, if a person accused of treason has previously executed a

But the confession is admissible in evidence. Only, it is not

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TREASON AND SEDITION:

Downloaded by Ape, Janna Mae A. (jannaape4@gmail.com)

allegiance to his sovereign or the disturbances in the state.

TREASON DISTINGUISHED FROM REBELLION:

IMPORTANT POINTS TO REMEMBER REGARDING TREASON:

ART. 115- CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT TREASON

Elements of Conspiracy to Commit Treason:

Elements of Proposal to Commit Treason:

NOTE: If actual acts of treason are committed after the

Downloaded by Ape, Janna Mae A. (jannaape4@gmail.com)

be treason. The conspiracy or proposal is considered as a means in

If anyone of the conspirators or persons participating in the

NOTE: Bear in mind that in conspiracy, there must be an

There must always be the CONCURRENCE of these 2

ART. 116- MISPRISION OF TREASON

For this crime to be committed

Even though the offender has reported the conspiracy to the

Downloaded by Ape, Janna Mae A. (jannaape4@gmail.com)

Misprision of treason is a felony by omission. The offender

NOTE: It is not enough that the report be made. What is

The idea here is to make it obligatory on the part of all citizens

NOTE: The obligation to report does not cover aliens even if

ART. 117- ESPIONAGE

NOTE: The purpose of the offender in entering must be to get

If that is not the purpose, the crime committed is trespass to

Downloaded by Ape, Janna Mae A. (jannaape4@gmail.com)

Elements of the second mode:

NOTE: Where the offender is not a custodian, the crime

ESPIONAGE DISTINGUISHED FROM TREASON

ART. 118- INCITING TO WAR OR GIVING MOTIVES FOR

This is committed by any public officer or employee who, by

ART. 119- VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY

Downloaded by Ape, Janna Mae A. (jannaape4@gmail.com)

Committed by any person who on the occasion of a war in which the

ART. 120- CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE COUNTRY

a) prohibited by the government;

This presupposes that there is a war going on and the