4A CRIM BQ - Finalwpage

CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
CRIMINAL
Consider it pure joy
when you face trials of
many kinds, because
the testing of your faith
LAW BAR
produces endurance so
that you may be lacking
in nothing.
JAMES 1 :2-4
EXAM
QUESTIONS
AND
ANSWERS
1989-2016
This work is a compilation of the ANSWERS TO
BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS by the
UP LAW complex, UST bar exam Q and A and
compiled bar exam questions of Siliman
University College of law and not an original
creation or formulation of the authors.
0
Page
Compiled by: 4A - Aiza, Gloovy, Vianney,

Leilani, Joan, Freda and Hagad.
Territoriality (1994) ............................ 18

Table of Contents
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND Territoriality principle (2008) .............. 19
CONCEPTS.............................................. 10
Distinguish between ex post facto law and
Wrongful Acts Which Are Not Per Se bill of attainder (2015) ........................ 19
Considered As Criminal Offense (2008) 10
Ex Post Facto Law (2014) .................... 19
Human Rights Violation (2008) ........... 10
What are the constitutional provisions
Simultaneous prosecution of two limiting the power of Congress to enact
different offenses (1991) ..................... 11 penal laws? (2012 BAR) ....................... 20
Circumstantial evidence; Proof beyond Constitutional limitations on the power of

reasonable doubt (2006) ...................... 11 Congress to enact penal laws (1988) .... 20
Construction of penal laws Doctrine of Constitutional limitations on the power of

pro reo (2010) ..................................... 11 Congress to enact penal laws (2013) .... 20
Grounds for dismissal of cases; affidavit of Due process Proper allegation of the
desistance; effect thereof (1993) ......... 12 offense charged (1997) ........................ 21
Corpus delicti, Elements (2000) .......... 12 What is aberratio ictus? (2015)............ 22
Corpus delicti (2001) ........................... 12 Aberratio Ictus vs Impossible Crime
Absence of corpus delicti .................... 13 (1993) .................................................. 22
Aberratio Ictus in rel. to ART 48, 49, 13 ART 3 Mala in se and crimes mala
(1989) ................................................. 13 prohibita (2005, 2003, 2001, 1999, 1997,

1988)................................................... 22
Aberratio ictus and error in personae .. 14
ART 3 Motive (1999) ............................ 22
Aberratio ictus: Error in personae; and
Praeter intentionem (1999 ................ 15 ART 3 Mala in se; mala prohibita
(1997) .................................................. 23
Art.2-Application of RPCs provisions
(2015) ................................................. 15 ART 3 Criminal Intent (1988) .............. 23
Characteristics of criminal law (1988) . 16 ART 3 Proof of motive; when not required
(2006) .................................................. 23
Characteristics of Philippine criminal law
(1998) ................................................. 17 ART 3 Theories; motive; criminal intent
(2004, 1996) ........................................ 23
Generality Diplomatic Immunity
(2016) ................................................. 17 ART 3 How are felonies committed?
(2015) .................................................. 24
Generality Diplomatic Immunity
CRIMINAL LIABILITY .............................. 24
1
(2014) ................................................. 17
Page
Territoriality (2004) ............................ 17

ART 4 (1) Criminal liability when Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of murder
incurred (1994) ................................... 24 (1998) .................................................. 33
Art 4 Criminal Liability In relation to Art ART 4. In rel to ART 267Impossible

8 Conspiracy (1992) ............................ 25 crime (2014) ........................................ 34
Art. 4 Criminal Liability Proximate ART. 4- Impossible crimes (2000) ........ 34

Cause In relation to robbery with
ART.4-Impossible crime of theft (2008) 35
homicide (1999) .................................. 25
ART .4(2)- Impossible crime of murder
Art. 4 Criminal Liability (2008) ........... 25
(1994) .................................................. 36
ART.4--Criminal liability when incurred
ART.4(2) Impossible crime of murder; less
(1996) ................................................. 26
serious physical injuries (1998) ........... 36
ART.4--Criminal liability; when incurred
STAGES OF EXECUTION ........................... 37
(2001) ................................................. 27
ART. 6-Stages of execution
Consummated theft (1998) .................. 37
(2004) ................................................. 27
ART.6- Stages of execution - Crime of
theft; attempted; consummated (2000) 37
(2008) ................................................. 28
ART.6--Stages of execution Frustrated
IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES ............................... 28
felony (2005) ....................................... 38
Art 4 (2): Impossible crimes (2014) ...... 28 ART.6--Stages of execution Frustrated
ART 4(2) Impossible Crime (2014) ....... 28 murder (2009) ..................................... 38
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of murder Art 6: Consummated theft (1998) ........ 38
(2009) ................................................. 30 Art 6: Theft; attempted; consummated
ART 4(2)- Impossible crime of murder (2000) .................................................. 39
(2009) ................................................. 30
LIGHT FELONIES .................................... 40
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of theft (2008) Art 7 Light Felonies in relation to Art 16
........................................................... 31 (1988) .................................................. 40
Art. 4 (2) Impossible crime of murder
CONSPIRACY ........................................... 41
(2004) ................................................. 31
ART. 8-[b] Wheel vs Circle and Chain
ART.4(2)- Impossible crime of murder (2016) .................................................. 41
(2004) ................................................. 31
Art. 8: Define conspiracy (2012) .......... 41
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crimes (2000) ..... 32
Art. 8: Conspiracy as a Felony vs as a
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of murder
2
Manner (2012) ..................................... 41

Page
(1994) ................................................. 33
Art. 8: Conspiracy (1991) .................... 41 ART.8-Define conspiracy. (2012) ......... 51
Art. 8: Conspiracy (1993) .................... 42 ART.8-- Conspiracy (1991) ................... 52
Art. 8: Conspiracy to commit robbery ART.8-- Conspiracy; murder (1993) ..... 52

(1996) ................................................. 42
ART.8-Conspiracy to commit robbery
Art. 8: Conspiracy (1994) .................... 43 (1996) .................................................. 53
Art. 8: Criminal law Conspiracy ART.8- Felonies Proposal to commit

(1997) ................................................. 43 kidnapping (1996) ............................... 53
Art. 8: Implied conspiracy (1998) ........ 44 ART.8--Conspiracy (1994) .................... 53
Art. 8: Implied conspiracy (2003) ........ 44 ART.8-- Conspiracy Who are liable
(1997) .................................................. 54
Art. 8: Conspiracy (1988) .................... 44
Art. 8: Conspiracy to commit sedition ART.8- Conspiracy - Implied conspiracy
(1987) ................................................. 45 (1998) .................................................. 55
ART.8- Implied conspiracy (2003) .... 55

Art. 8: Act of one is the act of all
(2004) ................................................. 46 Art. 8: Proposal (1996) ......................... 55
Art. 8: Conspiracy to commit robbery JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES .................. 56

(2005) ................................................. 46
Art.11 Defense Of Relative And Stranger
Art. 8: Conspiracy; Special complex crime (2016) .................................................. 56
of robbery with serious physical injuries
Art. 11: Self-Defense (1987) ................. 56
(1992) ................................................. 47
Art. 11: Self-Defense (1993) ................. 57
Art. 8: Conspiracy - Special complex
Art. 11: Avoid Greater Evil (1990) ....... 57
crime of robbery with rape (Art 294)
(2004) ................................................. 48 Art 11 Lawful Defense Of Property
(2008) .................................................. 58
Art. 8 Criminal law Conspiracy In
relation to Special complex crime of Art. 11 Defense Of Property Rights (1990)
robbery with homicide (2003) ............. 48 ........................................................... 58
Art. 8 Conspiracy and proposal in relation Art. 11: Defense Of Honor When Not
to Special complex crime of robbery with Sustained (2000) ................................. 58
homicide (2007) .................................. 49 Art. 11: Defense Of Honor; When
Art. 8: Conspiracy and proposal In Untenable (1998) ................................. 59
relation to PENALTIES (2006) ............. 50 Art. 11: Defense Of Property (2003) ..... 59
Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal (2008) 50 Art. 11: Defense of a stranger (2002) ... 60
3
Page
Art. 8: Conspiracy and proposal (2008) 50

Art. 11: Battered Woman Syndrome Art 12: Minority; ................................. 68

(2014, 2010) ....................................... 60 In relation to Art 13: Mitigating
Art. 11: Battered Woman Syndrome circumstances (2000) .......................... 68
(2015) ................................................. 60 Art. 12 Minority In relation to robbery
Art 11: Justifying Circumstances in with homicide (1995) .......................... 69
relation to Art 12: Exempting ART. 12 Warrantless arrest; entrapment;
Circumstances .................................... 62 in relation to prohibited drugs (1992).. 69
Distinction (2004) ............................... 62 ART. 12--Entrapment and instigation
Art. 11; Art 12: Exempting circumstances (1990) .................................................. 71
in comparison with justifying ART.12 Entrapment and instigation;
circumstances; illustration of exempting illustration of instigation (1995) ......... 71
circumstances; minor below nine (9) years
ART.12 Entrapment and instigation .... 71
old; (1998) ........................................... 62
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES .................. 72
EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES .............. 63
Art 13 Incomplete self-defense (1990) . 72
Art. 12: Exempting circumstances; when
not appreciated (1989) ........................ 63 Art. 13: Intoxication (2002) ................. 72
Art. 12: Insanity (1991) ....................... 63 Art. 13: Mitigating Circumstance

Privileged In relation to Penalties
Art. 12: Insanity (2010) ....................... 64
(2012) .................................................. 73
Art.12:Insuperable cause (1994) .......... 65
Art. 13 Immediate Vindication (1988) . 74
Art. 12: Exempting Circumstance-
Art. 13: Voluntary surrender (1996) ..... 74
Suspended sentence under The Child and
Youth Welfare Code; when not applicable Art. 13: Voluntary surrender and plea of
(2013) ................................................. 65 guilty; when not considered (1992) ..... 75
Art. 12: Suspended sentence under The Art. 13: Voluntary surrender; plea of
Child and Youth Welfare Code; when not guilty (1997) ........................................ 75
applicable (1995) ................................. 66 Art 13 Plea of Guilty (1999) ................. 76
Art. 12: Suspended sentence under The Art. 13: Voluntary surrender (1999) ..... 76
Child and Youth Welfare Code; when not
Art. 13: Voluntary surrender (2009) ..... 76
applicable (2003) ................................. 66
Art. 13: No intention to commit so grave
Art. 12: RA 9344) When applicable
a wrong as that committed; intoxication
(2006) ................................................. 67
(2000) .................................................. 77
4
Art 12: Persons exempt from criminal

