Common Bar Questions in Criminal Law:

1. What are the 4 Types of repetition under the RPC?

Recidivism the offender is on trial for an offense, for which he was previously convicted for a final
judgment of another crime, and both the 1
st
and 2
nd
offenses are embraced in the same title of the
RPC. The offender is CONVICTED in the new offense.
Quasi-Recidivism the offender has been previously convicted by final judgment and before
beginning to serve and BEFORE BEGINNING to serve such sentence or while serving the same, he
committed a felony. (Art. 160)
Habitual Delinquency A special aggravating circumstance for which is imposed an additional
penalty and which escalates with increase in the number of convictions.
Reiteracion the accused is on trial for the offense. He previously served sentence for another
offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty, OR for 2 or more crimes to which it
attaches a lighter penalty than that for the new offense, and he is convicted of the new offense.

2. Discuss and distinguish as to effects to criminal liability:

Praeter Intentionem the injury is on the intended victim but the resulting consequence is so grave a
wrong than what was intended. There must be a notable disparity between the means employed and
the resulting felony. Intention of the offender is not what is in his mind; it is disclosed in the MANNER
in which he committed the crime.
Example : A and B went on a drinking spree. They had an argument, so A stabbed B several times. The
fact that A stabbed B many times is NOT compatible with the idea that he did not intend to commit
so grave a wrong as that committed.
** Proximate Cause is that cause which in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any
efficient intervening cause produces the injury, and without which such result would not have
occured.
Abberatio Ictus (mistake in the blow) occurs when the offender delivered the blow at his intended
victim but missed, and instead landed on a different victim.
Error in Personae (mistake in identity) occurs when the offender actually hit the person to whom
the blow was directed but who turned out to be different and not the victim intended.

3. Enumerate the Exceptions to the Extraterritoriality Principle (Art 2)

Outside of the Philippine jurisdiction, against those who:
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship, (registration, public peace)
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations
and securities issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands;
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations
and securities mention in the preceeding number,
4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in the exercise of their
functions;
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations, defined in
Title One of Book 2 in the RPC.
XPN to the XPN : treaties and laws of preferential application.

4. What are the instances when an act or omission would constitute a crime despite the absence of
criminal intent? (culpable felonies (art3) ; mala prohibita)
Culpable felonies performed without malice, an intermediate act which the RPC qualifies as
IMPRUDENCE or NEGLIGENCE.
Requisites : Freedom of action, intelligence, negliegence (deficiency in perception or lack of
foresight), and imprudence (deficiency of action, or lack of skill.)
Reckless Imprudence and Simple Imprudence.

Mala Prohibita : Not inherently bad, evil or wrong but prohibited by law for public good, public
welfare or interest and when violated, are penalized by law. Element: Voluntariness is essential.
Defense: Lack of voluntariness in the commission. Act gives rise to a crime only when
CONSUMMATED.

6 .Mistake of Facts (elements)
Mistake of fact (as defense): - (1) the act would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused
believed them to be, (2) the intention of the accused in doing the act was lawful, (3) the mistake was
without fault or carelessness on the part of the accused.

7.Impossible Crimes (elements) ; A enters Bs house w/ intent to kill B. B is already dead. Impossible
crime? No. Trespass to dwelling.
Impossible crime is an act which would be an offense against person or property were if not for the
inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate or
ineffectual means.
Elements: 1. That the act performed would be an offense against PERSONS or PROPERTY;
2. That its accomplishment is inherently impossible or that the means used is either
inadequate or ineffectual;
3. That the act performed should not constitute a violation of another provision in the RPC.

6. When there is an accepted agreement to fight, generally, self defense cannot be raised:
except if the attack was not what was agreed upon.
Self Defense : Unlawful Aggression, Reasonable Necessity of the means employed to prevent or
repel it, lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.

8. A and B are rivals. B is on an island. C is an anak-anakan of A, who ordered the former to kill B. D,
who owns a gun and was also a rival of B overheard the order of A and offered his gun to C. E, who
owns a boat which is the only available means to reach the island, also overheard the order and
offered his boat to C. Degrees of participation.

