CRIMINAL LAW BOOK 1

Criminal law
- Brach or division of law which defines
crimes, treats of their nature, and provides
for their punishment

Crime
- An act committed or omitted in violation of
a public law forbidding or commanding it

Sources:
1. RPC and its amendments
2. Special Penal Laws
3. PPs

No Common Law
- Unless there be a particular provision in
the penal code or special penal laws that
defines and punishes the act, even if it be
socially or morally wrong, no criminal
liability is incurred by its commission.

Court Decisions
- Not sources of criminal law, because they
merely explain the meaning of, and apply,
the law as enacted by the legislative branch
of the government.

State
- Power to define and punish crime

Limitations on the Power of the Law Making Body
to enact Penal Legislation
1. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder
2. No person shall be held to answer for a
criminal offense without due process of law

Rights of the Accused which may be Waived
- The right of the accused to confrontation
and cross-examination
- These rights are personal to the accused

Rights which may Not Be Waived
- The right of the accused to be informed of
the nature and cause of the accusation
against him.
- These rights involve public interest which
may be affected.

Characteristics of Criminal Law
1. General
2. Territorial
3. Prospective

GENERAL
- Criminal law is binding on all persons who
live or sojourn in Philippine territory
- As a GR, the jurisdiction of the civil courts is
not affected by the military character of the
accused
- Civil courts have concurrent jurisdiction
with general courts-martial over soldiers of
the AFP
- Even in times of war, the civil courts have
concurrent jurisdiction with the military
courts or general courts-martial over
soldiers of the AFP, provided that in the
place of the commission of the crime no
hostilities are in progress and civil courts
are functioning.
- The RPC or other penal law is not applicable
when the military court takes cognizance of
the case
- The prosecution of an accused before a
court-martial is a bar to another
prosecution of the accused for the same
offense

EXP to the General App
RPC, Art. 2:
1. Treaties
2. Laws of Preferential Application
Art. 14, NCC:
1. Principles of Public International Law
2. Treaty Stipulations

PERSONS Exempt from the operation of our
Criminal Laws by Virtue of the Principles of PIL
1. Sovereigns and other chiefs of state
2. Ambassadors, ministers, plenipotentiary,
ministers resident, and charges daffaires

- A Consul is not entitled to the privileges and
immunities of an ambassador or minister

TERRITORIAL
- as a rule, penal laws of the Philippines are
enforceable only within its territory
- said code shall be enforced within the
Philippine archipelago, including its
atmosphere, its interior waters and
maritime zone

EXPs to the Territorial Application of Criminal Law
Art. 2, RPC:
1. Should commit an offense while on a
Philippine ship or airship;
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or
currency note of the Philippines or
obligations and securities issued by the
government of the Philippines;
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the
introduction into the Philippines of the
obligations and securities mentioned in the
preceding number;
4. While being public officers or employees,
should commit an offense in the exercise of
their functions; or
5. Should commit any of the crimes against
national security and the law
of nations

PROSPECTIVE
- A penal law cannot make an act punishable
in a manner in which it was not punishable
when committed
- Crimes are punished under the laws in force
at the time of their commission

EXPs To The Prospective Application of Criminal
Laws
- Whenever a new statute dealing with crime
establishes conditions more lenient or
favourable to the accused, it can be given a
retroactive effect.

But the EXP has NO Application:
1. Where the new law is expressly made
inapplicable to pending actions or existing
causes of action.
2. Where the offender is a habitual criminal

- When the new law and the old law penalize
the same offense, the offender can be tried
under the old law
- When the repealing law fails to penalize the
offense under the old law, the accused
cannot be convicted under the new law
- A person erroneously accused and
convicted under a repealed statute may be
punished under the repealing statue


ARTICLE 1
This Code shall take effect on the first day of
January, nineteen hundred and thirty-two.

- The RPC is based mainly on principles of
Classical School.

Two Theories in Criminal Law:
1. Classical Theory
2. Positivist Theory

CLASSICAL THEORY
- The basis of criminal liability is human free
will and the purpose of the penalty is
retribution
- It has endeavoured to establish a
mechanical and direct proportion between
crime and penalty.

POSITIVIST THEORY
- That man is subdued occasionally by a
strange and morbid phenomenon which
constrains him to do wrong, in spite of or
contrary to his volition.

ARTICLE 2
Except as provided in the treaties and laws of
preferential application, the provisions of this Code
shall be enforced not only within the Philippine
Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior
waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its
jurisdiction, against those who:
1. Should commit an offense while on a
Philippine ship or airship;
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or
currency note of the Philippines or
obligations and securities issued by the
government of the Philippines;
3. Should be liable for acts connected with
the introduction into the Philippines of the
obligations and securities mentioned in the
preceding number;
4. While being public officers or employees,
should commit an offense in the exercise of
their functions; or
5. Should commit any of the crimes against
national security and the law
of nations.

- The provisions of the RPC shall be enforced
not only within the Philippine Archipelago,
but also outside of its jurisdiction in certain
cases.

(1) When the offender Should commit an
offense while on a Philippine ship or
airship
- Any person who committed a crime on
board a Philippine Ship or airship while the
same is outside of the Philippine territory
can be tried before our civil courts for
violation of the RPC
- But when the Philippine vessel or aircraft is
in the territory of a foreign country, the
crime committed on said vessel or aircraft is
subject to the laws of that foreign country.
- It is the registration of the vessel or aircraft
in accordance with the laws of the
Philippines, not the citizenship of its owner,
which makes it a Philippine ship or airship.

(2) Should forge or counterfeit any coin or
currency note of the Philippines or
obligations and securities issued by the
government of the Philippines;

(3) Should be liable for acts connected
with the introduction into the
Philippines of the obligations and
securities mentioned in the preceding
number

(4) When the offender, while being a
public officer or employee, should
commit an offense in the exercise of
his functions

- Direct Bribery
- Indirect Bribery
- Fraud against the Public Treasury
- Possession of prohibited interest
- Malversation of Public Funds or Property
- Failure of accountable officer to render
accounts
- Illegal Use of Public Funds or Property
- Failure to make delivery of public funds or
property
- Falsification by a public officer or employee
committed with abuse of his official
position

(5) When the offender should commit any
of the crimes against the national
security and the law of nations.
- Treason
- Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason
- Espionage
- Inciting to war and giving motives for
reprisals
- Violation of neutrality
- Correspondence with Hostile Country
- Flight to enemys country
- Piracy and Mutiny on the high seas
- The crimes punishable in the Philippines
under Art. 2 are cognizable by the RTC in
which the charge is filed.
- An offense committed on the high seas on
board a foreign merchant vessel is not
triable by our courts
o But offense committed on board a
foreign merchant vessel while on
Philippine waters is triable before
our courts
Rules as to Jurisdiction over crimes committed
Aboard Foreign Merchant Vessels
1. FRENCH RULE
- Such crimes are not triable in the courts of
that country, unless their commission
affects the peace and security of the
territory or the safety of the state is
endangered.
2. ENGLISH RULE
- Such crimes are triable in that country,
unless they merely affect things within the
vessel or they refer to the internal
management thereof.
- Philippines follows the English Rule

- Mere possession of opium aboard a foreign
merchant vessel in transit is not triable in
Philippine Courts, because that fact alone
does not constitute a breach of public
order.

- When the foreign merchant vessel is not in
transit because the Philippines is its
terminal port, the person in possession of
opium on board that vessel is liable,
because he may be held guilty of illegal
importation of opium.

- Philippine courts have no jurisdiction over
offenses committed on board foreign
warships in territorial waters.

ARTICLE 3
Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies
(delitos).

Felonies are committed not only by means of deceit
(dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa).

There is deceit when the act is performed with
deliberate intent; and there is fault when the
wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence,
lack of foresight, or lack of skill.

Elements of Felonies
1. That there must be an act or omission.
2. That the act or omission must be
punishable by the RPC
3. That the act is performed or the omission
incurred by means of dolo or culpa.

Act
- Overt act or external act

Omission
- Inaction, the failure to perform a positive
duty which one is bound to do. There must
be a law requiring the doing or performance
of an act.
- But there is no law that punishes a person
who does not report to the authorities the
commission of a crime which he witnessed,
the omission to do so is not a felony.

Punished by law.
- Should be understood to mean punished
by the RPC and not by a special law.
- Crime and offense are applied to infractions
of the law punished by special statutes

Classifications of Felonies
1. Intentional Felonies
- The act or omission of the offender is
malicious
- Has the intention to cause an injury to
another

2. Culpable Felonies
- The act or omission is not malicious
- The injury caused by the offender to
another person is unintentional, it being
simply the incident of another act
performed without malice
- The wrongful act results from imprudence,
negligence, lack of foresight or lack of skill.
- A person who caused an injury, without
intention to cause an evil, may be held
liable for culpable felony.

Imprudence
- Indicates, deficiency in action
- If a person fails to take the necessary
precaution to avoid injury to person or
damage to property, there is imprudence.
- Imprudence usually involves lack of skill.

Negligence
- Indicates, deficiency in perception
- If a person fails to pay proper attention and
to use due diligence in foreseeing the injury
or damage impending to be caused, there is
negligence.
- Negligence usually involves lack of
foresight.

In felonies committed by means of dolo or with
malice and in felonies committed by means of fault
or culpa, the acts or omissions are voluntary.
- A criminal act is presume to be voluntary.
Fact prevails over assumption, and in the
absence of indubitable explanation, the act
must be declared voluntary and punishable.
- (Criminal Minds)
- When there is compulsion or prevention by
force or intimidation, there is no
voluntariness in the act.

REQUISITES OF DOLO OR MALICE
(all must be present)
1. Freedom
2. Intelligence
3. Intent

FREEDOM
- When a person acts without freedom, he is
no longer a human being but a tool; his
liability is as much as that of the knife that
wounds, or of the torch that sets fire, or of
the key that opens a door, or of the ladder
that is placed against the wall of a house in
committing robbery
- Examples:
a. A person who acts under the
compulsion of an irresistible force,
exempt from criminal liability.
b. A person who acts under the impulse of
an uncontrollable fear of an equal or
greater injury is exempt from criminal
liability.

INTELLIGENCE
- To determine the morality of human acts

INTENT
- Intent to commit the act with malice, being
purely a mental process, is presumed and
the presumption arises from the proof of
the commission of an unlawful act.
- Intent presupposes the exercise of freedom
and the use of intelligence
- Criminal intent and the will to commit a
crime are always presumed to exist on the
part of the person who executes an act
which the law punishes, unless the contrary
shall appear.
- But the presumption of criminal intent does
not arise from the proof of the commission
of an act which is not unlawful.
- The presumption of criminal intent from the
commission of an unlawful act may be
rebutted by proof of lack of such intent.
- When the accused is charged with
intentional felony, absence of criminal
intent is a defense.

MISTAKE OF FACT
- No Criminal Liability
- A misapprehension of fact on the part of
the person who caused injury to another.
He is not, however, criminally liable,
because he did not act with criminal intent.
- An honest mistake of fact destroys the
presumption of criminal intent which arises
upon the commission of a felonious act.

Requisites of Mistake of Fact as a Defense:
1. That the act done would have been lawful
had the facts been as the accused believed
them to be.
2. That the intention of the accused in
performing the act should be lawful.
3. That the mistake must be without fault or
carelessness on the part of the accused.