Page
liability In relation to Art 332 (2008) .. 67

Art. 13: No intention to commit so grave Art. 14: Band, Nocturnity, Dwelling,
a wrong as that which was committed Uninhabitted Place (1996) ................... 85
(2001) ................................................. 77 Art. 14: Evident premeditation,
Art. 13: Immediate vindication of a grave treachery, night time and unlawful entry
offense to a descendant (2002) ............ 78 (1997) .................................................. 86
Art. 13: Lack of intention to commit so Art. 14: Aggravating circumstances ..... 86
grave a wrong as that committed Four Kinds; Generic vs Qualifying
(2005) ................................................. 78 (1999) .................................................. 86
Art. 13: Mitigating and Art; 14:
Art. 14: Explosive, Treachery (2008) ... 87
aggravating circumstances (1993) ....... 79
Art. 14: Dwelling, Nighttime (2009) ..... 88
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES ............. 79
Art. 14: Qualifying circumstance in rape
Art 14: Cruelty (1988) ......................... 79
cases (2004) ........................................ 88
Art. 14 Recidivism In relation to Art. 62
Art. 14: Qualifying Aggravating
Habitual Delinquency (2012) ............... 79
circumstances (2003) .......................... 89
Art. 14: Recidivism (2014) .................. 80
Art. 14: Special aggravating circumstance
Art. 14. Recidivist (2009) .................... 80 ........................................................... 89
Arti. 14 Recidivism In relation to Art. 62 Use of an unlicensed firearm in the

reiteracion (1989) ............................... 81 commission of a crime (2004) ............. 89
Art. 14. Recidivism; In relation to Art. 62 Art. 14: Use of an unlicensed firearm in
habitual delinquency (2001) ................ 82 homicide or murder (2009) .................. 90
Art. 14 Recidivism And Art. 160. Quasi- Article 14 Treachery (1993) ................. 90
recidivism (1998) ................................ 82 PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES
Art. 14. Quasi recidivism Art 160 (1991) .............................................................. 90
........................................................... 82 ART. 17- Principals By Direct
Art. 14 Treachery (2008) ..................... 83 Participation ....................................... 90
Art. 14: Treachery; when not considered ART. 17- Principals by direct
(1992) ................................................. 83 participation and co-principal by
indispensable cooperation (2000) ........ 91
Art. 14: Evident Premeditation,
Treachery (1991) ................................. 84 ART. 17 Principal by inducement;
Accessory (1987) ................................. 91
Art. 14: Nighttime (1994) .................... 84
ART. 17 Principal by inducement;
Art. 14: Cruelty; Relationship (1994) .. 85
5
Accessory (2015) ................................. 92

Page
ART. 17 Principal by inducement; Duration and Effect of Penalties,

Accessory (1989) ................................. 93 Imposition (1997) .............................. 102
ART. 17 Principal by inducement; Duration and Effect of Penalties,

Accessory (2002) ................................. 93 Imposition (1997) .............................. 102
ACCOMPLICES ....................................... 95 Alternative Penalty............................ 103
ART. 18- Who is an accomplice? Civil Indemnity ................................. 103

(2012) ................................................. 95
Reclusion Perpetua vs Life Imprisonment
ART. 18 Accomplice vs Conspirator: (1994) ................................................ 103
Distinctions (2007, 2012) ................... 95
ART. 18 Accomplice vs Conspirator (2001) ................................................ 104
(1998) ................................................. 96
ACCESSORIES ........................................ 96 (2009) ................................................ 104
Art. 19. Accessories And Art. 20 ART 27 Penalties Reclusion perpetua;

Accessories who are exempt; In relation pecuniary penalties; pecuniary
to Composite crime of rape with liabilities ........................................... 104
homicide; theft (1998) ........................ 96
ART 38- PECUNIARY LIABILITIES ..... 105
ART 19- Accessories (2013) ................. 97
ART 39-SUBSIDIARY PENALTY .......... 105
ART 19- Accessories (2009) ................. 97 ART 47- CASES WHEREIN THE DEATH
ART. 19- Accessories (1987) ................ 98 PENALTY SHALL NOT BE IMPOSED ... 106
ART. 19- Accessories (1989) ................ 98 Proscription on Death Penalty ........... 106
ART. 19- Accessories (2004) ................ 99 Death Penalty .................................... 106
ART. 19- Accessories (2010) .............. 100 ART. 48 in rel ART. 296 (2016).......... 108
ART. 19- Accessories (2008) .............. 100 Art. 48. Complex Crimes In relation to
Art. 294 (1) Robbery with homicide; direct
PENALTIES............................................ 101
assault with multiple attempted homicide
ART 25- PENALTIES WHICH MAY BE
......................................................... 108
IMPOSED .......................................... 101
Art 48 Complex Crimes, Art 294 Robbery,
Duration and Effect of Penalties,
Art 249 Homicide, Art 320 Arson ...... 109
Imposition (1991).............................. 101
Art. 48: Complex crime of parricide with
unintentional abortion ...................... 110
Imposition (1997).............................. 102
6
Page
Art. 48: Complex crime of Murder, Art. 48 Complex crimes - Frustrated

qualified by explosion, with direct assault robbery, with homicide and damage to
......................................................... 110 property ............................................ 117
Art 48: Special Complex Crime In relation Art. 48 - Complex crime of attempted
to Art. 14: Qualifying Aggravating murder with homicide ....................... 117
Circumstance .................................... 111
Art. 48 Complex crimes - Malversation
Art. 48 Special Complex crime of Robbery through falsification .......................... 118
with Rape .......................................... 111 Art 48 Special Complex Crimes - Robbery
Art. 48 Criminal law Complex crimes - with homicide ................................... 118
Robbery with Homicide in relation to Art.
Art. 48: Special complex crime of Robbery
297 ................................................... 112
with homicide ................................... 118
Art. 48 Continuing crimes in relation to Art. 48: Special complex crimes- Robbery
BP 22 ................................................ 112 with homicide ................................... 119
Art 48 - Complex crime; requirement of
Art. 48 Special Complex Crime In relation
two or more grave or less grave felonies as
to Art 267 Serious illegal detention with
a result of single act ......................... 113
homicide ........................................... 119
Art 48 Complex crimes; when Art 48Special complex crime In relation
proper ............................................... 113 to Art. 266 - B rape through sexual assault
Art 48 Complex crimes, what with homicide ................................... 120
constitutes, penalty .......................... 114
Art 48 Special Crime In relation to Art.
Art. 48 Complex crime; Special complex 266 - B - of rape with homicide,
crime; complex crime of coup detat with Penalties ........................................... 120
rebellion; complex crime of coup d'etat
Art. 48 Special Complex Crime In relation
with sedition ..................................... 114
to Art 267. Kidnapping for ransom with
Art. 48 Compound and complex homicide ........................................... 121
crimes ............................................... 115 Art 48 Special Complex Crime in relation
Art 48 Complex crime of estafa thru to Art. 304 Rape with homicide ........ 122
falsification of a commercial
Penalties Disqualified offenders for
document .......................................... 116
parole; heinous crimes ...................... 122
Art. 48 Complex crime; Special complex ART. 48--Delito continuado and
crime; Delito continuado .................. 116 continuing offense ............................ 123
ART. 48--Doctrine of aberratio ictus .. 123

7
Page
Art. 48: Special complex crime of Robbery A. The differences between pardon and
with homicide ................................... 124 amnesty: ........................................... 154
Art. 62 Habitual delinquency (1991) .. 143 B. Crimes covered by the grant of

amnesty, under Presidential
ART 62 EFFECTS OF THE ATTENDANCE
Proclamation No. 724: ....................... 154
OF MITIGATING OR AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANES AND OF HABITUAL Pardon: Reinstatement ...................... 155
DELINQUENCY .................................. 143 Modification and extinction of criminal
ART 62 EFFECTS OF THE ATTENDANCE liability Pardon by the Chief
OF MITIGATING OR AGGRAVATING Executive .......................................... 155
CIRCUMSTANES AND OF HABITUAL
Amnesty ............................................ 156
DELINQUENCY .................................. 144
Modification and extinction of criminal
EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY . 145 liability Amnesty ............................ 156
Art. 93 in relation to Art 157 ............ 145
CIVIL LIABILITY ...................................... 157
ART. 89-93 Extinction of criminal
ART. 103--Execution of the employers
liability- prescription of crimes ......... 145 subsidiary liability............................. 157
ART.89/ART. 94 Total and partial
Art. 103--Civil liability Subsidiary
extinguishment Acquittal in relation to
liability of the employer .................... 158
civil liability ..................................... 150
Art. 104-Civil liability -Restitution;
ART. 89--Extinguishment of criminal reparation ......................................... 158
liability; civil liability ....................... 151
ART. 104--Civil liability - Damages .... 159
ART. 89--Effect of death of the accused on
ART. 104--Acquittal in a criminal
civil liability ..................................... 152
prosecution; Institution of civil
ART. 89/ART. 112--Effect of death of action ................................................ 159
accused on criminal and civil liability152
Civil action for recovery of property not
ART. 89--effect death of the accused
subject to confiscation; jurisdiction .. 160
pending appeal on his criminal and
CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY
pecuniary liabilities .......................... 153
AND THE LAW OF NATIONS .................. 161
ART.89--Criminal and civil liability; when
ART. 116 Crimes against National
extinguished ..................................... 153
Security Misprision of treason ........ 161
ART. 89 Criminal law Modification and
ART. 123-Qualified Piracy ................. 161
extinction of criminal liability Pardon
and Amnesty ..................................... 153 ART. 123 Crimes against national
8
security Qualified piracy ................. 162

Page
Pardon vs Amnesty ........................... 154

a) Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery SPECIAL LAW- Pres. Decree Nos. 704 and
(P.D. 532) (i) Definition of terms (ii) 1058 - Fishing with the use of explosives;
Punishable acts ................................. 163 punishable acts ................................. 224
ART.122, 123--Crimes against National SPECIAL LAW Act Defining Certain

Security and Law of Nations Piracy; 163 Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or
Under Custodial Investigation (RA 7438)
CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAW
Rights which can be violated ............. 225
OF THE STATE ..................................... 164
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER ....... 167 Special law. RA 9160: Anti-Money
Laundering Act .................................. 225
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC
Special Law. under Republic Act (RA) No.
INTERESTCRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC
9160, as amended (Anti- Money
INTEREST ............................................. 179
Laundering Act) ................................. 225
CRIMES COMITTED BY PUBLIC
OFFICERS ............................................ 185 Special penal law - Crimes relative to
opium and other prohibited drugs - Rep.
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS ................. 194
Act No. 9165, the Comprehensive
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY AND Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 ............ 227
SECURITY AND SECURITY ..................... 209
Special law Anti-Graft and Corrupt
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY .............. 211 Practices Act (RA 3019, as amended)
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY ............... 213 ......................................................... 229
CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF Special penal law - Violation of Rep. Act
PERSONS.............................................. 214 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical
Standards for Public Officials and
CRIMES AGAINST HONOR .................... 214
Employees) ........................................ 231
QUASI-OFFENSES ................................ 220
Criminal law Crimes committed by
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS.......................... 221
public officers - Indirect bribery; Special
SPECIAL LAW-R.A 9262 .................... 221 penal law - Republic Act No. 3019- .... 231
SPECIAL LAW- RA 9165- ................... 222 Criminal law Crimes committed by
SPECIAL LAW RA 6805; Instances of public officer - Republic Act No. 3019
legal use of an alias by a Filipino (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
citizen .............................................. 223 Act) ................................................... 233
SPECIAL LAW PD 704 punishable Special penal law - Violation of Rep. Act
acts ................................................... 224 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical

