Criminal Law 2 Reviewer Provisions, Notes, and Cases Chapter One CRIMES AGAINST LIBERTY Section One Illegal

l Detention Question: What are the crimes classified as Illegal Detention? (Sandoval) Answer: The crimes classified as Illegal Detention are: 1. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention (Art. 267); 2. Slight Illegal Detention (Art. 268); and 3. Unlawful Arrest (Art. 269). What is Article 267? Article 267 is about Kidnapping and serious illegal detention. It provides: Any private individual who shall kidnap or detain another, or in any other manner deprive him of his liberty, shall suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death: 1. If the kidnapping or detention shall have lasted more than three days; 2. If it shall have been committed simulating public authority; 3. If any serious physical injuries shall have been inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained; or if threats to kill shall have been made; 4. If the person kidnapped or detained shall be a minor, except when the accused is any of the parents, female or a public officer. The penalty shall be death where the kidnapping or detention was committed for the purpose of extorting ransom from the victim or any other person, even if none of the circumstances abovementioned where present in the commission of the offense. When the victim is killed or died as a consequence of the detention or is raped, or is subjected to torture or dehumanizing acts, the maximum penalty shall be imposed (As amended by R.A. No. 7659). What is the essence of the crime of kidnapping?

Criminal Law 2 Reviewer Provisions, Notes, and Cases 1) The essence of kidnapping is the actual deprivation of the victim's liberty coupled with indubitable proof of the intent of the accused to effect such deprivation (People vs. Jose Obeso, G.R. No. 152285, Oct. 24, 2003). 2) There must be a purposeful or knowing action by the accused to forcibly restrain the victim because taking coupled with intent completes the offense. Kidnapping which involves the detention of another is by its nature a continuing crime (People vs. Bisda, G.R. No. 140895. July 17, 2003). What is the nature of the crime? Kidnapping, which involves the detention of another is by its nature a continuing crime (People vs. Bisda, G.R. No. 140895. July 17, 2003). What must the prosecution prove for the crime of kidnapping to exist? For the crime of kidnapping the prosecution must prove the following elements as provided in Art. 267 of the Revised Penal Code: (a) a person has been deprived of his liberty, (b) the offender is a private individual, and (c) the detention is unlawful (People vs. Lumiwan, G.R. Nos. 122753-56. September 7, 1998). What are the elements of the crime? The elements of the offense, here adequately shown, are: (a) that the offender is a private individual; (b) that he kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner deprives the latter of the liberty; (c) that the act of detention or kidnapping is illegal; and (d) that, in the commission of the offense, any of the following circumstances is present, i.e., (i) that the kidnapping or detention lasts for more than 5 days, or (ii) that it is committed simulating public authority, or (iii) that any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill him are made, or (iv) that the person kidnapped or detained is a minor, female, or a public officer (People vs. Santiano, G.R. No. 123979. December 3, 1998). If the offender is a public officer, what is the crime? If the offender is a public officer, then the crime is arbitrary detention. Arbitrary detention is committed by a public officer or
2

Criminal Law 2 Reviewer Provisions, Notes, and Cases agent of the authorities who detains a person without lawful reason, no crime having been committed nor a judicial warrant issued therefor, is guilty of arbitrary detention and incurs, according to the case, the penalties imposed by article 200 of the Penal Code (U.S. vs. Aggravante, G.R. No. L-3947. January 28, 1908). What is the penalty when the victim is a minor and the accused is one of the parents? According to Art. 271 (2), if the person committing any of the crimes covered by the two preceding articles shall be the father or the mother of the minor, the penalty shall be arresto mayor or a fine not exceeding three hundred pesos (Reyes). What is the essence of the crime of kidnapping a minor? The essence of the crime of kidnapping is the actual deprivation of the victim's liberty coupled with indubitable proof of the accused's intent to effect the same. And if the person detained is a child, the question that needs to be addressed is whether there is evidence to show that in taking the child, there was deprivation of the child's liberty and that it was the intention of the accused to deprive the mother of the child's custody (People vs. Suriaga, G.R. No. 123779. April 17, 2002). Is the length of detention material to the crime of kidnapping a minor? No, the length of detention is immaterial to the crime of kidnapping a minor. Under the law and the current jurisprudence, If the victim is a minor, the duration of his detention is immaterial. Likewise, if the victim is kidnapped and illegally detained for the purpose of extorting ransom, the duration of his detention becomes inconsequential. The crime is qualified and becomes punishable by death even if none of the circumstances mentioned in paragraphs 1 to 4 of Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code is present (People vs. Mamantak, G.R. No. 174659. July 28, 2008). Is lack of consent presumed when the victim is a 5-year old? Yes, lack of consent is presumed when the victim is a 5-year old. In a case, the Supreme Court ruled that: The victim's lack of consent is also a fundamental element of kidnapping. The involuntariness
3