- The mistake must be without fault or
carelessness on the part of the accused.
- Lack of intent to kill the deceased, because
his intention was to kill another, does not
relieve the accused from criminal
responsibility
- In mistake of fact the intention of the
accused in performing the act should be
lawful.
o Thus in error in personae or
mistake in the identity of the
victim, the principle of mistake of
fact does not apply.
o Mistake in the identity of the
intended victim is not reckless
imprudence
- No crime of resistance when there is a
mistake of fact.
- When the accused is negligent, mistake of
fact is not a defense.

In mistake of fact, the act done by the accused
would have constituted,
(1) A justifying circumstance under Art. 11
(2) An absolutory cause under Art. 247, par. 2.
(3) An involuntary act
- In apprehending event the most notorious
criminal, the law does not permit the captor
to kill him. It is only when the fugitive from
justice is determined to fight the officers of
the law who are trying to capture him that
killing him would be justified.

REQUISITES OF FAULT OR CULPA
1. Freedom
2. Intelligence
3. Imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight,
or lack of skill.

- In felonies committed by means of culpa,
the mind of the accused is not criminal.
However, his act is wrongful, because the
injury or damage caused to the injured
party results from the imprudence,
negligence, lack of foresight or lack of skill
of the accused.
- In culpable felonies, the injury caused to
another should be unintentional, it being
simply the incident of another performed
without malice.
- A person causing damage or injury to
another, without malice or fault, is not
criminally liable under the RPC. Provided,
that the act performed must be lawful.

Case Note:
People vs Guillen
In throwing the hand grenade at the President with
the intention of killing him, the appellant acted with
malice. He is therefore liable for all the consequences
of his wrongful act; for in accordance with Art. 4 of
the RPC, criminal liability is incurred by any person
committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful
act done be different from that which he intended. In
criminal negligence, the injury caused to another
should be unintentional, it being simply the incident
of another act performed without malice.

In order that an act may be qualified as imprudence
it is necessary that neither malice nor intention to
cause injury should intervene; where such intention
exists, the act should be qualified by the felony it has
produced even though it may not have been the
intention of the actor to cause an evil of such gravity
as that produced.

Deliberate intent to do an unlawful act is essentially
inconsistent with the idea of reckless imprudence.

CRIMES PUNISHED BY SPECIAL LAWS
- Dolo is not required in crimes punished by
special law (municipal or city ordinances)
- It is sufficient that the offender has the
intent to perpetrate the act prohibited by
the special law.
- Mala in se and Mala Prohibita
- No intent to perpetrate the act prohibited,
no criminal liability.
- In those crimes punished by special laws,
the act alone, irrespective of its motives,
constitutes the offense.
- Good faith and absence of criminal intent
not valid defenses in crimes punished by
special laws.

INTENT VS MOTIVE
Motive
- Is the moving power which impels one to
action for a definite results.
- It is essential only when there is doubt as to
the identity of the assailant
- (UNSUB or Unknown Subject)

Intent
- Is the purpose to use a particular means to
effect such result


ARTICLE 4
Criminal Liability shall be incurred:
1. By any person committing a felony (delito)
although the wrongful act done be
different from that which he intended.
2. By any person performing an act which
would be an offense against persons or
property, were it not for the inherent
impossibility of its accomplishment or on
account of the employment of inadequate
or ineffectual means.

PRINCIPLE:
El que es causa de la causa es causa del mal
causado or He who is the cause of the cause is the
cause of the evil caused.

- One who commits an intentional felony is
responsible for all consequences which may
naturally and logically result therefrom,
whether foreseen or intended or not.
- One is not relieved from criminal liability for
the natural consequences of ones illegal
acts, merely because one does not intend
to produce such consequences.

Kinds:
1. Aberratio Ictus
2. Praeter Intentionem
3. Error in personae

- When a person has not committed a felony,
he is not criminally liable for the result
which is not intended.

Although the wrongful act done be different from
that which he intended.
1. Mistake in the Identity of the Victim (Error
in Personae)
2. Mistake in the Blow, that is, when the
offender intending to do an injury to one
person actually inflicts it on another
(Aberratio Ictus)
3. The act exceeds the intent, that is, the
injurious result is greater than that
intended. (Praeter Intentionem)

Requisites for Prater Intentionem:
1. That an intentional felony has been
committed; and
2. That the wrong done to the aggrieved party
be the direct, natural and logical
consequence of the felony committed by
the offender.

- No felony is committed (1) when the act or
omission is not punishable by the RPC, or
(2) when the act is covered by any of the
justifying circumstances enumerated in Art.
11, RPC.
- Any person who creates in anothers mind
an immediate sense of danger, which
causes the latter to do something resulting
in the latters injuries, is liable for the
resulting injuries.
- The felony committed must be the
proximate cause of the resulting injury.

Proximate Cause
- That cause, which, in natural and
continuous sequence, unbroken by any
efficient intervening cause, produces the
injury, and without which the result would
not have occurred.
- There must be a relation of cause and
effect
- The cause and effect relationship is not
altered or changed because of the pre-
existing conditions, such as the pathological
condition of the victim, the predisposition
of the offended party, or the concomitant
or concurrent conditions, or the conditions
supervening the felonies act such as
tetanus, pulmonary infection or gangrene.
- Requisites, not the proximate cause:
a) There is an active force that intervened
between the felony committed and the
resulting injury, and the active force is
a distinct act or fact absolutely foreign
from the felonious act of the accused;
or
b) The resulting injury is due to the
intentional act of the victim

When Death is presumed to be the natural
consequence of the Physical Injuries inflicted
When the following facts are established:
1. That the victim at the time the physical
injuries were inflicted was in normal health.
2. That death may be expected from the
physical injuries inflicted.
3. That death ensued within a reasonable
time.

- If the consequences produced have resulted
from a distinct act or fact absolutely foreign
from the criminal act, the offender is not
responsible for such consequences.

IMPOSSIBLE CRIME:
Requisites:
1. That the act performed would be an offense
against persons or property
2. That the act was done with evil intent
3. That its accomplishment is inherently
impossible, or that the means employed is
either adequate or ineffectual ( a. Legal
impossibility or b. Physical impossibility)
4. That the act performed should not
constitute a violation of another provision
of the RPC

- In committing an impossible crime, the
offender intends to commit a felony against
persons or a felony against property, and
the act performed would have been an
offense against persons or property. But a
felony against persons or property should
not be actually committed, for, otherwise,
he would be liable for that felony. There
would be no impossible crime to speak of.
- In Impossible crime the act performed
should not constitute a violation of another
provision of the Code.

- Purpose of the law in punishing the
Impossible Crime:
o To suppress criminal propensity or
criminal tendencies. Objectively,
the offender has not committed a
felony, but subjectively, he is a
criminal.

ARTICLE 6
Consummated felonies, as well as those which are
frustrated and attempted, are punishable.

A felony is consummated when all the elements
necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
present; and it is frustrated when the offender
performs all the acts of execution which would
product the felony as a consequence but which,
nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
independent of the will of the perpetrator.

There is an attempt when the offender commences
the commission of a felony directly by overt acts,
and does not perform all acts of execution which
should produce the felony by reason of some cause
or accident other than his own spontaneous
desistance.

Development of Crime
Stages:
1. Internal acts
- Mere ideas in the mind of a person, are not
punishable even if, had they been carried
out, they would constitute a crime.
2. External acts
- (a) preparatory acts and (b) acts of
execution

Acts of Execution
Stages
1. Attempted
2. Frustrated
3. Consummated

ATTEMPTED FELONY
Elements of Attempted Felony
1. The offender commences the commission
of the felony directly by overt acts.
2. He does not perform all the acts of
execution which should produce the felony;
3. The offenders act is not stopped by his own
spontaneous desistance;
4. The non-performance of all acts of
execution was due to cause or accident
other than his spontaneous desistance.

- Drawing or trying to draw a pistol is not an
overt act of homicide.
- Raising a bolo as if to strike the offended
party with it is not an over act of homicide.
- The external acts must have a direct
connection with the crime intended to be
committed by the offender.
- The desistance should be made before all
the acts of execution are performed.
- The desistance which exempts from
criminal liability has reference to the crime
intended to be committed, and has no
reference to the crime actually committed
by the offender before his desistance
- In attempted felony, the offender never
passes the subjective phase.

Indeterminate Offense
- It is one where the purpose of the offender
in performing an act is not certain. Its
nature in relation to its objective is
ambiguous.
- The intention of the accused must be
viewed from the nature of the acts
executed by him, and not from his
admission.

Subjective Phase
- It is that portion of the acts constituting the
crime, starting from the point where the
offender begins the commission of the
crime to that point where he has still
control over his acts, including their natural
course.

If between these two points the offender is
stopped by any cause outside of his own voluntary
desistance, the subjective phase has not been
passed and it is an attempt. If he is not so stopped
but continues until he performs the last act, it is
frustrated, provided the crime is not produced. The
acts then of the offender reached the objective
phase of the crime.

FRUSTRATED FELONY
Elements of Frustrated Felony
1. The offender performs all the acts of
execution;
2. All the acts performed would produce the
felony as a consequence;
3. But the felony is not produced;
4. By reason of causes independent of the will
of the perpetrator.

- The belief of the accused need not be
considered. What should be considered is
whether all the acts of execution performed
by the offender would produce the felony
as a consequence.
- In crimes against persons, which requires
the victims death to consummate the
felony, it is necessary for the frustration of
the same that a mortal wound be inflicted,
because then the wound could produce the
felony as a consequence.

CONSUMMATED FELONY
- When all the elements necessary for its
execution and accomplishment are present.

How to determine whether the crime is only
attempted or frustrated or it is consummated
1. The nature of the offense
2. The elements constituting the felony
3. The manner of committing the same, must
be considered.

Nature of the Crime
Arson
- It is not necessary that the property is
totally destroyed by fire.
- The crime of arson is therefore,
consummated even if only a portion of the
wall or any other part of the house is
burned.
- If there was a blaze, but no part of the
house is burned, the crime of arson is
frustrated. If any part of the house, no
matter how small, is burned, the crime of
arson is consummated.

Elements Constituting the Felony
Theft
- The crime is consummated when the thief is
able to take or get hold of the thing
belonging to another, even if he is not able
to carry it away.
- Actula taking with intent to gain of personal
property, belonging to another, without the
latters consent, is sufficient to constitute
consummated theft. It is not necessary that
the offender carries away or appropriates
the property taken

Estafa
- The crime is consummated when the
offended party is actually damaged or
prejudiced.

Manner of Committing the crime.
1. Formal Crimes
- Consummated in one instant, no attempt.
- Ex. Slander, False Testimony, Sale of
Marijuana and other Prohibited Drugs

2. Crimes Consummated by mere attempt or
proposal or by overt act
- Flight to Enemys Country
- Corruption of Minors

3. Felony by omission
- No attempted stage because in this kind of
felony the offender does not execute acts.
He omits to perform an act which the law
requires him to do.