Standards for Public Officials and
9
Employees) ........................................ 234

Page
Special Law. PD 1866, as amended by FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND

RA8294 and RA 10591 : .................... 235 CONCEPTS
Special law Penalties Grave offense; FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE --

life imprisonment ............................. 235 Wrongful Acts Which Are Not Per Se
Considered As Criminal Offense (2008)
Prescription for violation of special laws -
Petition for forfeiture under Republic Act After due hearing on a petition for a writ of
No. 1379 ........................................... 237 amparo founded on the acts of enforced
disappearance and extralegal killing of the
Special law - Highway Robbery under son of the complainant allegedly done by
Presidential Decree No. 532 .............. 237 the respondent military officers, the court
granted the petition. May the military
Special law Anti-Piracy and Anti-
officers be criminally charged in court with
Highway Robbery (PD 532) punishable enforced disappearance and extralegal
acts ................................................... 238 killing? Explain fully. (3%)
ART.220 in rel to RA 3019 ................ 240 SUGGESTED ANSWER

SPECIAL LAW- P.D 1612 .................... 241
No. "Enforced disappearance and
SPECIAL LAW- RA 6539-Anti- carnapping extralegal killing" is not per se a
Law ................................................... 242 criminal offense although it is wrongful.
The grant of a writ of amparo only
SPECIAL LAW- R.A Child exploitation provides a relief; it does not establish a
......................................................... 242 basis for a crime. Unless the writ was
issued because of specific overt acts
shown to have been committed by the
respondent military officers and such
acts are crimes under penal laws, no
criminal charge may be routinely filed
just because the petition for the writ was
granted.
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE --
Human Rights Violation (2008)
Are human rights violations considered as

crimes in the Philippines? Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Not necessarily, since there are human

rights violations which do not amount to
criminal offenses. In this country, there
10
can be no crime when there is no law

Page
punishing an act or omission as a crime.

If I were the judge and the evidence

FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE adduced by the prosecution
Simultaneous prosecution of two convincingly show a clear link between
different offenses (1991) the accused and the cut logs piled
outside the gate of the watershed, I will
May a ranking leader of the NPA who has hold the accused criminally liable not
taken up arms against the government be only for the newly cut logs in their
simultaneously prosecuted for violation of possession but also for those found
Section 1 of RA. 1700 (the AntiSubversion outside the gate. Circumstantial
Act) and for rebellion under Article 135 of evidence proving that the accused and
the Revised Penal Code, as amended? no other persons could have done the
cutting of the logs, such as the manner
SUGGESTED ANSWER: of cutting the logs, the area where they
cut the logs they were carrying, and
Yes, because the two offenses are other indications pointing to them as
punished under separate laws. Besides, the culprits may be considered.
the elements of the two offenses differ.
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE Construction of penal laws Doctrine of
Circumstantial evidence; Proof beyond pro reo (2010)
reasonable doubt (2006)
What is the doctrine of pro reo? How does
Forest Ranger Jay Velasco was patrolling it relate to Article 48 of the Revised
the Balara Watershed and Reservoir when Penal Code? (3%)
he noticed a big pile of cut logs outside the
gate of the watershed. Curious, he scouted SUGGESTED ANSWER:
around and after a few minutes, he saw
Rene and Dante coming out of the gate The doctrine of pro reo advocates that
with some more newly-cut logs. He penal laws and laws penal in nature are
apprehended and charged them with the to be construed and applied in a way
proper offense. lenient or liberal to the offender,
consonant to and consistent with the
During the preliminary investigation and up constitutional guarantee that an
to the trial proper, Rene and Dante accused shall be presumed innocent
contended that if they were to be held until his guilt is established beyond
liable, their liability should be limited only to reasonable doubt.
the newly-cut logs found in their
possession but not to those found outside Following the pro reo doctrine, under
the gate. Art. 48 of the Revised Penal Code,
crimes are complexed and punished
If you were the judge, what will be your with a single penalty (i.e that prescribed
ruling? 2.5% for the most serious crime and to be
imposed in its maximum period). The
SUGGESTED ANSWER: rationale being, that the accused who
11
commits two crimes with single criminal

Page
impulse demonstrates lesser perversity

than when the crimes are committed by was filed by the offended party or the
different acts and several criminal parents in the Fiscals Office.
resolutions. (People v. Comadre, 431
SCRA 366, 384 [2004}. However, Art. 48 The affidavit of desistance will only
shall be applied only when it would amount to the condonation of civil
bring about the imposition of a penalty liability but not criminal liability hence
lesser than the penalties imposable for the case should still proceed.
all the component crimes if prosecuted
separately instead of being complexed. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE
Corpus delicti, Elements (2000)
FUNDAMENTAL PRINICIPLE
Grounds for dismissal of cases; A. Define corpus delicti". (2%) (2000
affidavit of desistance; effect thereof Bar Question)
(1993) B. What are the elements of "corpus
delicti"? (3%)
Ariel intimidated Rachel, a mental
retardate, with a bolo into having sexual SUGGESTED ANSWER:
intercourse with him. Rachels mother
immediately filed a complaint, supported by A. Corpus Delicti literally means
her sworn statement, before the City the body or substance of the crime" or
Prosecutors Office, After the necessary the fact that a crime has been
preliminary investigation, an information committed, but does not include the
was signed by the prosecutor but did not identity of the person who committed it.
contain the signature of Rachel nor of her (People vs. Pascual, 44 OG 2789).
mother. Citing Art. 344 of the RPC
(prosecution of the crimes of rape, etc.), B. Elements of corpus delicti:
Ariel moves for the dismissal of the case.
Resolve with reasons. The actual commission by someone of
the particular crime charged. It is a
After the prosecution had rested its case, compound fact made up of two things:
Ariel presented a sworn affidavit of a.the existence of a certain act or result
desistance executed by Rachel and her forming the basis of the criminal
mother stating that they are no longer charge; and
interested in prosecuting the case and that
they have pardoned Ariel. b.the existence of a criminal agency as
the cause of the act or result
What effect would this affidavit of
desistance have on the criminal and civil The identity of the offender is not a
aspects of the case? Explain fully. necessary element of corpus delicti
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE
The case should not be dismissed. This Corpus delicti (2001)
is allowed by law (People vs. Horde, 125
12
SCRA 11). It is enough that a complaint At a birthday party in Bogo, Cebu, A got
Page
intoxicated and started quarrelling with B

and C. At the height of their arguments, A

left and took a bolo from his house, after FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE
which he returned to the party and Absence of corpus delicti
threatened to stab everybody. B got scared
and ran towards the seashore, with A Dang was a beauty queen in a university.
chasing him. B ran up a steep incline along Job, a rich classmate, was so enamored
the shore and was cornered on top of a cliff. with her that he persistently wooed and
Out of fear. B jumped from the cliff into the pursued her. Dang, being in love with
sea. A returned to the scene of their another man, rejected him. This angered
confrontation and seeing that nobody was Job. Sometime in September 2003, while
there, went home to sleep. The next day, Dang and her sister Lyn were on their way
Bs wife reported to the police station that home, Job and his minor friend Nonoy
her husband had not yet come home. A grabbed them and pushed them inside a
search was conducted by the residents of white van. They brought them in an
the barangay but after almost two days, B abandoned warehouse where they forced
or his body could not be located and his them to dance naked. Thereafter, they
disappearance continued for the next few brought them to a hill in a nearby barangay
days. Based on the testimony of C and where they took turns raping them. After
other guests, who had seen A and B on top satisfying their lust, Job ordered Nonoy to
of the cliff, A was arrested and charged with push Dang down a ravine, resulting in her
Murder. In his defense, he claimed that death. Lyn ran away but Job and Nonoy
since Bs body has not been found, there chased her and pushed her inside the van.
was no evidence of "corpus delicti' and Then the duo drove away. Lyn was never
therefore, he should be acquitted. seen again.
Is the defense of A tenable or not? State SUGGESTED ANSWER:

the reason(s) for your answer. (5%)
No. The corpus delicti or fact of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: commission of the crime is clear. Even
the death of Lyn may be established
The defense of A is not tenable. "Corpus from the acts of the culprits, without the
delicti' does not refer to the body of the need of the body of Lyn being
purported victim which had not been presented.
found. Even without the body of the
purported victim being found, the FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE -
offender can be convicted when the Aberratio Ictus in rel. to ART 48, 49, 13
facts and circumstances of a crime, the (1989)
body of the crime or corpus delicti' is
established. What do you understand by aberratio ictus;
error in personae; and praeter
In other words, the non-recovery of the intentionem? Do they alter the criminal
body of the victim is not a bar to the liability of an accused? Explain.
prosecution of A for Murder, but the fact
of death and identity of the victim must SUGGESTED ANSWER:
13
be established beyond reasonable

Page
doubt.
Aberatio ictus, error in personae and or less grave, since they are produced
praeter intentionem are the three ways by one single act, a complex crime will
by which a person may commit a felony result.
although the wrongful act done is
different from that which he intended. In the case of error in personae, the
offender shall be guilty of the crime
In aberratio ictus, there is a mistake in actually committed by him, but the
the blow meaning to say that the penalty to be imposed shall either be the
offender intending to cause an injury to penalty for the crime actually committed
one person actually inflicts it on another or that for the crime intended to be
because of lack of precision, as far for committed. Which ever is lower, but the
example when A, intending to kill B, same will be imposed in its maximum
fires his gun at the latter but because of period.
poor aim or lack of precision, he hits C
instead, who suffers serious physical In the case praeter intentionem, the
injury. offended, will incur criminal liability for
the felony actually committed by him,
In error in personae, there is a mistake but he will be entitled to the mitigating
in the identity of the victim, as for circumstance of not having intended to
instance, when A, intending to kill B, his commit so grave a wrong as that which
enemy lay in ambush for the latter to he committed.
pass along a dark alley. Because of the
darkness, A fired his gun at a person FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE in rel. to
passing by, thinking him to be B. It ART. 48, 49-
turned out that the person shot was C, Aberratio ictus and error in personae
A's father.
Distinguish aberratio ictus from error in
In praeter intentionem, the injurious personae. (1994 Bar Question)
result is greater than that intended by
the offender, the act exceeds the intent, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
as for instance, where A, without intent
to kill, strikes B with his fist at the back Aberratio ictus or mistake in the blow
of the head, causing B to fall down with occurs when a felonious act missed the
his head hitting the asphalt pavement, person against whom it was directed
resulting in the fracture of his head that and hit instead somebody who was not
caused his death. the intended victim. Error in personae,
or mistake in identity occurs when the
The presence of these circumstances felonious act was directed at the person
will alter the criminal liability of the intended, but who turned out to be
accused. Thus: somebody else. Aberratio ictus brings
about at least two (2) felonious
In aberratio ictus, two offenses are consequence. i.e the attempted felony
actually committed by the offender, that on the intended victim who was not hit
which he intended to commit and that and the felony on the unintended victim
14
which he actually committed. But if who was hit. A complex crime of the first
Page
these two offenses are both either grave form under Art. 48, RPC generally result.
In error in personae only one crime is

committed. Praeter intentionem or where the
consequence went beyond that
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE in rel. to intended or expected. This is a
ART. 48, 49, 13 mitigating circumstance (Art. 13, par. 3,
Aberratio ictus: Error in personae; and RPC) when there is a notorious disparity
Praeter intentionem (1999) between the act or means employed by
the offender and the resulting felony,
What do you understand by aberratio ictus: i.e., the resulting felony could not be
error in personae; and praeter reasonably anticipated or foreseen by
intentionem? Do they alter the criminal the offender from the act or means
liability of an accused? Explain. (4%) employed by him.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Art.2-Application of RPCs provisions