Criminal Law 2 Reviewer Provisions, Notes, and Cases of the seizure and detention is the very essence of the crime. The general rule is that the prosecution is burdened to prove lack of consent on the part of the victim. However, where the victim is a minor especially if she is only five years old, lack of consent is presumed. She is incompetent to assent to seizure and illegal detention. In this case, Angela was merely five years old when she was kidnapped; thus incapable of giving consent. The consent of such child could place the appellants in no better position than if the act had been done against her will. The appellants cannot rely on Angela's initial willingness to go along with them to the restaurant (People vs. Bisda, G.R. No. 140895. July 17, 2003). What does the word "female" in paragraph 1(4) of Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code refer to? It refers to the gender of the victim and not of the offender. The essence of the crime of kidnapping is the actual deprivation of the victim's liberty under any of the above-mentioned circumstances, coupled with indubitable proof of intent of the accused to effect the same (People vs. Bisda, G.R. No. 140895. July 17, 2003). What is Ransom? 'Ransom' under American rulings, as used in statutes making kidnapping with intent to hold for ransom a capital offense, has been held to mean in its ordinary sense as 'money, price, or consideration paid or demanded for redemption of a captured person or persons, a payment that releases from captivity.' Since the accused in this case demanded and received money as a requisite for releasing a person from captivity, whatever other motive may have impelled them to do so, the money is still ransom under the law" (People vs. Castro, G.R. No. 132726. July 23, 2002). In municipal criminal law, ransom refers to the money, price or consideration paid or demanded for redemption of a captured person or persons, a payment that releases from captivity (People vs. Salimbago). What is the Corpus Delicti in the crime of kidnapping for ransom? The corpus delicti in the crime of kidnapping for ransom is the fact that an individual has been in any manner deprived of his liberty for the purpose of extorting ransom from the victim or any other
4

Criminal Law 2 Reviewer Provisions, Notes, and Cases person. Whether or not the ransom is actually paid to or received by the perpetrators is of no moment. (People vs. Castro, G.R. No. 132756, July 23, 2002). In People vs. Salimbago, the Court stressed: ". . . No specific form of ransom is required to consummate the felony of kidnapping for ransom so long as it was intended as a bargaining chip in exchange for the victim's freedom. In municipal criminal law, ransom refers to the money, price or consideration paid or demanded for redemption of a captured person or persons, a payment that releases from captivity. Neither actual demand for nor actual payment of ransom is necessary for the crime to be committed. Is there a complex crime of illegal detention with rape under Article 48? No, there is no complex crime of illegal detention with rape under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code. Prior to the effectivity of Republic Act No. 7659, when the person kidnapped or illegal detained was raped, two independent crimes of kidnapping and rape were committed. Republic Act No. 7659, however, amended the last paragraph of Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code on serious illegal detention and kidnapping, to read: When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of the detention or is raped, or is subjected to torture or dehumanizing acts, the maximum penalty shall be imposed. Under this provision, when the person is kidnapped or illegally detained is raped, the offense committed is a special complex crime of serious illegal detention or kidnapping with rape, punishable with the maximum penalty of death (People vs. Ramos, 358 Phil. 261, 1998). Where will you apply the last paragraph of Article 267? The last paragraph of Art. 267 applies only to instances where the person illegally detained or kidnapped is raped. It does not provide for a complex crime or rape with serious illegal detention. In People vs. Lactao, 227 SCRA 463 [1993], the Court said that there is no complex crime of illegal detention with rape under Art. 48 of
5