4. Crimes requiring the intervention of two
persons to commit them are consummated
by mere agreement
- Betting in Sport Contests and Corruption of
Public Officer

5. Material Crimes
- Three Stages of Execution
There is no attempted or frustrated Impossible
Crime
- In impossible crime, the person intending to
commit an offense has already performed
the acts for the execution of the same, but
nevertheless the crime is not produced by
reason of the fact that the act intended is
by its nature one of impossible
accomplishment or because the means
employed by such person are essentially
inadequate or ineffectual to produce the
result desired by him.


ARTICLE 7
Light Felonies are punishable only when they have
been consummated, with the exception of those
committed against persons or property.

Light Felonies
- Are those infractions of law for the
commission of which the penalty of arresto
menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or
both, is provided.

ARTICLE 8
Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are
punishable only in the cases in which the law
specially provides a penalty therefor.

A conspiracy exists when two or more persons
come to an agreement concerning the commission
of a felony and decide to commit it.

There is proposal when the person who has decided
to commit a felony proposes its execution to some
other person or persons.

Conspiracy
- Exists when two or more persons come to
an agreement concerning the commission
of a felony and decide to commit it.
- Generally, conspiracy is not a crime except
when the law specifically provides a penalty
therefor as in treason, rebellion, and
sedition.
- An agreement to commit a crime is a
reprehensible act from the viewpoint of
morality, but as long as the conspirators do
not perform overt acts in furtherance of
their malevolent design, the sovereignty of
the State is not outraged and the
tranquillity of the public remains
undisturbed.
- The conspirators should not actually
commit treason coup detat, rebellion or
sedition. It is sufficient that two or more
persons agree and decide to commit
treason, rebellion or sedition.
- If they commit, say , treason, they will be
held liable for treason, and the conspiracy
which they had before committing treason
is only a manner of incurring criminal
liability. It is not a separate offense.

Conspiracy as a felony, distinguished from
conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal
liability.

Indications of Conspiracy
- When the defendants by their acts aimed at
the same object, one performing one part
and the other performing another part so as
to complete it, with a view to the
attainment of the same object, and their
acts, though apparently independent, were
in fact concerted and cooperative,
indicating closeness of personal association,
concerted action and concurrence of
sentiments, the court will be justified in
concluding that said defendants were
engaged in a conspiracy.
- Unity of Purpose
- Unity in the Execution of the Unlawful Acts

- For a collective responsibility among the
accused to be established, it is sufficient
that at the time of the aggression, all of
them acted in concert, each doing his part
to fulfil their common design to kill their
victim, and although only one of them may
have actually stabbed the victim, the act of
that one is deemed to be the act of all.

The Acts of the Defendants must show a Common
Design

Period of Time to afford opportunity for Meditation
and Reflection, not required in Conspiracy

REQUISITES OF CONSPIRACY:
1. That two or more persons came to an
agreement;
2. That the agreement concerned the
commission of a felony; and
3. That the execution of the felony be decided
upon.

First Element That two or more persons came to
an agreement
- Agreement presupposes meeting of the
minds of two or more persons

Second Element - That the agreement concerned
the commission of a felony
- The agreement refers to the commission of
a crime. It must be an agreement to act, to
effect, to bring about what has already
been conceived and determined.

Third Element - That the execution of the felony be
decided upon
- The conspirators have made up their minds
to commit the crime. There must be a
determination to commit the crime of
treason, rebellion or sedition.

Direct Proof is Not Essential to establish Conspiracy
- it may be inferred from the collective acts
of the accused before, during and after the
commission of the crime.
- Conspiracy can be presumed from and
proven by acts of the accused themselves
when the said acts point to a joint purpose
and design, concerted action and
community of interests
- It is not necessary to show that all the
conspirators actually hit and killed the
victim.
- Conspiracy renders all the conspirators as
Co-Principals regardless of the extent and
character of their participation because in
contemplation of law, the act of one
conspirator is the act of all.

REQUISITES OF PROPOSAL:
1. That a person has decided to commit a
felony; and
2. That he proposes its execution to some
other person or persons.

There is No Criminal Proposal when
1. The person who proposes is not determined
to commit the felony
2. There is no decided, concrete and formal
proposal
3. It is not the execution of a felony that is
proposed
- Note that what constitutes the felony of
proposal to commit treason or rebellion is
the making of proposal. The law does not
require that the proposal be accepted by
the person to whom the proposal is made.
If it is accepted, it may be conspiracy to
commit treason or rebellion, because there
would be an agreement and a decision to
commit it.

ARTICLE 9
Grave Felonies are those to which the law attaches
the capital punishment or penalties which in any of
their periods are afflictive, in accordance with
Article 25 of this Code.

Less Grace Felonies are those which the law
punishes with penalties which in their maximum
period are correctional, in accordance with the
above-mentioned article.

Light Felonies are those infractions of law for the
commission of which the penalty of arresto menor
or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both, is
provided.

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


The Circumstances Affecting Criminal Liability are:
1. Justifying Circumstances (Art. 11)
2. Exempting Circumstances (Art. 12, and
other Absolutory Circumstances (Arts. 20,
Art. 124, last par., Art. 280, last par., Art.
332, Art. 344, etc.)
3. Mitigating Circumstances (Art. 13)
4. Aggravating Circumstances (Art. 14)
5. Alternative Circumstances (Art. 15)

IMPUTABILITY
- The quality by which an act may be ascribed
to a person as its author or owner. It implies
that the act committed has been freely and
consciously done and may, therefore, be
put down to the doer as his very own.

RESPONSIBILITY
- The obligation of suffering the
consequences of crime. It is the obligation
of taking the penal and civil consequences
of the crime.
- While imputability implies that a deed may
be imputed to a person, responsibility
implies that the person must take the
consequence of such a deed.

GUILT
- An element of responsibility, for a man
cannot be made to answer for the
consequences of a crime unless he is guilty.

JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
- Those where the act of a person is said to
be in accordance with law, so that such
person is deemed not have transgressed
the law and is free from both criminal and
civil liability.
- There is no civil liability, except in par. 4 of
Art. 11, where the civil liability is borne by
the persons benefited by the act.

ARTICLE 11
The following do not incur any criminal liability:
1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person
or rights, provided that the following
circumstances concur:

First. Unlawful Aggression;
Second. Reasonable Necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel it;
Third. Lack of Sufficient Provocation on the part of
the person defending himself.

2. Anyone who acts in defense of the person
pr rights of his spouse, ascendants,
descendants, or legitimate, natural, or
adopted brothers or sisters, or his relatives
by affinity in the same degrees, and those
by consanguinity within the fourth civil
degree, provided that the first and second
requisites prescribed in the next preceding
circumstance are present, and the further
requisite, in case the provocation was
given by the person attacked, that the one
making defense had no part therein.

3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person
or rights of a stranger, provided that the
first and second requisites mentioned in
the first circumstance of this article are
present and that the person defending be
not induced by revenge, resentment or
other evil motive.

4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil
or injury, does an act which causes damage
to another, provided that the following
requisites are present: (THE AVENGERS
ARTICLE or THE HERO ARTICLE)

First. That the evil sought to be avoided
actually exists;
Second. That the injury feared be greater
than that done to avoid it.
Third. That there be no other practical and
less harmful means of preventing it.

5. Any person who acts in the fulfilment of a
duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or
office.

6. Any person who acts in obedience to an
order issued by a superior for some lawful
purpose. (BLACKHAWK DOWN ARTICLE)

ARTCILE 12
The following are exempt from criminal liability:
1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the
latter has acted during a lucid interval.

When the imbecile or an insane person has
committed an act which the law defines as a felony
(delito), the court shall order his confinement in one
of the hospitals or asylums established for persons
thus afflicted, which he shall not be permitted to
leave without first obtaining the permission of the
same court.

2. A person under 15 years of age. (RA 9344)
3. A person over 15 years of age and under
18, unless he has acted with discernment,
in which case, such minor shall be
proceeded against in accordance with the
provisions of Article 80 of this Code.

When such minor is adjudged to be
criminally irresponsible, the court, in conformity
with the provisions of this and the preceding
paragraph, shall commit him to the care and
custody of his family who shall be charged with his
surveillance and education; otherwise, he shall be
committed to the care of some institution or person
mentioned in said Article 80. (Impliedly repealed by
Ra 9344)

4. Any person who, while performing a lawful
act with due care, causes an injury by mere
accident without fault or intention of
causing it.
5. Any person who acts under the compulsion
of an irresistible force.
6. Any person who acts under the impulse of
an uncontrolled fear of an equal or greater
injury.
7. Any person who fails to perform an act
required by law, when prevented by some
lawful or insuperable cause.

ARTICLE 13
The following are mitigating circumstances;
1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter,
when all the requisites necessary to justify
or to exempt from criminal liability in the
respective cases are not attendant.
2. That the offender is under eighteen year of
age or over seventy years. In the case of
the minor, he shall be proceeded against in
accordance with the provisions of Art. 80.
3. That the offender had no intention to
commit so grave a wrong as that
committed.
4. That sufficient provocation or threat on the
part of the offended party immediately
preceded the act.
5. That the act was committed in the
immediate vindication of a grave offense
to the one committing the felony (delito),
his spouse, ascendants, or relatives by
affinity within the same degrees.
6. That of having acted upon an impulse so
powerful as naturally to have produced
passion or obfuscation.
7. That the offender had voluntarily
surrendered himself to a person in
authority or his agents, or tha the had
voluntarily confessed his guilt before the
court prior to the presentation of the
evidence for the prosecution;
8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind
or otherwise suffering some physical defect
which thus restricts his means of action,
defense, or communications with his fellow
beings.


9. Such illness of the offender as would
diminish the exercise of the will-power of
the offender without however depriving
him of the consciousness of his acts.
10. And, finally, any other circumstances of a
similar nature and analogous to those
above mentioned.

ARTICLE 14
The following are aggravating circumstances;
1. That advantage be taken by the offender
of his public position.
2. That the crime be committed in contempt
or with insult to the public authorities.
3. That the act be committed with insult or in
disregard of the respect due the offended
party on account of his rank, age, or sex, or
that is be committed in the dwelling of the
offended party, if the latter has not given
provocation.
4. That the act be committed with abuse of
confidence or obvious ungratefulness.
5. That the crime be committed in the palace
of the Chief Executive or in his presence, or
where public authorities are engaged in
the discharge of their duties, or in a place
dedicated to religious worship.
6. That the crime be committed in the night
time, or in an uninhabited place, or by a
band, whenever such circumstances may
facilitate the commission of the offense.

Whenever more than three armed
malefactors shall have acted together in
the commission of an offense, it shall be
deemed to have been committed by a
band.