(2015)
Aberratio ictus or mistake in the blow
occurs when the offender delivered the Ando, an Indonesian national who just
blow at his intended victim but missed, visited the Philippines, purchased a ticket
)unintended victim. The situation for a passenger vessel bound for Hong
generally brings about complex crimes Kong. While on board the vessel, he saw
where from a single act, two or more his mortal enemy Iason, also an Indonesian
grave or less grave felonies resulted, national, seated at the back portion of the
namely the attempt against the intended cabin and who was busy reading a
victim and the consequence on the newspaper. Ando stealthily approached
unintended victim. As complex crimes, Iason and when he was near him, Ando
the penalty for the more serious crime stabbed and killed Iason. The vessel is
shall be the one imposed and in the registered in Malaysia. The killing
maximum period. It is only when the happened just a few moments after the
resulting felonies are only light that vessel left the port of Manila. Operatives
complex crimes do not result and the from the PNP Maritime Command arrested
penalties are to be imposed distinctly Ando. Presented for the killing of Iason,
for each resulting crime. Ando contended that he did not incur
criminal liability because both he and the
Error in personae or mistake in identity victim were Indonesians. He likewise
occurs when the offender actually hit argued that he could not be prosecuted in
the person to whom the blow was Manila because the vessel is a Malaysian-
directed but turned out to be different registered ship. Discuss the merits of
from and not the victim intended. The Ando's contentions.
criminal liability of the offender is not
affected, unless the mistake in identity Suggested Answer:
resulted to a crime different from what
the offender intended to commit, in Both contentions of Ando lack merit.
which case the lesser penalty between The argument of Ando that he did not
the crime intended and the crime incur criminal liability because both he
15
committed shall be imposed but in the and the victim were Indonesians is not
Page
maximum period (Art. 49. RPC). tenable. Under the generality principle,
penal laws shall be obligatory upon all of a kind to disturb the peace of the
who live or sojourn in the Philippine country or the good order of the
territory (Article 14 of the Civil Code). territorial sea. The vessel is still within
The foreign characteristic of an offender the territorial waters of the Philippines
and offended party does not exclude when the crime was committed since
him from operation of penal laws the killing happened a few moments
(People v. Galacgac, C.A., 54 O.G. 1027). after the vessel left the port of Manila.
Under the Revised Penal Code, except Murder committed by Ando disturbs the
as provided in treaties and laws of peace of the Philippines; hence, he
preferential application, penal laws of could be prosecuted in Manila.
the Philippines shall have force and
effect within its territory. Here, since the FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE-
killing took place within the Philippine Characteristics of criminal law (1988)
territory, our penal laws applies and
Ando may be held criminally State the characteristics of criminal law and
responsible despite his being and explain each.
Indonesian citizen.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Likewise, the contention of Ando that he
could not be prosecuted in Manila The characteristics of criminal law are
because the vessel is a Malaysian- as follows:
registered ship is without merit. Under
the English Rule, which our jurisdiction 1. GENERALITY That the law is
recognizes and follows, crimes binding upon all persons who reside to
committed aboard a vessel within the sojourn in the Philippines, irrespective
territorial waters of a country are triable of age, sex, color, creed, or personal
in the courts of such country except cricumtances.
when crimes merely affect things within
the vessel or when they only refer to the 2. TERRITORIALITY - That the law is
internal management thereof. Here, applicable to all crimes committed with
since the crime was committed within in the limits of Philippine territory,
the Philippine waters and neither which includes its atmosphere interiors
exception applies, Ando may be waters and maritime zone (Art. 2).
prosecuted in Manila.
3. PROSPECTIVITY that the law
ADDITIONAL ANSWER: does not have any retroactive effect,
except if it favors the offender unless he
Under Section 27 of the Convention of is a habitual delinquent (Art. 22) or the
the Law of The Sea, the criminal law otherwise provides.
jurisdiction of the coastal State should
not be exercised on board a foreign ship Article 2 if the Revised Penal Code
passing through the territorial sea to however provides for the following
arrest any person or to conduct any exception: Treaty stipulations or by a
investigation in connection with any law of preferential application
16
crime committed on board the ship

Page
during its passage except if the crime is FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE

Characteristics of Philippine criminal victims. Treachery is present since the

law (1998) sudden attack rendered the victims
defenseless. The nature of the weapon
What are the three cardinal features or used in attacking the victims and extent
main characteristics of Philippine criminal of the wounds sustained by the five
Law? [5%] victims showed intent to kill. His
psychotic condition is not an exempting
SUGGESTED ANSWER: circumstance of insanity in the absence
of showing that there is complete
The three main characteristics of deprivation of intelligence in
Philippine criminal law are: accordance with the cognition test.
1. Generality or its being binding to However, he is immune from
all persons who live or sojourn in criminal prosecution. Since the position
Philippine territory subject to certain of Volvik as charges de affaires is
exceptions; diplomatic, he is vested with blanket
2. Territoriality or its having force immunity from criminal suit (Minucher
and effect only within Philippine v. Hon. CA, G.R. No. 142396, 11
territory, subject to certain exceptions February 2003).
also;
3. Irretrospectivity or its application FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE
only to acts and omissions Generality Diplomatic Immunity (2014)
committed/incurred after the effectivity
of the law. Pierce is a French diplomat stationed in the
Philippines. While on EDSA and driving
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE -- with an expired license, he hit a pedestrian
Generality Diplomatic Immunity (2016) who was crossing illegally. The pedestrian
died. Pierce was charged with reckless
Charges d'affaires Volvik of Latvia suffers imprudence resulting in homicide. In his
from a psychotic disorder after he was defense, he claimed diplomatic immunity.
almost assassinated in his previous Is Pierce correct?
assignment. One day, while shopping in a
mall, he saw a group of shoppers whom he SUGGESTED ANSWER:
thought were the assassins who were out
to kill him. He asked for the gun of his Yes, Pierce is correct. Pierce, being a
escort and shot ten (10) people and French diplomat stationed in the
wounded five (5) others before he was Philippines, would be exempt from the
subdued. The wounded persons required general application of our criminal laws,
more than thirty (30) days of medical as provided for under laws or treaties of
treatment. What crime or crimes, if any, did preferential application, more
he commit? Explain. (5%) particularly under R.A. 75.
SUGGESTED ANSWER Scope of application and characteristics

of Philippine criminal law
Volvik committed five frustrated Territoriality (2004)
17
murders for the unwounded victims and

Page
five frustrated murders for the wounded

After drinking one (1) case of San Miguel in the hometown of Abe in Calamba,
beer and taking two plates of pulutan", Laguna.
Binoy, a Filipino seaman, stabbed to death
Sio My, a Singaporean seaman, aboard A. Can Abe be prosecuted for bigamy?
M/V Princess of the Pacific", an overseas (1994 Bar Question)
vessel which was sailing in the South China
Sea. The vessel, although Panamanian B. If not, can he be prosecuted for any
registered, is owned by Lucio Sy, a rich other crime? (1994 Bar Question)
Filipino businessman. When M /V
Princess of the Pacific" reached a SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Philippine Port at Cebu City, the Captain of
the vessel turned over the assailant Binoy A. No, Abe may not be prosecuted
to the Philippine authorities. An Information for bigamy since the bigamous marriage
for homicide was filed against Binoy in the was contracted or solemnized in
Regional Trial Court of Cebu City. He Singapore, hence such violation is not
moved to quash the Information for lack of one of those where the Revised Penal
jurisdiction. If you were the Judge, will you Code, under Art. 2 thereof, may be
grant the motion? Why? (5%) appplied extraterritorially. The general
rule on territoriality of criminal law
SUGGESTED ANSWER: governs the situation.
Yes, the Motion to Quash the B. Yes, Abe, together with Connie,
Information should be granted. The may be prosecuted for concubinage
Philippine court has no jurisdiction over under Art. 334 of the Revised Penal
the crime committed since it was Code for having cohabited as husband
committed on the high seas or outside and wife. But concubinage being a
of Philippine territory and on board a private crime requires the sworn
vessel not registered or licensed in the complaint of Liza, the offended spouse
Philippines (US vs. Fowler, 1 PhiL 614) in accordance with Rule 110 of the
Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure.
It is the registration of the vessel in
accordance with the laws of the As lawyer of Andrew, I will file a motion
Philippines, not the citizenship of her to quash the information on the ground
owner, which makes it a Philippine ship. of prescription. The crime of false
The vessel being registered in Panama, testimony under Art. 180 has prescribed
the laws of Panama govern while it is in because Paolo, the accused in the
the high seas. principal case, was acquitted on
January 10, 1987 and therefore the
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE--Application penalty prescribed for such crime is
of Philippine Criminal law arresto mayor under Art. 180. par. 4.
Territoriality (1994) RPC.
Abe, married to Liza, contracted another Crimes punishable by arresto mayor