A Principal by inducement, because 2 ways of becoming one: 2. By directly inducing another to
commit a crime either by giving a price, offering a reward or promise, or by using words of command.
D Accomplice, because he 1. Knows the criminal design of the principal (by overhearing) and
concurs with the latter on his purpose (also rival), 2. He cooperates in the execution of the offense by
previous or simultaneous acts of supplying material or moral aid in the commission of the crime, and
3. There is a relation between the acts done by the principal and those attributed to the person done
as accomplice.
C- Principal by direct participation, because he materially executes the crime. He appears at the
crime scene and performs acts necessary to the commission of the offense, by 1. Participating in the
criminal resolution and 2. Carrying out their plan and PERSONALLY took part in its execution by acts
which directly tended to the same end.
E Accomplice?

9. Read Valenzuela v. People
ISSUE:
Whether or not the crime of theft has a frustrated stage.
HELD:
No. Art 6 of the Revised Penal Code provides that a felony is consummated when all the elements
necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present. In the crime of theft, the following
elements should be present: (1) that there be taking of personal property; (2) that said property
belongs to another; (3) that the taking be done with intent to gain; (4) that the taking be done
without the consent of the owner; and (5) that the taking be accomplished without the use of
violence against or intimidation of persons or force upon things. The Court held that theft is produced
when there is deprivation of personal property by one with intent to gain. Thus, it is immaterial that
the offender is able or unable to freely dispose the property stolen since he has already committed all
the acts of execution and the deprivation from the owner has already ensued from such acts.
Therefore, theft cannot have a frustrated stage, and can only be attempted or consummated.


10. A has just killed B. A pays C, HIS BROTHER a certain amount of money and orders the latter to
hide the body. Is C an accessory? No. The payment is not considered as proceeds of the crime. He did
not profit from the effects of the crime, 2. By concealing or destroying the body, effects and
instruments of the crime in order to prevent its discovery and by harbouring, concealing, or assisting
in the escape or concealment of the principal of the crime PROVIDED he acts with abuse of public
functions.

11. A went to a party, got drunk, went home to get his bolo, and returned to the party. He shouted
threats that he would stab everyone (not directed to any particular person) B, one of the guests,
panicked and as a result, fell into a crevice. B was never seen again. In an action for homicide against
A, he averred that he cannot be held liable because the body was never found. Tenable? No. What is
corpus delicti? What are its elements?
Corpus delicti means the body or the substance of the crime or to the fact that the crime has actually
been committed. Made up of a) the proof of the occurrence of certain events, b) some persons
criminal responsibility.
Even if a corpse is not discovered, as long as that killing is ESTABLISHED BEYOND REASONABLE
DOUBT, criminal liability will arise and if there is someone who destroys the corpus delicti to prevent
discovery, he becomes an accessory.

12. A indiscriminately fired his gun. B was hit and was killed as a result. A contends lack of intent to
kill B. Tenable? No. Art. 4, rpc par 1. He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil
caused.
Criminal Liability shall be incurred by 1.) Any person committing a felony (delicto) although the
wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. 2.) 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.

13. Read Rule 110, in re: aggravating/qualifying circumstances must be alleged in the information.

14. A saw B sitting alone in a park. With the intention of taking Bs bag, A stabbed B. But B was
already dead. A escaped with Bs bag. Impossible Crime?

15. A and B are suitors of F. A was a rich man, and was favoured by F, who ignored B. To get even, B
went to As house and placed a rubber snake on the latters bed. As a result of seeing the snake, A
suffered a heart attack and died. Decide. Tenable.

16. A saw B kill C. 21 years later, A reported the incident to the police. Has the felony prescribed?

17. Take note of RA 10159 on subsidiary penalty: 1day = per highest minimum wage rate.

18. Destierro with fine. In case of insolvency, can there be subsidiary imprisonment?

19. Take note of the aggravating circumstances which absorbs one another.

20. Take note of aggravating circs which only applies to crimes against persons. Relate to Robbery w/
homicide, etc.

21. Relate Anti-Fencing Law with Accessories.