7. That the crime be committed on the
occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck,
earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or
misfortune.
8. That the crime be committed with the aid
of armed men or persons who insure or
afford impunity.
9. That the accused is a recidivist. A recidivist
is one who, at the time of his trial for one
crime, shall have been previously convicted
by final judgment of another crime
embraced in the same title of this Code.
10. That the offender has been previously
punished by an offense to which the law
attaches an equal or greater penalty or for
two or more crimes to which it attaches a
lighter penalty.
11. That the crime be committed in
consideration of a price, reward, or
promise.
12. That the crime be committed by means of
inundation, fire, poison, explosion,
stranding of a vessel or international
damage thereto, derailment of a
locomotive, or by the use of any other
artifice involving great waste and ruin.
13. That the act be committed with evidence
premeditation.
14. That the craft, fraud or disguise be
employed.
15. That advantage be taken of superior
strength, or means be employed to weaken
the defense.
16. That the act be committed with treachery
(alevosia). There is treachery when the
offender commits any of the crimes against
the person, employing means, methods, or
forms in the execution thereof which
tenddirectly and specially to insure its
execution, without risk to himself arising
from the defense which the offended party
might make.
17. That means be employed or circumstances
brought about which add ignominy to the
natural effects of the act.
18. That the crime be committed after an
unlawful entry. There is an unlawful entry
when an entrance of a crime a wall, roof,
floor, door, or window be broken.
19. That as means to commission of a crime a
wall, roof, floor, door, or window be
broken.
20. That the crime be committed with the aid
of persons under fifteen years of age or by
means of motor vehicles, motorized
watercraft, airships, or other similar
means. (As amended by RA 5438).
21. That the wrong done in the commission of
the crime be deliberately augmented by
causing other wrong not necessary for its
commissions.

ARTICLE 15
Alternative Circumstances are those which must be
taken into consideration as aggravating or
mitigating according to the nature and effects of
the crime and the other conditions attending its
commission. They are the relationship, intoxication,
and the degree of instruction, and education of the
offender.

The alternative circumstance of
relationship shall be taken into consideration when
the offended party is the spouse, ascendant,
descendant, legitimate, natural, or adopted brother
or sister, or relative by affinity in the same degree
of the offender.

The intoxication of the offender shall be
taken into consideration as a mitigating
circumstance when the offender is committed a
felony in a state of intoxication, if the same is not
habitual or subsequent to the plan to commit said
felony; but when the intoxication is habitual or
intentional, it shall be considered as an aggravating
circumstance.

The Alternative Circumstances are:
1. Relationship
2. Intoxication
3. Degree of instruction and education of the
offender.

Relationship
When the offended party is the
(a) Spouse
(b) Ascendant
(c) Descendant
(d) Legitimate, natural or adopted brother or
sister, or
(e) Relative by affinity in the same degree of
the offender.

- The relationship of stepfather or
stepmother and stepson or stepdaughter is
included by analogy as similar to that of
ascendant and descendant.
- The relationship of adopted parent and
adopted child may also be included, as
similar to that of ascendant and
descendant.

When mitigating and when aggravating
Mitigating:
- Crimes against property
- Robbery
- Usurpation
- Fraudulent insolvency
- Arson
- Trespass to dwelling
No Criminal Liability, Only Civil Liability
- Theft
- Swindling
- Malicious Mischief

Aggravating
- Crimes against Persons, in cases where the
offended party is a relative of a higher
degree than the offender, or when the
offender and the offended party are
relatives of the same level, as killing a
brother, a brother-in-law, a half-brother or
adopted brother.
- In crime of Chastity, relationship is always
aggravating.
- If the crime against persons is any of the
serious physical injuries, the fact that the
offended party is a descendant of the
offender is not mitigating,
- If the offense of serious physical injuries is
committed by the offender against his child,
whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of
his legitimate other descendants,
relationship or aggravating. But the serious
physical injuries must not be inflicted by a
parent upon his child by excessive
chastisement.

- When the crime is less serious physical
injuries, or slight physical injuries,
relationship is a mitigating circumstance, if
the offended party is a relative of a lower
degree of the offender; and aggravating
circumstance, if the offended party is a
relative of a higher degree of the offender.

- When the crime against persons is homicide
or murder, relationship is aggravating even
if the victim of the crime is a relative of
lower degree.

Relationship is neither mitigating nor aggravating,
when relationship is an element of the offense.

Intoxication
When mitigating and when aggravating
Mitigating:
(1) If intoxication is not habitual, or
(2) If intoxication is not subsequent to the plan
to commit a felony.


Aggravating:
(1) If intoxication is habitual; or
(2) If it is intentional (subsequent to the plan to
commit a felony)

It is intentional when the offender drinks
liquor fully knowing its effects, to find in the liquor a
stimulant to commit a crime or a means to suffocate
any remorse.

The accuseds state of intoxication must be
proved.

Drunkenness must affect mental faculties.

Intoxication is mitigating where the same
was not habitual nor intentional and the crime was
not the offspring of planning and deliberation but a
fatal improvisation dictated by an impromptu
impulse.

Presumption is that intoxication is
accidental.

Non-habitual intoxication, lack of
instruction and obfuscation are not to be taken
separately. The SC considered them as one
mitigating circumstance only and modified the
penalty imposed by the trial court by raising it and
imposing the proper penalty in the minimum period.

Degree of Instruction and Education of the
Offender
- Low degree of instruction and education or
lack of it is generally mitigating. High degree
of instruction and education is aggravating,
when the offender avails himself of his
learning in committing the crime.
- Lack of sufficient intelligence is required in
illiteracy.
- Not illiteracy alone but also lack of
sufficient intelligence are necessary to
invoke the benefit of the alternative
circumstance of lack of instruction, the
determination of which is left to the trial
court.
- The question of lack of instruction cannot
be raised for the first time in appellate
court.
- Degree of instruction is aggravating when
the offender availed himself or took
advantage of it in committing the crime.

GR: Low degree or lack of instruction is mitigating in
all Crimes.

EXPS:
1. Crimes against property; estafa, theft,
robbery, arson.
2. Robbery with homicide.
3. Crimes against Chastity, rape and adultery
4. Treason
5. Murder

ARTICLE 16
The following are criminally liable for grave and
less grave felonies:
1. Principals
2. Accomplices
3. Accessories

The following are criminally liable for light offense:
1. Principals
2. Accomplices

Rules relative to Light Felonies:
1. Light felonies are punishable only when
they have been consummated.
2. But when light felonies are committed
against persons or property, they are
punishable even if they are only in the
attempted or frustrated stage of execution.
3. Only principals and accomplices are liable
for light felonies.
4. Accessories are not liable for light felonies,
even if they are committed against persons
or property.

ARTICLE 17
The following are considered Principals:
1. Those who take a direct part in the
execution of the act;
2. Those who directly force or induce others
to commit it.
3. Those who cooperate in the commission of
the offense by another act without which it
would not have been accomplished.

But when two or more persons are involved
in killing another, it is necessary to determine the
participation of each.

The difference between an accused who is a
principal under any of the three categories
enumerated in Art. 17 of the RPC and a co-
conspirator who is also a principal is that while the
formers criminal liability is limited to his own acts,
as a general rule, the latters responsibility includes
the acts of his fellow conspirators.

Par. 1 PRINCIPALS BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION
- Personally takes part in the execution of the
act committing the crime.
- It is the one personally committing the
crime in obedience to that order or because
of the inducement, who is the principal by
direct participation

Two or More Offenders as Principals By Direct
Participation
Requisites:
1. That they participated in the criminal
resolutions.
2. That they carried out their plan and
personally took part in its execution by acts
which directly tended the same end.

First Requisite Participation in the Criminal
Resolutions
- When they were in Conspiracy at the time
of the commission of the crime
- It is well-settled that a person may be
convicted for the criminal act of another
where, between them, there has been
conspiracy or unity of purpose and
intention in the commission of the crime
charged.

Conspiracy
- It exists when two or more persons come to
an agreement concerning the commission
of a felony and decide to commit it.
- The conspiracy contemplated in the first
requisite is not a felony, but only a manner
of incurring criminal liability.
- To be a party to a conspiracy, one must
have the intention to participate in the
transaction with a view to the furtherance
of the common design and purpose.
- He must perform an overt act in
furtherance of the conspiracy, either by
actively participating in the actual
commission of the crime, or lending moral
assistance to his co-conspirators by being
present at the scene of the crime , or by
exerting moral ascendancy over the rest of
the conspirators as to move them to
executing the conspiracy.
- Mere knowledge, acquiescence or approval
of the act without cooperation or
agreement to cooperate is not enough to
constitute one a party to a conspiracy, but
that there must be intentional participation
in the transaction with a view to the
furtherance of the common design and
purpose.
- Conspiracy transcends companionship.

Existence of Conspiracy
- It does not require an agreement for an
appreciable length of time prior to the
execution of its purpose.
- It exists if, at the time of the commission of
the offense, the accused had the same
purpose and were united in its execution.

Conspiracy arises on the very instant the plotters
agree, expressly or impliedly, to commit the felony
and forthwith decide to pursue it. Once this assent is
established, each and everyone of the conspirators is
made criminally liable for the crime actually
committed by anyone of them.

- Formal agreement or precious acquaintance
among several persons not necessary in
conspiracy.
- It is sufficient that at the time of the
aggression, all the accused manifested by
their acts a common intent or desire to
attack so that the act of one accused
becomes the act of all.

Conspiracy must be established by positive and
conclusive evidence.
- Proof beyond reasonable doubt

- When there is no conspiracy, each of the
offenders is liable only for the act
performed by him.

Participation in Criminal Resolutions
- The cooperation which the law punishes is
the assistance which is knowingly or
intentionally given and which is not possible
without previous knowledge of the criminal
purpose.

Unity of purpose and intention in the commission of
the crime is shown in the following cases:
a. Spontaneous agreement at the moment of
the commission of the crime is sufficient to
create joint responsibility
b. Active cooperation by all the offenders in
the perpetration of the crime will also
create joint responsibility
c. Contributing by positive acts to the
realization of a common criminal intent also
creates joint responsilibility.
d. Presence during the commission of the
crime by a band and lending moral support
thereto, also create joint responsibility with
the material executors.
e. Where one of the accused knew of the plan
of the others to kill the two victims and he
accepted the role assigned to him, which
was to shoot one of the victims, and he
actually performed that role, he is a co-
principal by direct-participation in the
double murder.

- There may be conspiracy even if there is no
evident premeditation on the part of the
accused.

Liability of Participants where there is conspiracy
- The act of one is the act of all.
- Where conspiracy has been adequately
proven, all the conspirators are liable as co-
principals regardless of the extent and
character of their participation because in
contemplation of law, the act of one is the
act of all. The degree of actual participation
by each of the conspirators is immaterial. As
conspirators, each is equally responsible for
the acts of their co-conspirators.
- A conspirator should necessarily be liable
for the acts of another conspirator even
though such acts differ radically and
substantially from that which they intended
to commit.
- Where there is conspiracy to commit a
felony, all the conspirators are liable for its
consequences.

A conspirator is not liable for anothers crime which
is not an object of the conspiracy or which is not a
necessary and logical consequence thereof.

Conspiracy may cover persons previously
undetermined.
- The accused are liable for all the natural
and inherent consequences of such plan, it
appearing that there was a general plan to
kill anyone who might put up violent
resistance.

A person in conspiracy with others, who had
desisted before the crime was committed by the
others, is not criminally liable.

When there is conspiracy, it is not necessary to
ascertain the specific act of each conspirator.
- Conspiracy having been established, it is
immaterial who of the conspirators fired
the fatal shot. S

When there is conspiracy, the fact that an element
of the offense is not present as regards one of the
conspirators is immaterial.

GR: In multiple rape, each rapist is equally liable for
the other rapes.
EXPS:
1. In the crime of parricide, the element of
relationship must be present as regards all
the offenders.
2. In the crime of murder where treachery is
an element of the crime, all the offenders
must at least have knowledge of the
employment of treachery at the time of the
execution of the act or their cooperation
therein.
- The circumstances which consist int he
material execution of the act, or in the
means employed to accomplish it, shall
serve to aggravate the liability of those
persons only who had knowledge of them
at the time of the execution of the act or
their cooperation therein. Treachery is
either a qualifying or a generic aggravating
circumstance.