marriage with Connie in Singapore. prescribes in five (5) years (Art. 90, par.
18
Thereafter, Abe and Connie returned to the 3. RPC). But the case against Andrew
Page
Philippines and lived as husband and wife was filed only on June 18. 1994,
whereas the principal criminal case was Distinguish between ex post facto law
decided with finality on January 10, and bill of attainder (2015)
1987 and, thence the prescriptive period
of the crime commenced to run. From SUGGESTED ANSWER:
January 10, 1987 to June 18, 1994 is
more than five (5) years. Ex post facto law is any law which
makes an innocent act a crime after the
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE-- Application act was committed. It is a Latin phrase
of Philippine criminal law which means from something done
Territoriality principle (2008) afterwards. It could also be a law which
aggravates a crime, or makes it greater
The inter-island vessel M/ V Viva Lines I, than when it was committed, or which
while cruising off Batanes, was forced to changes the punishment and inflicts a
seek shelter at the harbor of Kaoshiung, greater penalty than the law governing
Taiwan because of a strong typhoon. While the crime when committed. A bill of
anchored in said harbor, Max, Baldo and attainder is a law which inflicts
Bogart arrived in a speedboat, fired a punishment on a named individual or a
bazooka at the bow of the vessel, boarded group of individuals without judicial
it and divested the passengers of their trial.
money and jewelry. A passenger of M/ V
Viva Lines I, Dodong, took advantage of Ex post facto law pertains to the act
the confusion to settle an old grudge with while a bill of attainder pertains to a
another passenger, and killed him. After named individual or to members of a
their apprehension, all four were charged group.
with qualified piracy before a Philippine
court. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE
Ex Post Facto Law (2014)
Was Dodong correctly charged before the
Philippine court for qualified piracy? Congress passed a law reviving the Anti-
Explain. (3%) Subversion Law, making it a criminal
offense again for a person to join the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Communist Party of the Philippines.
Reporma, a former high-ranking member of
No, Dodong was not correctly charged the Communist Party, was charged under
with qualified piracy because the new law for his membership in the
committing piracy was never in his mind Communist Party when he was a student in
nor did he have any involvement in the the 80s. He now challenges the charge
piracy committed. He merely took against him. What objections may he
advantage of the situation in killing the raise?
passenger. He should be charged with
murder since there was evident SUGGESTED ANSWER:
premeditation and intent to kill.
Reporma may raise the limitations
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE imposed by the 1987 Constitution on the
19
power of Congress to enact retroactive

Page
penal laws which are prejudicial to the

accused. Under the Bill of Rights of the A. The limitations upon the power of
Constitution such is classified as an ex congress to enact penal laws are as
post facto law. It should be noted that follows:
when Congress decriminalized the
crime of subversion, under R.A. 7637, it 1. Congress cannot enact an ex
obliterated the felony and its effects post facto law.
upon Reporma. Consequently charging 2. Congress cannot enact a bill of
him now under the new law for his attainder.
previous membership in the Communist 3. Congress cannot provide for a
Party would be constitutionality cruel punishment.
impermissible.
However, other limitations may be
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE considered like:
What are the constitutional provisions a. Congress cannot enact a law
limiting the power of Congress to enact which shall punish for a condition.
penal laws? (2012 BAR) Congress shall punish an act and not
the condition or status. (Robinson vs.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: California).
b. Congress should consider Article
The constitutional provisions limiting 21 of the Revised Penal Code which
the power of Congress to enact penal provides that penalties that may be
laws are the following: imposed. No felony shall be punishable
1. The law must not be an ex post by any penalty not prescribed by law
facto law or it should not be given a prior to its commission.
retroactive effect.
2. The law must not be a bill of B. There are none. The rule is,
attainder, meaning it cannot provide nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege,
punishment without judicial process. there is no crim if there is no law
3. The law must not impose cruel, punishing it.
unusual or degrading punishment.
4. No person shall be held to answer FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE
for a criminal offense without due Constitutional limitations on the power
process of law. of Congress to enact penal laws (2013)
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE Assume that you are a member of the legal

Constitutional limitations on the power staff of Senator Salcedo who wants to file a
of Congress to enact penal laws (1988) bill about imprisonment at the National
Penitentiary in Muntinlupa. He wants to
A. What are the limitations upon the make the State prison a revenue earner for
power of congress to enact penal laws? the country through a law providing for
premium accommodations for prisoners
B. Are there common law crimes in our (other than those under maximum security
jurisdiction? status) whose wives are allowed conjugal
weekend visits, and for those who want
20
SUGGESTED ANSWER: long-term premium accommodations.

Page
For conjugal weekenders, he plans to rent

out rooms with hotel-like amenities at rates Bs claim for the payment of the price of his
equivalent to those charged by 4-star land which the government had
hotels; for long-term occupants, he is expropriated, and after the claim was
prepared to offer room and board with approved, the accused gave B only
special meals in air conditioned single PI,000.00 of the approved claim
occupancy rooms, at rates equivalent to ofP5,000.00and willfully and unlawfully
those charged by 3-star hotels. appropriated for himself the balance of
P4,000.00, thus causing undue injury to B
What advice will you give the Senator from and the Government."
the point of view of criminal law, taking into
account the purpose of imprisonment (7%) A has filed a motion to quash the
and considerations of ethics and morality information, contending that it does not
(3%)? charge an offense. Is he correct?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I would advise Senator Salcedo not to Yes, the contention of A is correct. The
file the said bill. First, the bill is information failed to allege that the
unconstitutional as it violates the equal undue lnjury to B and the government
protection clause of the Constitution. It was caused by the accused's manifest
will create economic inequality in our partiality, evident bad faith, or gross
criminal justice system. Rich prisoners inexcusable negligence, which are
will enjoy better amenities and necessary elements of the offense
privileges than those who are poor. charged, i.e., violation of Section 3(e) of
Second, the bill will defeat the purpose the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
of penalties in criminal law, which is to Act. The accused is employed in the
secure justice, retribution, and Office of the District Engineer of the
reformation. DPWH, which has nothing to do with the
determination and fixing of the price of
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE the land expropriated, and for which
Due process Proper allegation of the expropriated land the Government is
offense charged (1997) legally obligated to pay. There is no
allegation in the Information that the
A is charged with the crime defined in land was overpriced or that the payment
Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt of the amount was disadvantageous to
Practices Act in an information that reads: the Government. It appears that the
"That from 1 to 30 January 1995, in the charge was solely based on the accused
City of Pasig and within the jurisdiction of having followed up the payment for B's
this Honorable Court, the accused, being land which the Government has already
then employed in the Office of the District appropriated, and that the accused
Engineer, Department of Public Works and eventually withheld for himself from the
Highways and in the discharge of his price of the said land, the amount of
official administrative functions, did then P4.000.00 for his services. No violation
21
and there willfully and unlawfully work for of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and
Page
and facilitate the approval of Corrupt Act appears. At most, the

accused should be merely charged ART 3 Mala in se and crimes mala

administratively prohibita (2005, 2003, 2001, 1999, 1997,
1988)
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE in rel. to Art
48 Distinguish between crimes mala in se and
What is aberratio ictus? (2015) crimes mala prohibita.
Aberratio ictus means mistake of blow. Crimes mala prohibita are distinguished
Under the principle of aberration ictus, from crimes mala insets follows, to wit:
a person is criminally responsible for
committing an intentional felony In crimes mala prohibita, the acts are
although the consequent victim is not by nature wrong, evil or bad. They
different from that intended due to are punished only because there is a
mistake of blow. This principle is based law prohibiting them for public good,
on the rule in Article 4 of the Revised and thus good faith or lack of criminal
Penal Code, which provides that intent in doing the prohibited act is not
criminal liability shall be incurred by any a defense.
person committing a felony (delito)
although the wrongful act done be In crimes mala in se, the acts are by
different from that which he intended. nature wrong, evil or bad, and so
generally condemned. The moral trait of
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE in rel. to Art the offender is involved; thus, good
48, 49, 13 faith or lack of criminal intent on the part
Aberratio Ictus vs Impossible Crime of the offender is a defense, unless the
(1993) crime is the result of criminal
negligence. Correspondingly,
Explain and illustrate the following: 1) modifying circumstances are
aberratio ictus, 2) impossible crime, and 3) considered in punishing the offender.
subordination of perjury.
ART 3 Motive (1999)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
When is motive relevant to prove a case?
1. Aberratio ictus - A fired a gun at When is it not necessary to be established?
his father to kill him but hit instead a Explain. (3%)
stranger.
2. Impossible crime - Killing a dead SUGGESTED ANSWER:
person.
3. Subordination of perjury - Motive is the moving power which
Procuring another to swear falsely and impels a person to do an act for a
testify under circumstances rendering definite result; while intent is the
him guilty of perjury. purpose for using a particular means to
bring about a desired result. Motive is
22
FELONIES not an element of a crime but intent is

Page
an element of intentional crimes.

Motive, if attending a crime, always 2. Felonies committed by means of

precede the intent. culpa.
Motive is relevant to prove a case when ART 3 Proof of motive; when not
there is doubt as to the identity of the required (2006)
offender or when the act committed
gives rise to variant crimes and there is Motive is essential in the determination of
the need to determine the proper crime the commission of a crime and the liabilities
to be imputed to the offender. of the perpetrators. What are the instances
where proof of motive is not essential or
It is not necessary to prove motive when required to justify conviction of an
the offender is positively identified or accused? Give at least 3 instances. 5%
the criminal act did not give rise to
variant crimes. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ART 3 Mala in se; mala prohibita (1997) Proof of motive is not required
May an act be malum in se and be, at the a. Where the offender is positively
same time, malum prohibitum? identified or
b. has admitted the commission of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the crime (People v. Yurong, 133 SCRA
26 (1984] citing People v. Realon, et. al.,
Yes, an act may be malum in se and 94 SCRA 422 [1980]);
malum prohibitum at the same time. In c. Where the crime committed is a
People v. Sunico, etaL, (CA 50 OG 5880) malum prohibitum; or
it was held that the omission or failure d. Where the crime is the product of
of election inspectors and poll clerks to culpa or criminal negligence.
include a voter's name in the registry list
of voters is wrong perse because it ART 3 Theories; motive; criminal intent
disenfranchises a voter of his right to (2004, 1996)
vote. In this regard it is considered as
malum in se. Since it is punished under A. What are the different schools of
a special law (Sec. 101 and 103, Revised thought or theories in Criminal Law and
Election Code), it is considered malum describe each briefly. (1996 Bar Question)
prohibitum.
B. To what theory does our Revised
ART 3 Criminal Intent (1988) Penal Code belong? (1996 Bar Question)
May a crime be committed without criminal C. Distinguish intent from motive in

intent? Explain. Criminal Law. (2004, 1996 Bar Question)
A crime may be committed without D. May crime be committed without

criminal intent in two cases: criminal intent? (1996 Bar Question)
1. Offense, punishable as mala
23
prohibita; and SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Page
A. There are two schools of thought ART 3 How are felonies committed?
in Criminal Law, and these are (a) the (2015)
classical theory, which simply means
that the basis of criminal liabilities is SUGGESTED ANSWER:
human free will, and the purpose of the
penalty is retribution which must be Felonies are committed not only by
proportional to the gravity of the means of deceit (dolo) but also by
offense; and (b) the positivist theory, means of fault (culpa). There is deceit
which considers man as a social being when the act is performed with
and his acts are attributable not just to deliberate intent; and there is fault when
his will but to other forces of society. As the wrongful act results from
such, punishment is not the solution, as imprudence, negligence, lack of
he is not entirely to be blamed; law and foresight, or lack of skill (Article 3 of
jurisprudence should not be the Revised Penal Code).
yardstick in the imposition of sanction,
instead the underlying reasons would CRIMINAL LIABILITY
be inquired into.
B. We follow the classical school of ART 4 (1) Criminal liability when