Criminal Law 2 Reviewer Provisions, Notes, and Cases the Revised Penal Code. There is also no complex crime of kidnapping with attempted rape under Art. 48 because there is no single act which results in two or more grave or less grave felonies. Neither is illegal detention a necessary means for committing rape. Distinguish Illegal Detention from Arbitrary Detention 1. The crime of illegal detention is committed by a private individual who unlawfully kidnaps, detains, or otherwise, deprives a person of his right to liberty. On the other hand, arbitrary detention is committed by a public officer or employee who detains a person without legal ground. 2. Illegal detention is a crime against personal liberty and security. Arbitrary detention is a crime against the fundamental law of the State. What is Article 268? Article 268 of the Revised Penal Code speaks of Slight Illegal Detention. It provides, the penalty of reclusion temporal shall be imposed upon any private individual who shall commit the crimes described in the next preceding article without the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated therein. The same penalty shall be incurred by anyone who shall furnish the place for the perpetration of the crime. If the offender shall voluntarily release the person so kidnapped or detained within three days from the commencement of the decision, without having attained the purpose intended, and before the institution of criminal proceedings, the penalty shall be prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods and a fine not exceeding seven hundred pesos (As amended by R.A. No. 18). What is Slight Illegal Detention? Where there was deprivation of liberty but not attended to by the circumstances mentioned in Art. 267 that is, when the detention did not last for more than three (3) days, there was no stimulation of public authority nor was there any infliction of serious physical injuries upon the person detained or threats to kill were made, and the person kidnapped or detained is a male private individual meaning not a female, not a minor and not a public officer, then the
6

Criminal Law 2 Reviewer Provisions, Notes, and Cases offense committed is Slight Illegal Detention under Art. 268 and the penalty is Reclusion Temporal (Justice Edilberto Sandoval). Question: X was convicted of two counts of kidnapping for ransom He was sentenced to double death and hence, this automatic review. X and his co-accused, Y, wrongfully entered the house of the Z and dragged A and his son B out of their bedroom into the victim's car. They drove out of the house and cruised along the highway. Later, the police were able to rescue A, while B remained in the company of the other kidnappers. B was rescued several days after. What is the crime? Answer: X is guilty of kidnapping and slight illegal detention under Articles 267 and 268 of the Revised Penal Code. While the epigraph or title of Article 268 mentions only slight illegal detention, kidnapping committed in connection with the lower offense of slight illegal detention is also covered by the article. The felony has the following essential elements: 1. That, the offender is a private individual. 2. That, he kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner deprives him of his liberty. 3. That, the act of kidnapping or detention is illegal. 4. That, the crime is committed without the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated in Art. 267. The crime of slight illegal detention is consummated upon the occurrence of all the elements thereof. In this case, the X is a private individual. A had been kidnapped and detained illegally by the X and Y, his cohorts, but only for less than a day. A regained his freedom after the X had been arrested at the intersection of a national highway and Espina Road. There is no evidence that the X and Y kidnapped A for the purpose of extorting ransom for his release. There is likewise no evidence that they inflicted any serious physical injuries on A, or simulated public authority, or threatened to kill him. Furthermore, there is no evidence that they intended to detain the victim for more than three days. They were animated by two sets of separate criminal intents and criminal resolutions in kidnapping and illegally detaining the two victims. The criminal intent in kidnapping B was separate from and independent of the criminal intent and resolution in kidnapping and detaining A for less than three days.