- Participation in anothers criminal
resolution must either precede or be
coetaneous with the criminal act.

- There could be no conspiracy to commit an
offense through negligence.

- In cases of criminal negligence or crimes
punishable by special law, allowing or failing
an act to be performed by another, makes
one a co-principal.

Second Requisite (Principals by Direct
Participation)
- The principals by direct participation must
be at the scene of the crime, personally
taking part in its execution.
- The acts of each offender must directly tend
to the same end.

In a murder which the offenders previously agreed
to commit, not only the one who inflicts the fatal
wound is considered a principal, but also the one
who holds down the victim and the one who lies in
wait at the door to prevent any help from being
rendered. The acts of each and every one of the
offenders in this case are all directed to the same
end, that is, the killing of their victim. Criminal
responsibility in such a case is collective.

- One serving as guard pursuant to the
conspiracy is a principal by direct
participation
- When the second requisite is lacking, there
is only conspiracy.

Par. 2. PRINCIPALS BY INDUCTION
- The principal by induction becomes liable
only when the principal by direct
participation committed the act induced.

Two ways of becoming Principal By Induction:
1. By directly forcing another to commit a
crime, and
2. By directly inducing another to commit a
crime.

By directly forcing
Two ways of directly forcing another to commit a
crime:
a. By using irresistible force
b. By causing uncontrollable fear

By directly inducing
Two ways of directly inducing another to commit a
crime:
a. By giving price, or offering reward or
promise
b. By using words of command

Requisites
1. That the inducement be made directly with
the intention of procuring the commission
of the crime; and
2. That such inducement be the determining
cause of the commission of the crime by the
material executor.

To constitute inducement, there must exist on the
part of the inducer the most positive resolution and
the most persistent effort to secure the commission
of the crime, together with the presentation to the
person induced of the very strongest kind of
temptation to commit the crime.

A thoughtless expression without intention to
produce the result is not an inducement to commit a
crime.
- But a thoughtless expression or act, without
any expectation or intention that it would
produce the result, is not an inducement to
commit a crime.

The words of advice or the influence must have
actually moved the hands of the principal by direct
participation.

It is necessary that the inducement be the
determining cause of the commission of the crime
by the principal by direct participation, that is,
without such inducement the crime would not have
been committed.

Inducement exists if the command or advice is of
such a nature that, without its concurrence, the
crime would not have materialized.

The inducement must precede the act induced and
must be so influential in producing the criminal act
that without it, the act would not have been
performed.
- Thus, the price given to the principal by
direct participation after the commission of
the crime, without prior promise to give a
price or reward, could not be an
inducement.

If the person who actually committed the crime had
a reason of his own to commit the crime, it cannot
be said that the inducement was influential in
producing the criminal act. In such case, the one
charged with having induced the commission of the
crime is not criminally liable.

By using words of Command
- Command must be the moving cause of the
offense
- An imprudent utterance said in the
excitement of the hour or in the beat of
anger, and not, rather, in the nature of a
command that had to be obeyed, does not
make the utterer a principal by inducement.

In determining whether the utterances of an
accused are sufficient to make him guilty as co-
principal by inducement, it must appear that the
inducement was of such nature and was made in
such a way as to become the determining cause of
the crime and that such inducement was uttered
with the intention of producing the result.

The inciting words must have great dominance and
influence over the person who acts; they ought to be
direct and as efficacious or powerful as physical or
moral coercion or violence itself.

Requisites
(1) That the one uttering the words of
command must have the intention of
procuring the commission of the crime.
(2) That the one who made the command must
have an ascendancy or influence over the
person who acted.
(3) That the words used must be so direct, so
efficacious, so powerful as to amount to
physical or moral coercion.
(4) The words of command must be uttered
prior to the commission of the crime.
(5) The material executor of the crime has no
personal reason to commit the crime.

Requisites considered in determining the liability of a
person accused as principal by inducement.
- The question whether a person present
upon the occasion of a homicide but who
takes no direct part in the act can be held
criminally liable for inciting and encouraging
another with expressions, such as, go
ahead, hit him, there you have him,
now is the time, etc., depends upon
whether such words are spoken under
conditions which give them a direct and
determinative influence upon the mind of
the principal actor.

Ascendancy of influence as to amount to moral
coercion is not necessary when there is conspiracy.

One who planned the crime committed by another is
a principal by inducement.
If the crime committed is not contemplated in the
order given, the inducement is not material and not
the determining cause thereof.

Principal by Inducement vs Offender who made
proposal to commit a felony
1. In both, there is an inducement to commit a
crime.
2. In the first, the principal by inducement
becomes liable only when the crime is
committed by the principal by direct
participation; In the second, the mere
proposal to commit a felony is punishable in
treason or rebellion. The person whom the
proposal is made should not commit the
crime; otherwise, the proponent becomes a
principal by inducement.
3. In the first, the inducement involves any
crime; in the second, the proposal to be
punishable must involve only treason or
rebellion.

But if the one charged by as principal by direct
participation is acquitted because he acted without
criminal intent or malice, his acquittal is not a
ground for the acquittal of the principal by
inducement.

The reason for the rule is that in exempting
circumstances, such as when the act is not voluntary
because of lack of intent on the part of the accused,
there is a crime committed, only that the accused is
not a criminal. In intentional felonies, the act of a
person does not make him criminal unless his mind
be criminal.

Par. 3. PRINCIPALS BY INDISPENSABLE
COOPERATION
Cooperate
- To desire or wish in common a thing. But
that common will or purpose does not
necessarily mean previous understanding,
for it can be explained or inferred from the
circumstances of each case.

Requisites:
1. Participation in the criminal resolution, that
is, there is either anterior conspiracy or
unity of criminal purpose and intention
immediately before the commission of the
crime charged; and
2. Cooperation in the commission of the
offense by performing another act, without
which it would not have been
accomplished. Otherwise, the offender is
only an accomplice.

Cooperate...by another act.
- It should be different from the act of the
principal by direct participation.

Liability of conspirators who took turns in raping a
girl.

Collective criminal responsibility.
Individual criminal responsibility.

ARTICLE 18
Accomplices are the persons who, not being
included in Article 17, cooperate in the execution of
the offense by previous or simultaneous acts.

The principal element of every punishable complicity
consists in the concurrence of the will of the
accomplice with the will of the author of the crime,
and the accomplice cooperates by previous or
simultaneous acts in the execution of the offense by
the principal.

But the participation or cooperation of the
accomplice is not any one of those mentioned in
Article 17.

When there is no conspiracy between or among the
defendants but they were animated by one and the
same purpose to accomplish the criminal objective,
those who cooperated by previous or simultaneous
acts but cannot be held liable as principals are
accomplices.

In case of doubt, the participation of the offender
will be considered that of an accomplice rather than
that of a principal.

When the participation of an accused is not
disclosed, he is only an accomplice.

An accomplice does not enter into a conspiracy with
the principal by direct participation. He does not
have previous agreement or understanding with the
principal to commit a crime. But he participates to a
certain point in the common criminal design.

Accomplice vs Conspirator
They have one thing in common, they know and
agree with the criminal design.
Conspirators, however, know the criminal intention
because they themselves have decided upon such
course of action. Accomplices come to know about it
after the principals have reached the decision, and
only then do they agree to cooperate in its
execution.

Conspirators decide that a crime should be
committed; Accomplices merely concur in it.

Conspirators are the authors of a crime; Accomplices
are merely instruments who perform acts not
essential to the perpetration of the offense.

It was held that if the overt acts of the accused,
although done with knowledge of the criminal intent
of his co-accused should be held liable only as an
accomplice in the killing of the victim.

Requisites
1. That there be community of design; that is,
knowing the criminal design of the principal
by direct participation, he concurs with the
latter in his purpose.
2. That he cooperates in the execution of the
offense by previous or simultaneous acts,
with the intention of supplying material or
moral aid in the execution of the crime in
an efficacious way; and
3. That there be a relation between the acts
done by the principal and those attributed
to the person charged as accomplice.

First Requisite
The cooperation that the law punishes is the
assistance knowingly or intentionally rendered,
which cannot exist without previous cognizance of
the criminal act intendeds to be executed by the
principal by direct participation.

How an accomplice acquires knowledge of the
criminal design of the principal?
1. When the principal informs or tells the
accomplice of the formers criminal
purpose.
2. When the accomplice saw the criminal acts
of the principal.

No knowledge of the criminal design of the principal
not an accomplice.

The community of design need not be to commit the
crime actually committed. It is sufficient if there was
a common purpose to commit a particular crime and
that the crime actually committed was a natural or
probable consequence of the intended crime.

The cooperation of an accomplice is not due to a
conspiracy.

When the acts of the accused are not indispensable
in the killing, they are merely accomplices.

The accomplice merely supplies the principal with
material or moral aid without conspiracy with the
latter.

The wounds inflicted by an accomplice in crime
against persons should not have caused the death of
the victim. Otherwise, he becomes a principal by
direct participation.

Being present and giving moral support when a
crime is being committed will make a person
responsible only as accomplice in the crime
committed.

The moral aid may be through advice,
encouragement or agreement. But it should not be
the determining cause of the commission of the
crime by the principal by direct participation;
otherwise, the one who gave the advice or
encouragement or the one who entered into the
agreement would be a principal by inducement.
When the accomplice gives an advice or
encouragement to, or enters into an agreement with
the principal, he knows the principal if going to
commit the crime.

It is not enough that a person entertains an identical
criminal design as that of the principal. There must
be a relation between the criminal act of the
principal by direct participation and that of the
person charged as accomplice.

ARTICLE 19
Accessories are those who, having knowledge of
the commission of the crime, and without having
participated therein, either as principals or
accomplices, take part subsequent to its
commission in any of the following manners:
1. By profiting themselves or assisting the
offender to profit by the effects of the
crime;
2. By concealing or destroying the body of the
crime or the effects or instruments thereof,
in order to prevent its discovery
3. By harbouring, concealing, or assisting in
the escape of the principal of the crime,
provided the accessory acts with abuse of
his public functions or whenever the author
of the crime is guilty of treason, parricide,
murder or an attempt to take the life of
the Chief Executive, or is known to be
habitually guilty of some other crime.

An accessory does not participate in the criminal
design, nor cooperate in the commission of the
felony, but, with knowledge of the commission of
the crime, he subsequently takes part in three ways.

Important Words and Phrases
1.) Having knowledge
- An accessory must have knowledge of the
commission of the crime, and having that
knowledge, he took part subsequent to its
commission.

Mere possession of stolen property does not make
the accused accessory where the thief was already
convicted.
- If there has been no one convicted as thief,
the possessor should be prosecuted as
principal of the crime of theft.

Entertaining suspicion that a crime has been
committed is not enough.
- Suspicion is the imagination of the
existence of something without proof, or
upon very slight evidence, or upon no
evidence at all.

Knowledge of the commission of the crime may be
acquired subsequent to the acquisition of stolen
property.
- To declare the accused guilty as accessory,
it is not necessary that he should have
acquired the property, knowing at that time
that it had been stolen. It is sufficient that
after acquiring that knowledge, he
concealed or disposed of the property,
thereby depriving the owner thereof.