thought although some provisions of incurred (1994)
eminently positivist in tendencies, like
punishment of impossible crime, Bhey eloped with Scott. Whereupon,
juvenile circumstances, are Bheys father, Robin, and brother, Rustom,
incorporated in our Code. went to Scotts house. Upon reaching the
house, Rustom inquired from Scott about
C. Intent is the purpose for using a his sisters whereabouts, while Robin
particular means to achieve the desired shouted and threatened to kill Scott. The
result; while motive is the moving power latter then went downstairs but Rustom
which impels a person to act for a held his (Scotts) waist. Meanwhile Olive,
definite result. Intent is an ingredient of the elder sister of Scott, carrying her two-
dolo or malice and thus an element of month old child, approached Rustom and
deliberate felonies; while motive is not Scott to pacify them. Olive attempted to
an element of a crime but only remove Rustoms hand from Scotts waist.
considered when the identity of the But Rustom pulled Olives hand causing
offender is in doubt. her to fall over her baby. The baby then
died moments later.
D. Yes, a crime may be committed
without criminal intent if such is a Is Rustom criminally liable for the death of
culpable felony, wherein intent is the child?
substituted by negligence or
imprudence, and also in a malum SUGGESTED ANSWER:
prohibitum, or if an act is punishable by
special law. Yes, Rustom is criminally liable for the
death of the child because his felonious
24
act was the proximate cause of such

death. It was Rustoms act of pulling
Page
Olives hand which caused the latter to

fall on her baby. Had it not been for said During the robbery in a dwelling house, one
act of Rustom, which is undoubtedly of the culprits happened to fire his gun
felonious (at least slight coercion) there upward in the ceiling without meaning to kill
was no cause for Olive to fall over her anyone. The owner of the house who was
baby. In short, Rustoms felonious act is hiding thereat was hit and killed as a result.
the cause of the evil caused. Any person
performing a felonious act is criminally The defense theorized that the killing was
liable for the direct, natural and logical a mere accident and was not perpetrated in
consequence thereof although different connection with, or for purposes of, the
from what he intended (Art. 4, par. 1. robbery.
RPC: People vs. Pugay, et aL, GR No.
74324, Nov. 18, 1988). Will you sustain the defense? Why? (4%)
Art 4 Criminal Liability In relation to Art SUGGESTED ANSWER:

8 Conspiracy (1992)
No, I will not sustain the defense. The
As Sergio, Yoyong, Zoilo and Warlilo act being felonious and the proximate
engaged in a drinking spree at Heartthrob cause of the victim's death, the offender
Disco, Special Police Officer 3 (SPO 3) is liable therefor although it may not be
Manolo Yabang suddenly approached intended or different from what he
them, aimed his revolver at Sergio whom intended.
he recognized as a wanted killer and fatally
shot the latter. Whereupon, Yoyong.Zoilo The offender shall be prosecuted for the
and Warlito ganged up on Yabang. Warlito, composite crime of robbery with
using his own pistol, shot and wounded homicide, whether the killing was
Yabang. intentional or accidental, as long as the
killing was on occasion of the robbery
What are the criminal liabilities of Yoyong,
Zoilo and Warlito for the injury to Yabang? Art. 4 Criminal Liability (2008)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: While Carlos was approaching his car, he

saw it being driven away by Paolo, a thief.
If they have to be criminally liable at all Carlos tried to stop Paolo by shouting at
each will be responsible for their him, but Paolo ignored him. To prevent his
individual acts as there appears to be no car from being carnapped, Carlos drew his
conspiracy, as the acts of the three were gun, aimed at the rear wheel of the car and
spontaneous and a reflex response to fired. The shot blew the tire which caused
Yabangs shooting of Sergio. There was the car to veer out of control and collide
no concerted act that will lead to a with an oncoming tricycle, killing the
common purpose. tricycle driver.
Art. 4 Criminal Liability Proximate Art 4 (1) What is the criminal liability of
Cause In relation to robbery with Carlos, if any? Explain. (4%) (2008)
homicide (1999)
25
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page
Carlos did not incur criminal liability (C7.S. os. Valdez. 41 Phil. 1497; People
because his act of firing at the rear vs. Apra. 27 SCRA 1037.)
wheel of the car to stop the vehicle and
prevent Paolo from taking away his ART.4 Criminal liability when incurred
(Carlos') car is neither done with dolo (1997)
nor culpa. The act does not constitute a
crime; it is a reasonable exercise of his While the crew of a steamer prepared to
right to prevent or repel an actual raise anchor at the Pasig River, A,
unlawful physical invasion or evidently impatient with the progress of
usurpation of his property pursuant to work, began to use abusive language
Art. 429 of the Civil Code. against the men. B, one of the members of
the crew, remonstrated saying that they
ART.4--Criminal liability when could work best if they were not insulted. A
incurred (1996) took B's attitude as a display of
insubordination and, rising in a rage,
Alexander, an escaped convict, ran amuck moved towards B wielding a big knife and
on board a Superlines Bus bound for threatening to stab B. At the instant when A
Manila from Bicol and killed ten (10) was only a few feet from B, the latter,
persons. Terrified by the incident, Carol apparently believing himself to be in great
and Benjamin who are passengers of the and immediate peril, threw himself into the
bus, jumped out of the window and while water, disappeared beneath the surface,
lying unconscious after hitting the and drowned.
pavement of the road, were ran over and
crushed to death by a fast moving Desert May A be held criminally liable for the death
Fox bus tailing the Superlines Bus. of B?
Can Alexander be held liable for the death SUGGESTED ANSWER:

of Carol and Benjamin although he was
completely unaware that the two jumped Yes, A can be held criminally liable for
out of the bus? Explain. the death of B. Article 4 of the Revised
Penal Code provides in part that
SUGGESTED ANSWER: criminal liability shall be incurred by any
person committing a felony although
Yes, Alexander can be held liable for the the wrongful act done be different from
death of Carol and Benjamin because of that which he intended. In U.S. vs.
felonious act of running was the Valdez, 41 Phil. 497, where the victim
proximate cause of the victims death. who was threatened by the accused
The rule is that when a person, by a with a knife, jumped into the river but
felonious act, generates in the mind of because of the strong current or
another a sense of imminent danger, because he did not know how to swim,
prompting the latter to escape from or he drowned, the Supreme Court
avoid such danger and in the process, affirmed the conviction for homicide of
sustains injuries or dies, the person the accused because, if a person
committing the felonious act is against whom a criminal assault is
26
responsible for such injuries or death. directed believes himself to be in

Page
danger of death or great bodily harm

and in order to escape jumps into the passengersjumping out of the train;
water, impelled by the instinct of self- hence their deaths.
preservation, the assailant is
responsible for the homicide in case Under Article 4, Revised Penal Code,
death results by drowning. any person committing a felony shall
incur criminal liability although the
ART.4--Criminal liability; when incurred wrongful act done be different from that
(2001) which he intended.
Luis Cruz was deeply hurt when his offer of In this case, the death of the three
love was rejected by his girlfriend Marivella passengers was the direct, natural and
one afternoon when he visited her. When logical consequence of Luis felonious
he left her house, he walked as if he was act which created an immediate sense
sleepwalking so much so that a teenage of danger in the minds of said
snatcher was able to grab his cellphone passengers who tried to avoid or
and flee without being chased by Luis. At escape from it by jumping out of the
the next LRT station, he boarded one of the train. (People vs. Arpa, 27 SCRA 1037;
coaches bound for Baclaran. While seated, U.S. vs. Valdez, 41 Phil. 497)
he happened to read a newspaper left on
the seat and noticed that the headlines ART.4--Criminal liability; when incurred
were about the sinking of the Super Ferry (2004)
while on its way to Cebu. He went over the
list of missing passengers who were On his way home from office, ZZ rode in a
presumed dead and came across the name jeepney. Subsequently, XX boarded the
of his grandfather who had raised him from same jeepney. Upon reaching a secluded
childhood after he was orphaned. He was spot in QC, XX pulled out a grenade from
shocked and his mind went blank for a few his bag and announced a hold-up. He told
minutes, after which he ran amuck and, ZZ to surrender his watch, wallet and
using his balisong, started stabbing at the cellphone. Fearing for his life, ZZ jumped
passengers who then scampered away, out of the vehicle. But as he fell, his head
with three of them jumping out of the train hit the pavement, causing his instant death.
and landing on the road below. All the three
passengers died later of their injuries at the Is XX liable for ZZs death? Explain briefly.
hospital. (5%)
Is Luis liable for the death of the three SUGGESTED ANSWER:

passengers who jumped out of the moving
train? State your reasons. (5%) Yes, XX is liable for ZZ's death because
his acts of pulling out a grenade and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: announcing a hold-up, coupled with a
demand for the watch, wallet and
Yes, Luis is liable for their deaths cellphone of ZZ is felonious, and such
because he was committing a felony felonious act was the proximate cause
when he started stabbing at the of ZZ's jumping out of the jeepney,
27
passengers and such wrongful act was resulting in the latter's death. Stated
Page
the proximate cause of said otherwise, the death of ZZ was the