Criminal Law 2 Reviewer Provisions, Notes, and Cases In the mind and conscience of X, he had committed two separate felonies; hence, should be meted two separate penalties for the said crimes: one for kidnapping under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code and another for slight illegal detention under Article 268 of the same code (People vs. Pagalasan, G.R. Nos. 131926 & 138991; June 18, 2003). When is the crime of slight illegal detention consummated? The crime of slight illegal detention is consummated upon the occurrence of all the elements thereof (People vs. Pagalasan, G.R. Nos. 131926 & 138991; June 18, 2003). Is there a privilege mitigating circumstance in slight illegal detention? Yes, if the offender: (a) voluntarily releases the person so kidnapped or detained within three days from the commencement of the detention; (b) without having attained the purpose intended, and (c) before the institution of criminal proceedings against him, his liability is mitigated. In effect, it is a privileged mitigating circumstance because the penalty is lower by one degree. However, to impose the lesser penalty, it must be shown by the offender that he was in a position to prolong the detention for more than three days and yet he released the person detained within that time. No mitigation of the penalty is allowed when the proceedings have already been instituted, for the simple reason that in this case, the accused acted through fear rather than through repentance. All the requisites mention in (a), (b), and (c) must concur. What is Article 269? Article 269 of the Revised Penal Code speaks of Unlawful Arrest. Unlawful arrest is made by any person who, in any case other than those authorized by law, or without reasonable ground therefore, shall arrest or detain another for the purpose of delivering him to the proper authorities. The penalty for the crime is arresto mayor or a fine of not exceeding 500 pesos.

Criminal Law 2 Reviewer Provisions, Notes, and Cases What are the elements of the crime? The elements of the crime are: 1. That, the offender arrests or detains another person. 2. That, the purpose of the offender is to deliver him to the proper authorities. 3. That, the arrest or detention is not authorized by law or there is no reasonable ground therefor. This article punishes any person who commits the acts defined therein. It applies also to public officers. The phrase any person pertains to either a public officer or a private individual. Under the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, a private individual may arrest an individual without warrant under the circumstances when public officers can make arrest. If the private person makes an arrest without reasonable ground therefor, because it is not in accordance with Sec. 6, Rule 113 of the Rules of Court, and the purpose is to deliver the person arrested to the proper authorities, he is liable under this article. There is no unlawful arrest when the arrest is authorized by a warrant issued by the Court. When is there a valid issuance of a warrant of arrest (Section 5, Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)? Section 5 of Rule 112 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure provides for a valid issuance of a warrant of arrest: SECTION 5. Resolution of investigating judge and its review. Within ten (10) days after the preliminary investigation, the investigating judge shall transmit the resolution of the case to the provincial or city prosecutor, or to the Ombudsman or his deputy in cases of offenses cognizable by the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, for appropriate action. The resolution shall state the findings of facts and the law supporting his action, together with the record of the case which shall include: (a) the warrant, if the arrest is by virtue of a warrant; (b) the affidavits, counter-affidavits and other supporting evidence of the parties; (c) the undertaking or bail of the accused and the order for his release; (d) the transcripts of the proceedings during the

Criminal Law 2 Reviewer Provisions, Notes, and Cases preliminary investigation; and (e) the order of cancellation of his bail bond, if the resolution is for the dismissal of the complaint. Within thirty (30) days from receipt of the records, the provincial or city prosecutor, or the Ombudsman or his deputy, as the case may be, shall review the resolution of the investigating judge on the existence of probable cause. Their ruling shall expressly and clearly state the facts and the law on which it is based and the parties shall be furnished with copies thereof. They shall order the release of an accused who is detained if no probable cause is found against him. (5a) Distinguish unlawful arrest from other illegal detention If the purpose of locking up or detaining the victim is to deliver him to the proper authorities, and it develops that the detention is unlawful, then the offense committed is unlawful arrest. If any other case, the detention will render the culprit liable for other illegal detention. Distinguished from Article 125 1. In the crime of delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authority (Art. 126), the detention is for some legal ground; in unlawful arrest, the detention is not authorized by law; 2. Under Art. 125, the crime is committed by failing to deliver such person to the proper judicial authority with a certain period of time; in unlawful arrest, it is committed by making an arrest not authorized by law.

10