Knowledge of the commission of the crime may be
established by circumstantial evidence.

2.) Commission of the crime
3.) Without having participated therein either
as principals or accomplices
4.) Take part subsequent to its commission

Specific acts of Accessories
1. By profiting themselves or assisting the
offender to profit by the effects of the crime

- The crime committed by the principal under
this paragraph may be any crime, provided
it is not a light felony.
- The accessory should not take the property
without the consent of the principal.
Otherwise, he is a principal in a crime of
theft.
- Theft may be committed by taking with
intent to gain, personal property from one
who stole it, without the latters consent.

When is profiting by the effects of the crime
punished as the act of principal, and not the act of
accessory?
- When a person knowingly acquired or
received property taken by the brigands.

Assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the
crime.
- An accessory should not be in conspiracy
with the principal.

2. By concealing or destroying the body of the
crime to prevent its discovery.
- The crime committed by the principal under
this paragraph may be any crime, provided
it is not a light felony.
- There must be an attempt to hide the body
of the crime.

3. By harboring, concealing or assisting in the
escape of the principal of the crime.

Two classes of Accessories are contemplated in Par.
3 of Art. 19.
a. Public officers who harbour, conceal or
assist in the escape of the principal of any
crime (not light felony) with abuse of his
official functions.
Requisites:
(1) The accessory is a public officer.
(2) He harbours, conceals, or assists in the
escape of the principal.
(3) The public officer acts with abuse of his
public functions.
(4) The crime committed by the principal is any
crime, provided it is not a light felony.

b. Private persons who harbour, conceal or
assist in the escape of the author of the
crime guilty of treason, parricide, murder
or an attempt against the life of the
President, or who is known to be habitually
guilty of some other crime.
Requisites:
(1) The accessory is a private person.
(2) He harbours, conceals or assists in the
escape of the author of the crime.
(3) The crime committed by the principal is
either, treason, parricide, murder, an
attempt against the life of the President, or
that the principal is known to be habitually
guilty of some other crime.

But the accessory must have knowledge of the
principal being habitually guilty of some other crime,
because the law says or is known to be habitually
guilty of some other crime.

A mayor who refused to prosecute offender is
accessory.

One who kept silent with regard to the crime he
witnessed is not an accessory.

The responsibility of the accessory is subordinate to
that of the principal in a crime, because the
accessorys participation therein is subsequent to its
commission, and his guilt is directly related to that of
the principal delinquent in the punishable act.

Conviction of an accessory is possible
notwithstanding the acquittal of the principal, if the
crime was in fact committed, but the principal was
not held criminally liable, because of an exempting
circumstance. In exempting circumstances, there is a
crime committed. Hence, there is a basis for
convicting the accessory.

Even if the principal is still unknown or at large, the
accessory may be held responsible provided the
requisites prescribed by law for the existence of the
crime are present and that someone committed it.

The accused cannot be held liable as accessory, if the
principal charged with murder died before trial,
because had he been alive he might have been
found guilty only of homicide.
The arraignment, trial and conviction of an accessory
after the fact without the principal of the crime
having first been tried and convicted in the separate
case filed and pending at the time of the
arraignment, trial and decision of the case against
the accessory, is not proper and violates the legal
system of procedural orderliness.

For one to be found guilty and punished as an
accessory, it is not necessary that there be a
principal duly convicted. Neither the letter nor the
spirit of the law requires that the principal be
convicted before one may be punished as an
accessory. As long as the corpus delicti is proved and
the accessorys participation as such shown, he can
be held criminally responsible and meted out the
corresponding penalty.

An accessory does not participate in the criminal
design, nor cooperate in the commission of the
felony, but, with knowledge of the commission of
the crime, he subsequently takes part in any of the
three ways mentioned in Art. 19.

ARTICLE 20
Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability.
The penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be
imposed upon those who are such with respect to
their spouses, ascendants, descendants, legitimate,
natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or
relatives by affinity within the same degrees, with
single exception of accessories falling within the
provisions of paragraph 1 of the next preceding
article.

Even if only two of the principals guilty of murder
are the brothers of the accessory and the others are
not related to him, such accessory is exempt from
criminal liability.

Nephew or niece not included among such relatives.

Accessory is not exempt from criminal liability even
if the principal is related to him, if such accessory (1)
profited by the effects of the crime, or (2) assisted
the offender to profit by the effects of the crime.

===========================================

EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
TOTAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
ARTICLE 89
Criminal Liability is totally extinguished:
1. By the death of the convict, as to the
personal penalties; and as to pecuniary
penalties, liability therefor is extinguished
only when the death of the offender occurs
before final judgment;
2. By service of the sentence;
3. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes
the penalty and all its effects;
4. By absolute pardon;
5. By prescription of the crime;
6. By prescription of the penalty;
7. By the marriage of the offended woman,
as provided in Art. 344 of this Code.

Extinction of criminal liability does not necessarily
mean that the civil liability is also extinguished.

Causes of extinction of criminal liability arise after
the commission of the offense; while the causes of
justification or exemption from criminal liability arise
from circumstances existing either before the
commission of the crime or at the moment of its
commission.

That criminal liability is totally extinguished is a
ground for motion to quash.

The death of the convict, whether before or after
judgment, extinguishes criminal liability, because
one of the juridical conditions of penalty is that it is
personal.

Civil liability is extinguished only when death occurs
before final judgment.

Criminal and civil liability is extinguished when the
offender dies before final judgment.

When the accused died while the judgment of
conviction against him was pending appeal, his civil
and criminal liability was extinguished by his death.

Final Judgment
- Judgement in a criminal case becomes final
after the lapse of the period for perfecting
an appeal or when the sentence has been
partially or totally satisfied or served, or the
defendant has expressly waived in writing
his right to appeal.

Effect of the death of the accused pending appeal on
his criminal and civil liability
GR: --
Death of the accused pending appeal of his
conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as well as
the civil liability based solely on the offense
committed.

EXP: --

The claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding
the death of the accused, if the same may also be
predicated on a source of obligation other than
delict, such as law, contracts, quasi-contracts and
quasi-delicts.

If the private offended party, upon extinction, of the
civil liability ex delicto, desires to recover damages
from the same act or omission complained of, he
must, file a separate civil action, this time predicated
not on the felony previously charged but on other
sources of obligation. The source of obligation
against whom the same shall be enforced.

Right of offended party to file separate civil action
not lost by prescription when accused dies pending
appeal.

Death of the offended party does not extinguish the
criminal liability of the accused.

Service of sentence does not extinguish the civil
liability.

Amnesty
- It is an act of the sovereign power granting
oblivion or a general pardon for a past
offense, and is rarely, if ever, exercised in
favour of a single individual, and is usually
exerted in behalf of certain classes of
persons, who are subject to trial but have
not yet been convicted.

Amnesty completely extinguishes the penalty and all
its effects.

Amnesty may be granted after conviction.

Civil liability not extinguished by amnesty.

Absolute Pardon
Pardon
- It is an act of grace proceeding from the
power entrusted with the execution of the
laws which exempts the individual on whom
it is bestowed from the punishment the law
inflicts for the crime he has committed.
- Kinds:
o Absolute pardon
o Conditional pardon
- A pardon, whether absolute or conditional,
is in the nature of a deed, for the validity of
which delivery is an indispensable requisite.
Until accepted, all that may have been done
is a matter of intended favour and may be
cancelled. But once accepted by the
grantee, the pardon already delivered
cannot be revoked by the authority which
granted it.

Amnesty vs Pardon
1. Pardon includes any crime and is exercised
individually by the President; Amnesty is a
blanket pardon to classes of persons or
communities who may be guilty of political
offenses.
2. Pardon is exercised when the person is
already convicted; Amnesty may be
exercised even before trial or investigation
is had.
3. Pardon looks forward and relieves the
offender from the consequences of which
he had been convicted, that is, it abolishes
or forgives the punishment, and for that
reason it does not work the restoration of
the rights to hold public office or the right
of suffrage, unless such rights be expressly
restored by the terms of the pardon.

On the other hand, amnesty looks backward
and abolishes and puts into oblivion the offense
itself; it so overlooks and obliterates the offense
with which he is charged that the person released by
amnesty stands before the law precisely as though
he had committed no offense.

4. Both do not extinguish the civil liability of
the offender.
5. Pardon, being a private act of the President,
must be pleaded and proved by the person
pardoned; while Amnesty being by
Proclamation of the Chief Executive with
the concurrence of Congress, is a public act
of which the courts should take judicial
notice.

Prescription
By prescription, the State or the People loses the
right to prosecute the crime or demand the service
of the penalty imposed.

Prescription of the crime
- Is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the
State to prosecute the offender after the
lapse of a certain time.

Prescription of the penalty
- Is the loss or forfeiture of the right of the
Government to execute the final sentence
after the lapse of a certain time.

Two conditions necessary in prescription of penalty
(a) That there be final judgment
(b) That the period of time prescribed by law
for its enforcement has elapsed.

By the marriage of the offended woman
Marriage of the offender with the offended woman
after the commission of any of the crimes of rape,
seduction, abduction or acts of lasciviousness, must
be contracted by the offender in good faith. Hence,
marriage contracted only to avoid criminal liability is
devoid of legal effects.

ARTICLE 90
Prescription of Crimes
Crimes punishable by death, reclusion perpetua pre
reclusion temporal shall prescribe in twenty years.

Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall
prescribe in fifteen years.

Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall
prescribe in ten years; with the exception of those
punishable by arresto mayor, which shall prescribe
in five years.

The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall
prescribe in one year.

The offenses of oral defamation and slander by
deed shall prescribe in six months.

Light offenses prescribe in two months.

When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one,
the highest penalty shall be made the basis of the
application of the rules contained in the first,
second and third paragraph of this article.

In computing the period of prescription, the first day
is to be excluded and the last day included.

Where the last day of the prescription period for
filing an information falls on a Sunday or legal
holiday, the information can no longer be filed on
the next day as the crime has already prescribed.

As to the prescription of oral defamation and slander
by deed, distinction should be made between simple
and grave slander. Simple slander prescribes in two
months.

Crimes punishable by arresto menor or a fine not
exceeding P200 prescribe in two months.

The period of prescription of the offense of
attempted bribery, penalized with destierro, is 10
years according to Article 90, for the reason that
destierro is classified as a correctional penalty under
Art. 25.

The crimes punishable by fines shall prescribe in 15
years, if the fine is afflictive; or in 10 years, if it is
correctional; or in two months, if the fine is light.
The subsidiary penalty for non-payment of the fine
should not be considered in determining the period
of prescription of such crimes.

When the penalty is a compound one, the highest
penalty is the basis of the application of the rules in
Art. 90.

When fine is an alternative penalty higher than the
other penalty which is by imprisonment
prescription of the crime is based on the fine.

Prescriptive periods of offenses punished under
special laws and municipal ordinances.
Act No. 3763, amending Act No. 3326, provides:
1. Offenses punished only by a fine or by
imprisonment for not more than one
month, or both, prescribe after 1 year.
2. Offenses punished by imprisonment, for
more than one month, but less than two
years after 4 years.
3. Offenses punished by imprisonment for two
years or more but less than six years after
8 years.
4. Offenses punished by imprisonment for six
years or more after 12 years.
5. Offenses under Internal Revenue Law
after 5 years.
6. Violations of municipal ordinances after 2
months.
7. Violations of the regulations or conditions
of certificate of convenience by the Public
Service Commission after 2 months.