direct, natural and logical consequence was arrested. The prosecutor considered
of XXs felonious act which created an that the ransom note was never received
immediate sense of danger in the mind by Carlas parents and filed a case of
of ZZ who tried to avoid such danger by Impossible crime to commit kidnapping
jumping out of the jeepney (.People v. against Enrique.
Arpat 27 SCRA 1037 [1969]). Is the prosecutor correct? If he is not
correct, can he instead file a case of grave
ART.4--Criminal liability; when incurred coercion?
(2008)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Francis and Joan were sweethearts, but
their parents had objected to their The Prosecutor is not correct. There is
relationship because they were first no Impossible crime to commit
cousins. They forged a pact in writing to kidnapping. First, an impossible crime
commit suicide. The agreement was to applies only to Crimes against Persons
shoot each other in the head which they and Crimes against Property under
did. Joan died. Due to medical assistance, Titles 8 and 10 of the RPC, respectively.
Francis survived. Is Francis criminally liable Kidnapping is a Crime against Personal
for the death of Joan? Explain. (5%) Liberty and Security under Title 9, RPC.
Second, even if the ransom note was not
SUGGESTED ANSWER: received by Carlas parents, the crime of
kidnapping and serious illegal detention
Yes, Francis is criminally liable for for ransom is already consummated.
Joan's death. His act of shooting her, Under Article 267, RPC, Kidnapping for
although done pursuant to a solemn Ransom is committed when the
pact, is nevertheless felonious and is kidnapping or detention is for the
the proximate cause of Joan's death purpose of extorting ransom from the
(Art. 4, par. 1, RPC). Moreover, the mere victim or any other person. To
act of giving assistance to a suicide is a consummate the crime, it suffices that
crime (Art. 253, RPC) the purpose is to extort ransom; it is not
necessary that the ransom note be
received or that ransom be paid.
IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES
No, the Prosecutor cannot file a case of
Art 4 (2): Impossible crimes (2014) grave coercion because the crime
committed, as explained above, is
Carla, four (4) years old, was kidnapped by kidnapping for ransom.
Enrique, the tricycle driver engaged by her
parents to drive her to and from school ART 4(2) Impossible Crime (2014)
every day. Enrique wrote a ransom note
demanding that Carlas parents pay him Puti detested Pula, his roommate, because
P500,000.00 ransom in exchange for her Pula was courting Ganda, whom Puti
liberty. However, before the ransom note fancied. One day, Puti decided to teach
could be received by Carlas parents, Pula a lesson and went to a veterinarian
28
Enriques hideout was discovered by the (Vet) to ask for poison on the pretext that
Page
police. Carla was rescued while Enrique he was going to kill a sick pet, when
actually Puti was intending to poison Pula. where he can get poison, he approached
The Vet instantly gave Puti a non-toxic another classmate. Jerry to whom he
solution which, when mixed with Pulas disclosed his evil plan. Because he himself
food, did not kill Pula. harbored resentment towards Jun, Jerry
gave Buddy a poison, which Buddy placed
(A) What crime, if any, did Puti commit? on Jun's food. However, Jun did not die
(B) Would your answer be the same if, because, unknown to both Buddy and
as a result of the mixture, Pula got an upset Jerry, the poison was actually powdered
stomach and had to be hospitalized for 10 milk.
days?
(A) What crime or crimes, if any, did
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Jerry and Buddy commit? [3%J (1998 Bar
Question)
(A) Puti committed the impossible (B) Suppose that, because of his severe
crime of murder. All the elements of an allergy to powdered milk, Jun had to be
impossible crime are present. Putis act hospitalized for 10 days for ingesting it.
of mixing a solution with Pulas food Would your answer to the first question be
would have been murder, a crime the same? [2%] (1998 Bar Question)
against persons. The act was done evil
intent which is to kill Pula. However, the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
crime was not accomplished because of
the employment of ineffectual means, (A) Jerry and Buddy are liable for the so-
i.e., the solution turned out to be non- called impossible crime because, with
toxic which would not kill Pula. And said intent to kill, they tried to poison Jun
act would not fall under any other and thus perpetrate murder, a crime
provision of the RPC. against persons. Jun was not poisoned
(B) No, my answer would not be the only because the would-be killers were
same. If as a result of the mixture, Pula unaware that what they mixed with the
got an upset stomach and had to be food of Jun was powdered milk, not
hospitalized for 10 days, the crime poison. In short, the act done with
committed by Puti is Less Serious criminal intent by Jerry and Buddy,
Physical Injuries. It is not an impossible would have constituted a crime against
crime because the last element of an persons were it not for the inherent
impossible requires that the act inefficacy of the means employed.
performed should not constitute a
violation of another provision of the Criminal liability is incurred by them
RPC. although no crime resulted, because
their act of trying to poison Jun is
criminal,
Art. 4 (2) Impossible Crime In relation to
Art. 265: Less serious physical injuries (B) No, the answer would not be the
(1998) same. Charlie would be, criminally liable
for less serious physical injuries
Buddy always resented his classmate, Jun. because his act of mixing the powder
29
One day. Buddy planned to kill Jun by with Brad's food was done with
Page
mixing poison in his lunch. Not knowing felonious intent and was the proximate
cause of Brad's illness for 10 days. It Charlie hated his classmate, Brad,
cannot constitute attempted murder, because the latter was assiduously
although done with intent to kill, courting Lily, Charlie's girlfriend. Charlie
because the means employed is went to a veterinarian and asked for some
inherently ineffectual to cause death poison on the pretext that it would be used
and the crime committed must be to kill a very sick, old dog. Actually, Charlie
directly linked to the means employed, intended to use the poison on Brad.
not to the intent. Liability for an
impossible crime can only arise from a The veterinarian mistakenly gave Charlie a
consummated act. non-toxic powder which, when mixed with
Brad's food, did not kill Brad.
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of murder
(2009) [a] Did Charlie commit any crime? If so;
what and why? If not, why not? (3%)
Charlie hated his classmate, Brad, [b] Would your answer be the same if
because the latter was assiduously Brad proved to be allergic to the powder,
courting Lily, Charlie's girlfriend. Charlie and after ingesting it with his food, fell ill
went to a veterinarian and asked for some and was hospitalized for ten (10) days?
poison on the pretext that it would be used Explain. (3%)
to kill a very sick, old dog. Actually, Charlie
intended to use the poison on Brad. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The veterinarian mistakenly gave Charlie a a. Charlie committed an impossible

non-toxic powder which, when mixed with crime of murder. His act of mixing the
Brad's food, did not kill Brad. non-toxic powder with Brad's food,
done with intent to kill, would have
(A) Did Charlie commit any crime? If so; constituted murder which is a crime
what and why? If not, why not? against persons, had it not been for the
(3%) employment of a means which,
unknown to him, is ineffectual (Art.4,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: par. 2, RPC).
Charlie committed an impossible crime

of murder. His act of mixing the non- b. No, the answer would not be the
toxic powder with Brad's food, done same. Charlie would be, criminally liable
with intent to kill, would have for less serious physical injuries
constituted murder which is a crime because his act of mixing the powder
against persons, had it not been for the with Brad's food was done with
employment of a means which, felonious intent and was the proximate
unknown to him, is ineffectual (Art.4, cause of Brad's illness for 10 days. It
par. 2, RPC). cannot constitute attempted murder,
although done with intent to kill,
ART 4(2)- Impossible crime of murder because the means employed is
(2009) inherently ineffectual to cause death
30
and the crime committed must be

Page
directly linked to the means employed,

not to the intent. Liability for an rivalry, OZ decided to get rid of YO by

impossible crime can only arise from a poisoning him. OZ poured a substance into
consummated act. YOs coffee thinking it was arsenic. It
turned out that the substance was white
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of theft sugar substitute known as Equal. Nothing
(2008) happened to YO after he drank the coffee.
Lucas had been the stay-in houseboy of What criminal liability did OZ incur, If any?
spouses Nestor and Julia for five years. Explain briefly. (5%) (2004 Bar
One night, while Nestor and Julia were out Question)
having dinner, Lucas and his friend Pedro
gained entry into the masters' bedroom SUGGESTED ANSWER:
with the use of a false key.
OZ incurred criminal liability for an
They found Julia's jewelry box in one of the impossible crime of murder. Criminal
cabinets, which was unlocked. Lucas liability shall be incurred by any person
believed that Julia's jewelry was inside the performing an act which would be an
box. Unknown to Lucas and Pedro, the box offense against persons or property,
was empty. Pedro took the box and left the were it not for the inherent impossibility
bedroom with Lucas. They were shocked of its accomplishment or on account of
when they saw Nestor in the house pointing the employment of inadequate or
a gun at them. Nestor ordered them to stop ineffectual means (Art. 4, par. 2, RPC).
hand over the box. Pedro complied. It
turned out that Nestor had just arrived in In the problem given, the impossibility
time to see Lucas and Pedro leaving of accomplishing the crime of murder, a
masters' bedroom with the box. crime against persons, was due to the
employment of ineffectual means which
State with reasons, the crime or crimes, if OZ thought was poison. The law
any, Lucas and Pedro committed. (7%) imputes criminal liability to the offender
although no crime resulted, only to
SUGGESTED ANSWER: suppress his criminal propensity.
Lucas and Pedro may be held liable only ART.4(2)- Impossible crime of murder
for impossible crime of theft because (2004)
what they had in in in taking the jewelry
box was to take Julia's jewelry. OZ and YO were both courting their co-
However, it turned out to be empty. The employee, SUE. Because of their bitter
impossibility of committing the crime of rivalry, OZ decided to get rid of YO by
theft is factual or physical since there is poisoning him. OZ poured a substance into
no jewelry to steal inside the box. YOs coffee thinking it was arsenic. It
turned out that the substance was white
Art. 4 (2) Impossible crime of murder sugar substitute known as Equal. Nothing
(2004) happened to YO after he drank the coffee.
31
OZ and YO were both courting their co- What criminal liability did OZ incur, If any?
Page
employee, SUE. Because of their bitter Explain briefly. (5%)

D. Carla, 4 years old, was kidnapped

SUGGESTED ANSWER: by Enrique, the tricycle driver paid by her
parents to bring and fetch her to and from
OZ incurred criminal liability for an school. Enrique wrote a ransom note
impossible crime of murder. Criminal demanding * P500.000.00 from Carla's
liability shall be incurred by any person parents in exchange for Carla's freedom.
performing an act which would be an Enrique sent the ransom note by mail.
offense against persons or property, However, before the ransom note was
were it not for the inherent impossibility received by Carla's parents, Enrique's
of its accomplishment or on account of hideout was discovered by the police. Carla
the employment of inadequate or was rescued while Enrique was arrested
ineffectual means (Art. 4, par. 2, RPC). and incarcerated. Considering that the
ransom note was not received by Carlas
In the problem given, the impossibility parents, the investigating prosecutor
of accomplishing the crime of murder, a merely filed a case of Impossible Crime to
crime against persons, was due to the Commit Kidnapping" against Enrique. Is
employment of ineffectual means which the prosecutor correct? Why? (3%) (2000
OZ thought was poison. The law Bar Question)
imputes criminal liability to the offender
although no crime resulted, only to SUGGESTED ANSWER:
suppress his criminal propensity
because subjectively, he is a criminal A. An impossible crime is an act
though objectively, no crime was which would be an offense against
committed. person or property, were if not for the
inherent impossibility of its
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crimes (2000) accomplishment or on account of the
employment of inadequate or
A. What is an impossible crime? (2%) ineffectual means (Art. 4, par. 2, RPC).
(2000 Bar Question)
B. No. An impossible crime is not
B. Is an impossible crime really a really a crime. It is only so-called
crime? (2%) (2000 Bar Question) because the act gives rise to criminal
liability. But actually, no felony is
C. A, B, C and D, all armed with committed. The accused is to be
armalites, proceeded to the house of X. Y, punished for his criminal tendency or
a neighbor of X, who happened to be propensity although no crime was
passing by, pointed to the four culprits the committed.
room that X occupied. The four culprits
peppered the room with bullets. C. Yes, A, B, C and D are liable for
Unsatisfied, A even threw a hand grenade destructive arson because of the
that totally destroyed X's room. However, destruction of the room of X with the use
unknown to the four culprits, X was not of an explosive, the hand grenade.
inside the room and nobody was hit or Liability for an impossible crime is to be
injured during the incident. Are A, B, C and imposed only if the act committed
32
D liable for any crime? Explain. (3 would not constitute any other crime
Page
under the Revised Penal Code.