Act No. 3326 is not applicable where the special law
provides for its own prescriptive period.

Prescription of violations penalized by special laws
and ordinances shall begin to run from the day of
the commission of the violation of the law, and if the
same be not known at the time, from the discovery
thereof and the institution of judicial proceedings for
its investigation and punishment.

The prescription shall be interrupted when
proceedings are instituted against the guilty
person, and shall begin to run again if the
proceedings are dismissed for reasons not
constituting jeopardy.

Defense of prescription may be raised during the
trial or during the appeal.

The accused cannot be convicted of an offense
lesser than that charged if the lesser offense had
already prescribed at the time the information was
filed.

Prescription does not divest court of jurisdiction; it is
a ground for acquittal of the accused.

ARTICLE 91
Computation of prescription of offenses.
The period of prescription shall commence to run
from the day on which the crime is discovered by
the offended party, the authorities, or their agents,
and shall be interrupted by the filing of the
complaint or information, and shall commence to
run again when such proceedings terminate
without the accused being convicted or acquitted,
or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not
imputable to him.

The term of prescription shall not run when the
offender is absent from the Philippine Archipelago.

Outline of the provisions:
1. The period of prescription commences to
run from the day on which the crime is
discovered by the offended party, the
authorities or their agents.
2. It is interrupted by the filing of the
complaint or information.
3. It commences to run again when such
proceedings terminate without the accused
being convicted or acquitted or are
unjustifiably stopped for any reason not
imputable to him.
4. The term of prescription shall not run when
the offender is absent from the Philippines.

ARTICLE 92
When and how penalties prescribe.
The penalties imposed by final sentence prescribe
as follows:
1. Death and reclusion perpetua, in twenty
years.
2. Other afflictive penalties, in fifteen yeasrs.
3. Correctional penalties, in ten years, with
the exception of the penalty of arresto
mayor, which prescribes in five years.
4. Light penalties, in one year.

The penalties must be imposed by final sentence.
Hence, if the convict appealed and thereafter fled to
the mountains, the penalty imposed upon him
would never prescribe, because pending the appeal,
the sentence is not final.

In prescription of crimes, it is the penalty prescribed
by law that should be considered; in prescription of
penalties, it is the penalty imposed that should be
considered.

ARTICLE 93
Computation of the prescription of penalties.
The period of prescription of penalties shall
commence to run from the date when the culprit
should evade the service of his sentence, and it shall
be interrupted if the defendant should give himself
up, be captured, should go to some foreign country
with which this Government has no extradition
treaty, or should commit another crime before the
expiration of the period of prescription.

Outline of the provisions:
1. The period of prescription of penalties
commences to run from the date when the
culprit evaded the service of his sentence.
2. It is interrupted if the convict
(1) Gives himself up,
(2) Be captured,
(3) Goes to a foreign country with which
we have no extradition treaty, or
(4) Commits another crime before the
expiration of the period of prescription.

The period of prescription of penalties shall
commence to run again when the convict escapes
again, after having been captured and returned to
prison.

Elements:
1. That the penalty is imposed by final
sentence;
2. That the convict evaded the service of the
sentence by escaping during the term of his
sentence;
3. That the convict who escaped from prison
has not given himself up, or been capture,
or gone to a foreign country with which we
have no extradition treaty, or committed
another crime;
4. That the penalty has prescribed, because of
the lapse of time from the date of the
evasion of the service of the sentence by
the convict.

Evasion of the service of the sentence is an essential
element of prescription of penalties.

Period of prescription that ran during the time the
convict evaded service of sentence is not forfeited
upon his capture.

Acceptance of conditional pardon interrupts the
prescriptive period.

PARTIAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
ARTICLE 94
Criminal liability is extinguished partially:
1. By conditional pardon;
2. By commutation of the sentence; and
3. For good conduct allowances which the
culprit may earn while he is serving his
sentence.

Conditional Pardon
- Nature: Conditional pardon delivered and
accepted is considered a contract between
the sovereign power of the executive and
the convict that the former will release the
latter upon compliance with the condition.

In conditional pardon, the condition usually imposed
upon the convict is that he shall not again violate
any of the penal laws of the Philippines.

Commutation of sentence
- It is a change of the decision of the court
made by the Chief Executive by reducing
the degree of the penalty inflicted upon the
convict, or by decreasing the length of the
imprisonment or the amount of the fine.
- In commutation of sentence, consent of the
offender is not necessary. The public
welfare, not his consent, determines what
shall be done.

For good conduct allowance
- Are deductions from the term of the
sentence for good behaviour.
- A prisoner is also entitled to special time
allowance for loyalty. A deduction of 1/5 of
the period of his sentence is granted to a
loyal prisoner.

Parole should be added as No.4 in the enumeration
of causes of partial extinction of criminal liability.
- A parole may be granted to a prisoner after
serving the minimum penalty under the
Indeterminate Sentence Law

Parole
- It consists in the suspension of the sentence
of a convict after serving the minimum term
of the indeterminate penalty, without
granting a pardon, prescribing the terms
upon which the sentence shall be
suspended.
- If the convict fails to observe the conditions
of the parole, the Board of Pardons and
Parole is authorized to direct his arrest and
return to custody and thereafter to carry
out his sentence without deduction of the
time that has elapsed between the date of
the parole and the subsequent arrest.
- The mere commission, not conviction by
the court, of any crime is sufficient to
warrant paroles arrest and reincarceration.

Condittional pardon vs Parole
1. Conditional pardon, which may be given at
any time after final judgment, is granted by
the Chief Executive under the provisions of
the Administrative Code; Parole, which may
be given after the prisoner has served the
minimum penalty, is granted by the Board
of Pardons and Parole under the provisions
of the Indeterminate Sentence Law.
2. For violation of the Conditional Pardon, the
convict may be ordered rearrested or
reincarcerated by the Chief Executive, or
may be prosecuted under Art. 159 of the
Code; for violation of the terms of the
Parole, the convict cannot be prosecuted
under Art. 159. He can be rearrested and
reincarcerated to serve the unserved
portion of his original penalty.

ARTICLE 95
Obligation incurred by a person granted conditional
pardon.
Any person who has been granted conditional
pardon shall incur the obligation of complying
strictly with the conditions imposed therein,
otherwise, his noncompliance with any of the
conditions specified shall result in the revocation of
the pardon and the provisions of Article 159 shall be
applied.

Outline of the provisions:
1. He must comply strictly with the conditions
imposed in the pardon.
2. Failure to comply with the conditions shall
result in the revocation of the pardon. The
Chief Executive may order his arrest and
reincarceration.
3. He becomes liable under Art. 159. This is
the judicial remedy.

Condition of pardon is limited to the unserved
portion of the sentence, unless an intention to
extend it beyond that time is manifest.

ARTICLE 96
Effect of commutation of sentence.
The commutation of the original sentence for
another of a different length and nature shall have
the legal effect of substituting the latter in the
place of the former.

ARTICLE 97
Allowance for good conduct.
The good conduct of any prisoner in any penal
institution shall entitle him to the following
deductions from the period of his sentence:
1. During the first two years of imprisonment,
he shall be allowed a deduction of five
days for each month of good behaviour;
2. During the third to the fifth year, inclusive,
of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a
deduction of eight days for each month of
good behaviour;
3. During the following years until the tenth
year, inclusive, of his imprisonment, he
shall be allowed a deduction of ten days
for each month of good behaviour; and
4. During the eleventh and successive years
of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a
deduction of fifteen days for each month of
good behaviour.

No allowance for good conduct while prisoner is
released under conditional pardon.

ARTICLE 98
Special time allowance for loyalty.
A deduction of one fifth of the period of his
sentence shall be granted to any prisoner who,
having evaded the service of his sentence under the
circumstances mentioned in Article 158 of this Code,
gives himself up to the authorities within 48 hours
following the issuance of a proclamation
announcing the passing away of the calamity or
catastrophe referred to in said article.

The deduction of one-fifth is based on the original
sentence.

Art. 158 provides for increased penalty.

ARTICLE 99
Who grants time allowance.
Whenever lawfully justified, the Director of Prisons
shall grant allowances for good conduct. Such
allowances once granted shall not be revoked.

The allowance for good conduct is not an automatic
right. It must be granted by the Director of Prisons.

Allowances for good conduct once granted by the
Director of Prisons cannot be revoked by him.

The authority to grant time allowance is exclusively
vested in the Director.

===========================================

CIVIL LIABILITY
PERSONS CIVILLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES
ARTICLE 100
Civil liability of a person guilty of felony.
Every person criminally liable for a felony is also
civilly liable.
Civil liability arising from offenses
- Article 20, NCC: Every person who, contrary
to law, wilfully or negligently causes
damage to another, shall indemnify the
latter for the same.
- Article 1161, NCC: Civil obligations arising
from criminal offenses shall be governed by
the penal laws.

The civil liability arising from negligence under the
RPC is entirely separate and distinct from the
responsibility for fault or negligence called a quasi-
delict. (Art. 2176, NCC)

But the party claiming payment for the damages
done cannot recover twice for the same act or
omission of the defendant. (Art. 2177, NCC)

Civil liability under the RPC includes:
(1) Restitution
(2) Reparation of the damage caused, and
(3) Indemnification for consequential damages

Basis of civil liability
- In the ultimate analysis, what gives rise to
the civil liability is really the obligation of
everyone to repair or to make whole the
damage caused to another by reason of his
act or omission, whether done intentionally
or negligently and whether or not
punishable by law.

Damages that may be recovered in Criminal Cases
Crimes against property:
- Damages based on the price of the thing
and its special sentimental value to the
injured party may be recovered, if the thing
itself cannot be restored.

Crimes against person:
- The injured party is entitled to be paid for
whatever he spent for the treatment of his
wounds, doctors fees, and for medicine, as
well as the salary or wages unearned by him
because of his inability to work due to his
injuries.
- Damages for loss or impairment of earning
capacity in cases of temporary or
permanent personal injury

Moral Damages:
- For physical injuries, seduction, abduction,
rape or other lascivious acts, adultery or
concubinage, illegal or arbitrary detention
or arrest, illegal search, libel, slander or any
other form of defamation, and in malicious
prosecution.

Exemplary Damages:
- May be imposed when the crime was
committed with one or more aggravating
circumstances

Damages for Death caused by a crime:
- P50, 000.00
- Loss of earning capacity of the deceased,
unless the deceased, on account of
permanent physical disability not caused by
the defendant, had no earning capacity;
- Liable to give support if the deceased was
obliged to give support under Art. 291 of
the NCC, to one not an heir of the
deceased;
- Moral damages for mental anguish to the
spouse, legitimate and illegitimate
descendants and ascendants.

But if there is no damage caused by the commission
of the crime, the offender is not civilly liable.

The extinction of the penal action does not carry
with it extinction of the civil. However, the civil
action based on delict shall be deemed extinguished
if there is a finding in a final judgment in the criminal
action that the act or omission from which the civil
liability may arise did not exist.

Civil liability may exist, although the accused is not
held criminally liable, on the following cases:
1. Acquittal on reasonable doubt.
2. Award in judgment of acquittal
3. Acquittal from a cause of nonimputability
4. Acquittal in the criminal action for
negligence
5. When there is only civil responsibility
6. In cases of independent civil actions

Commencement of criminal action not a condition
precedent to the filing and prosecution of civil action
arising from crime.

But the civil action arising from crime cannot be
instituted or prosecuted in the following cases:
1. After the criminal action has been
commenced, the separate civil action
arising therefrom cannot be instituted until
final judgment has been entered in the
criminal action.
2. If the criminal action is filed after the said
civil action has already been instituted, the
latter shall be suspended in whatever stage
it may be found before judgment on the
merits. The suspension shall last until final
judgment is rendered in the criminal action.

The rule which requires the suspension of the civil
case after the criminal action has been commenced,
refers to the commencement of the criminal action
in court and not to the mere filing of a complaint
with the prosecuting officer.

Judgment in the civil case already promulgated
cannot be suspended by the filing of criminal action.

ARTICLE 101
Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases.
The exemption from criminal liability established in
subdivisions 1,2,3,5 and 6 of Article 12 and in
subdivision 4 of Article 11 of this Code does not
include exemption from civil liability, which shall be
enforced subject to the following rules:

First. In cases of subdivisions 1,2, and 3 of Article
12, the civil liability for acts committed by an
imbecile or insane person, and by a person under
nine years of age, or over nine but under fifteen
years of age, who has acted without discernment,
shall devolve upon those having such a person
under their legal authority or control, unless it
appears that there was no fault or negligence on
their part.

Should there be no person having such insane,
imbecile, or minor under his authority, legal
guardianship, or control, or if such person be
insolvent, said insane, imbecile, or minor shall
respond with their own property, excepting
property exempt from execution, in accordance
with the civil law.

Second. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of
Article 11, the persons for whose benefit the harm
has been prevented shall be civilly liable in
proportion to the benefit which they may have
received.

The courts shall determine, in their sound
discretion, the proportionate amount for which
each one shall be liable.
When the respective shares cannot be equitably
determined, even approximately, or when the
liability also attaches to the Government, or to the
majority of the inhabitants of the town, and, in all
events, whenever the damage has been caused
with the consent of the authorities or their agents,
indemnification shall be made in the manner
prescribed by special laws or regulations.

Third. In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of
Article 12, the persons using violence or causing the
fear shall be primarily liable and secondarily, or, if
there be no such persons, those doing the act shall
be liable, saving always to the latter that part of
their property exempt from execution.

GR: Exemption from criminal liability does not
include exemption from civil liability.

EXPS:
1. There is no civil liability in par. 4 of Art. 12
which provides for injury caused by mere
accident.
2. There is no civil liability in par. 7 of Art. 12
which provides for failure to perform an act
required by law when prevented by some
lawful or insuperable cause.

The civil liability for acts committed by an imbecile
or insane or minor exempt from criminal liability
shall devolve upon the persons having legal
authority or control over them, if the latter are at
fault or negligent.

If there is no fault or negligence on their part, or
even if at fault or negligent but insolvent, or should
there be no person having such authority or control,
the insane, imbecile, or such minor shall respond
with their own property not exempt from execution.

The persons having the insane or minor under their
legal authority or control are primarily liable to pay
the civil liability for acts committed by such insane or
minor.

But they can avoid civil liability by pleading and
proving the defense that there was no fault or
negligence on their part.

Duty of court trying an insane
- Courts, in rendering judgment in a criminal
case prosecuted against an insane, even
when they hold the accused exempt from
criminal liability, must fix the civil liability of
the person charged with the watching over
and caring for him or the liability of the
demented person himself with his property.

There is no civil liability in justifying circumstances.
Except, there is civil liability, but the person civilly
liable is the one benefited by the act which causes
damage to another.

ARTICLE 102
Subsidiary civil liability if innkeepers, tavernkeepers
and proprietors of establishments.
In default of the persons criminally liable,
innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and any other persons
or corporations shall be civilly liable for crimes
committed in their establishments, in all cases
where a violation of municipal ordinances or some
general or special police regulations shall have
been committed by them or their employees.

Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the
restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft
within their houses from guests lodging therein, or
for the payment of the vale thereof, provided that
such guests shall have notified in advance the
innkeeper himself, or the person representing him,
of the deposit of such goods within the inn; and
shall furthermore have followed the directions
which such innkeeper or his representative may
have given them with respect to the care of and
vigilance over such goods. No liability shall attach
in case of robbery with violence against or
intimidation of persons unless committed by the
innkeepers employees.

ARTICLE 103
Subsidiary civil liability of other persons.
The subsidiary liability established in the next
preceding article shall also apply to employers,
teachers, persons, and corporations engaged in any
kind of industry for felonies committed by their
servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices, or
employees in the discharge of their duties.

ARTICLE 104
What is included in civil liability
The civil liability established in Articles 100, 101,
102, and 103 of this Code includes:
1. Restitution;
2. Reparation of damage caused;
3. Indemnification for consequential
damages.
ARTICLE 105
Restitution How made.
The restitution of the thing itself must be made
whenever possible, with allowance for any
deterioration or diminution of value as determined
by the court.

The thing itself shall be restored, even though it be
found in the possession of a third person who has
acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter his
action against the proper person who may be liable
to him.

This provision is not applicable in cases in which the
thing has been acquired by the third person in the
manner and under the requirements which, by law,
bar an action for its recovery.

The convict cannot, by way of restitution, give to the
offended party a similar thing of the same amount,
kind or species and quality.

The purpose of the law is to place the offended party
as much as possible in the same condition as he was
before the offense was committed against him.

Thus, if the property stolen while in the possession
of the thief suffers deterioration due to his fault, the
court will assess the amount of the deterioration
and, in addition to the return of the property, the
culprit will be ordered to pay such amount
representing the deterioration.

Under the Civil Code, the person who has lost any
personal property or has been unlawfully deprived
thereof cannot obtain its return without reimbursing
the price paid therefor, only when the possessor
thereof acquired it in good faith at a public sale.

Restitution cannot be ordered before final judgment
in estafa.

A person who is not a party in the case cannot
recover in the criminal action any indemnity from
the accused.

When the liability to return a thing arises from
contract, not from a criminal act, the court cannot
order its return in the criminal case.

Restitution may be ordered, even if accused is
acquitted, provided the offense is proved and it is
shown that the thing belongs to somebody else.
Salary of acquitted accused may not be ordered paid
in criminal cases.

The Court has authority to order the reinstatement
of the accused acquitted of a crime punishable by
the penalty of perpetual or temporary
disqualification.

ARTICLE 106
Reparation How made.
The court shall determine the amount of damage,
taking into consideration the price of the thing,
whenever possible, and its special sentimental
value to the injured party, and reparation shall be
made accordingly.

Reparation will be ordered by the court of
restitution is not possible.

What reparation includes
Under this provision, the repair of the material
damage caused by the robbers in breaking doors,
wardrobes, etc., in addition to the value of the thing
taken, may be assessed and included as part of the
reparation to be paid by the robbers.

Civil damages are limited to those caused by and
flowing from the commission of the crime.

Payment by the insurance company does not relieve
the offender of hi obligation to repair the damage
caused.

ARTICLE 107
Indemnification What is included.
Indemnification of consequential damages shall
include not only those caused the injured party, but
also those suffered by his family or by a third
person by reason of the crime.

Indemnity is ordinarily the remedy granted to the
victims of crimes against persons; reparation, to the
victims of crimes against property.

Contributory negligence on the part of the offended
party reduces the civil liability of the offender.

Civil indemnity for rape qualified by circumstances
where the death penalty may be imposed is
P75,000.00.

Civil indemnity for rape with homicide is
P100,000.00.

Moral Damages
Moral damages may be recovered in the following
and analogous cases:
(1) A criminal offense resulting in physical
injuries;
(2) Seduction, abduction, rape, or other
lascivious acts;
(3) Adultery or concubinage;
(4) Illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest;
(5) Illegal search;
(6) Libel, slander or any other form of
defamation;
(7) Malicious prosecution.

The parents of the female seduced, abducted, raped,
or abused, referred to in No. 2 of this article, may
also recover moral damages.

In crimes of rape, moral damages may additionally
be awarded to the victim, without need for pleading
or proof of the basis thereof.

Exemplary Damages
In criminal offenses, exemplary damages as a part of
the civil liability may be imposed when the crime
was committed with one or more aggravating
circumstances. Such damages are separate and
distinct from fines and shall be paid to the offended
party.

Exemplary damages cannot be recovered as a matter
of right; the court will decide whether or not they
should be adjudicated.

While the amount of the exemplary damages need
not be proved, the plaintiff must show that he is
entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory
damages before the court may consider the question
of whether or not exemplary damages should be
awarded.

Attorneys fees may be recovered only in separate
civil actions to recover civil liability arising from
crimes.

Civil liability is not part of the punishment.

ARTICLE 108
The obligation to make restoration or reparation
for damages and indemnification for consequential
damages devolves upon the heirs of the person
loable.
The action to demand restoration, reparation and
indemnification likewise descends to the heirs of
the person injured.

The heirs of the person liable has no obligation if
restoration is not possible and the deceased left no
property.

Civil liability is possible only when the offender dies
after final judgment.

Indemnity not possible in acquittal, right of heirs of
deceased.

ARTICLE 109
If there are two or more persons civilly liable for a
felony, the courts shall determine the amount for
which each must respond.

ARTICLE 110
Notwithstanding the provisions of the next
preceding article, the principals, accomplices, and
accessories, each within their respective class, shall
be liable severally among themselves for their
quotas, and subsidiarily lfor those of the other
persons liable.

The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first
against the property of the principals; next, against
that of the accomplices; and lastly, against that of
the accessories.

Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary
liability has been enforced, the person by whom
payment has been made shall have a right of action
against the others for the amount of their
respective shares.

The principal is primarily liable for his own part of
the indemnity. The several accomplices are jointly
and severally liable for the portion adjudged against
them and are subsidiarily liable for the portion of
their principal in case of the latters insolvency.

ARTICLE 111
Any person who has participated gratuitously in the
proceeds of a felony shall be bound to make
restitution in an amount equivalent to the extent of
such participation.

===========================================

EXTINCTION AND SURVIVAL OF CIVIL LIABILITY
ARTICLE 112
Civil liability established in Arts. 100, 101, 102, and
103 of this Code shall be extinguished in the same
manner as other obligations, in accordance with the
provisions of the Civil Law.

Civil liability is, therefore, extinguished by:
(1) Payment or performance
(2) Loss of the thing due
(3) Condonation or remission of the debt
(4) Confusion or merger of the rights of
creditor and debtor
(5) Compensation
(6) Novation
(7) Annulment
(8) Rescission
(9) Fulfillment of a resolutory condition
(10) Prescription

Civil liability is extinguished by subsequent
agreement between the accused and the offended
party.

Express condonation by the offended party has the
effect of waiving civil liability with regard to the
interest of the injured party. For civil liability arising
from an offense is extinguished in the same manner
as other obligations, in accordance with the
provisions of the civil law.

Offender is civilly liable even if stolen property is lost
by reason of force majeure.

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