Although the facts involved are parallel On appeal to the Court of Appeals, all the
to the case of Intod vs. Court of Appeals accused ascribed to the trial court the sole
(215 SCRA 52). where it was ruled that error of finding them guilty of attempted
the liability of the offender was for an murder.
impossible crime, no hand grenade was
used in said case, which constitutes a If you were the ponente, how will you
more serious crime though different decide the appeal?
from what was intended.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
D. No, the prosecutor is not correct
in filing a case for impossible crime to If I were the ponente, I will set aside the
commit kidnapping" against Enrique. judgment convicting the accused of
Impossible crimes are limited only to attempted murder and instead find them
acts which when performed would be a guilty of impossible crime under Art. 4,
crime against persons or property. par. 2, RPC, in relation to Art. 59, RPC.
Liability for impossible crime arises not
As kidnapping is a crime against only when the impossibility is legal, but
personal security and not against likewise when it is factual or physical
persons or property, Enrique could not impossibility, as in the case at bar.
have incurred an impossible crime" to Elsas absence from the house is a
commit kidnapping. There is thus no physical impossibility which renders
impossible crime of kidnapping the crime intended inherently incapable
of accomplishment. To convict the
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of murder accused of attempted murder would
(1994) make Art. 4, par. 2 practically useless as
all circumstances which prevented the
JP, Aries and Randal planned to kill Elsa, a consummation of the offense will be
resident of Barangay Pula, Laurel, treated as an incident independent of
Batangas. They asked the assistance of the actors will which is an element of
Ella, who is familiar with the place. attempted or frustrated felony (Intod vs.
CA, 215 SCRA 52).
On April 3, 1992, at about 10:00 in the
evening, JP, Aries and Randal, all armed Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of murder
with automatic weapons, went to Barangay (1998)
Pula. Ella, being the guide, directed her
companions to the room in the house of Buddy always resented his classmate, Jun.
Elsa. Whereupon, JP, Aries and Randal One day. Buddy planned to kill Jun by
fired their guns at her room. Fortunately, mixing poison in his lunch. Not knowing
Elsa was not around as she attended a where he can get poison, he approached
prayer meeting that evening in another another classmate. Jerry to whom he
barangay in Laurel. disclosed his evil plan. Because he himself
harbored resentment towards Jun, Jerry
JP, et aL, were charged and convicted of gave Buddy a poison, which Buddy placed
attempted murder by the Regional Trial on Jun's food. However, Jun did not die
33
Court at Tanauan, Batangas. because, unknown to both Buddy and

Page
Jerry, the poison was actually powdered Is the prosecutor correct? If he is not
milk correct, can he instead file a case of grave
coercion?
What crime or crimes, if any, did Jerry and
Buddy commit? [3%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The Prosecutor is not correct. There is

no Impossible crime to commit
1. Jerry and Buddy are liable for the kidnapping. First, an impossible crime
so-called impossible crime because, applies only to Crimes against Persons
with intent to kill, they tried to poison and Crimes against Property under
Jun and thus perpetrate murder, a crime Titles 8 and 10 of the RPC, respectively.
against persons. Jun was not poisoned Kidnapping is a Crime against Personal
only because the would-be killers were Liberty and Security under Title 9, RPC.
unaware that what they mixed with the Second, even if the ransom note was not
food of Jun was powdered milk, not received by Carlas parents, the crime of
poison. In short, the act done with kidnapping and serious illegal detention
criminal intent by Jerry and Buddy, for ransom is already consummated.
would have constituted a crime against Under Article 267, RPC, Kidnapping for
persons were it not for the inherent Ransom is committed when the
inefficacy of the means employed. kidnapping or detention is for the
purpose of extorting ransom from the
Criminal liability is incurred by them victim or any other person. To
although no crime resulted, because consummate the crime, it suffices that
their act of trying to poison Jun is the purpose is to extort ransom; it is not
criminal. necessary that the ransom note be
received or that ransom be paid.
ART 4. In rel to ART 267Impossible
crime (2014) No, the Prosecutor cannot file a case of
grave coercion because the crime
Carla, four (4) years old, was kidnapped by committed, as explained above, is
Enrique, the tricycle driver engaged by her kidnapping for ransom.
parents to drive her to and from school
every day. Enrique wrote a ransom note ART. 4- Impossible crimes (2000)
demanding that Carlas parents pay him
P500,000.00 ransom in exchange for her A. What is an impossible crime? (2%)
liberty. However, before the ransom note (2000 Bar Question)
could be received by Carlas parents,
Enriques hideout was discovered by the B. Is an impossible crime really a
police. Carla was rescued while Enrique crime? (2%) (2000 Bar Question)
was arrested. The prosecutor considered
that the ransom note was never received C. A, B, C and D, all armed with
by Carlas parents and filed a case of armalites, proceeded to the house of X. Y,
Impossible crime to commit kidnapping a neighbor of X, who happened to be
34
against Enrique. passing by, pointed to the four culprits the

Page
room that X occupied. The four culprits

peppered the room with bullets. C. Yes, A, B, C and D are liable for
Unsatisfied, A even threw a hand grenade destructive arson because of the
that totally destroyed X's room. However, destruction of the room of X with the use
unknown to the four culprits, X was not of an explosive, the hand grenade.
inside the room and nobody was hit or Liability for an impossible crime is to be
injured during the incident. Are A, B, C and imposed only if the act committed
D liable for any crime? Explain. (3%) (2000 would not constitute any other crime
Bar Question) under the Revised Penal Code.
Although the facts involved are parallel
D. Carla, 4 years old, was kidnapped to the case of Intod vs. Court of Appeals
by Enrique, the tricycle driver paid by her (215 SCRA 52). where it was ruled that
parents to bring and fetch her to and from the liability of the offender was for an
school. Enrique wrote a ransom note impossible crime, no hand grenade was
demanding * P500.000.00 from Carla's used in said case, which constitutes a
parents in exchange for Carla's freedom. more serious crime though different
Enrique sent the ransom note by mail. from what was intended.
However, before the ransom note was
received by Carla's parents, Enrique's D. No, the prosecutor is not correct
hideout was discovered by the police. Carla in filing a case for impossible crime to
was rescued while Enrique was arrested commit kidnapping" against Enrique.
and incarcerated. Considering that the Impossible crimes are limited only to
ransom note was not received by Carlas acts which when performed would be a
parents, the investigating prosecutor crime against persons or property.
merely filed a case of Impossible Crime to
Commit Kidnapping" against Enrique. Is As kidnapping is a crime against
the prosecutor correct? Why? (3%) personal security and not against
persons or property, Enrique could not
SUGGESTED ANSWER: have incurred an impossible crime" to
commit kidnapping. There is thus no
A. An impossible crime is an act impossible crime of kidnapping
which would be an offense against
person or property, were if not for the ART.4-Impossible crime of theft (2008)
inherent impossibility of its
accomplishment or on account of the Lucas had been the stay-in houseboy of
employment of inadequate or spouses Nestor and Julia for five years.
ineffectual means (Art. 4, par. 2, RPC). One night, while Nestor and Julia were out
having dinner, Lucas and his friend Pedro
B. No. An impossible crime is not gained entry into the masters' bedroom
really a crime. It is only so-called with the use of a false key.
because the act gives rise to criminal
liability. But actually, no felony is They found Julia's jewelry box in one of the
committed. The accused is to be cabinets, which was unlocked. Lucas
punished for his criminal tendency or believed that Julia's jewelry was inside the
propensity although no crime was box. Unknown to Lucas and Pedro, the box
35
committed. was empty. Pedro took the box and left the
Page
bedroom with Lucas. They were shocked

when they saw Nestor in the house pointing error of finding them guilty of attempted
a gun at them. Nestor ordered them to stop murder.
hand over the box. Pedro complied. It
turned out that Nestor had just arrived in If you were the ponente, how will you
time to see Lucas and Pedro leaving decide the appeal?
masters' bedroom with the box.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
State with reasons, the crime or crimes, if
any, Lucas and Pedro committed. (7%) If I were the ponente, I will set aside the
judgment convicting the accused of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: attempted murder and instead find them
guilty of impossible crime under Art. 4,
Lucas and Pedro may be held liable only par. 2, RPC, in relation to Art. 59, RPC.
for impossible crime of theft because Liability for impossible crime arises not
what they had in in in taking the jewelry only when the impossibility is legal, but
box was to take Julia's jewelry. likewise when it is factual or physical
However, it turned out to be empty. The impossibility, as in the case at bar.
impossibility of committing the crime of Elsas absence from the house is a
theft is factual or physical since there is physical impossibility which renders
no jewelry to steal inside the box. the crime intended inherently incapable
of accomplishment. To convict the
ART .4(2)- Impossible crime of murder accused of attempted murder would
(1994) make Art. 4, par. 2 practically useless as
all circumstances which prevented the
JP, Aries and Randal planned to kill Elsa, a consummation of the offense will be
resident of Barangay Pula, Laurel, treated as an incident independent of
Batangas. They asked the assistance of the actors will which is an element of
Ella, who is familiar with the place. attempted or frustrated felony (Intod vs.
CA, 215 SCRA 52).
On April 3, 1992, at about 10:00 in the
evening, JP, Aries and Randal, all armed ART.4(2) Impossible crime of murder;
with automatic weapons, went to Barangay less serious physical injuries (1998)
Pula. Ella, being the guide, directed her
companions to the room in the house of Buddy always resented his classmate, Jun.
Elsa. Whereupon, JP, Aries and Randal One day. Buddy planned to kill Jun by
fired their guns at her room. Fortunately, mixing poison in his lunch. Not knowing
Elsa was not around as she attended a where he can get poison, he approached
prayer meeting that evening in another another classmate. Jerry to whom he
barangay in Laurel. disclosed his evil plan. Because he himself
harbored resentment towards Jun, Jerry
JP, et aL, were charged and convicted of gave Buddy a poison, which Buddy placed
attempted murder by the Regional Trial on Jun's food. However, Jun did not die
Court at Tanauan, Batangas. because, unknown to both Buddy and
Jerry, the poison was actually powdered
36
On appeal to the Court of Appeals, all the milk

Page
accused ascribed to the trial court the sole

What crime or crimes, if any, did ART. 6-Stages of execution

Jerry and Buddy commit? [3%] Consummated theft (1998)
Suppose that, because of his severe In the jewelry section of a big department
allergy to powdered milk, Jun had to be store, Julia snatched a couple of bracelets
hospitalized for 10 days for ingesting it. and put these in her purse. At the store's
Would your answer to the first question be exit, however, she was arrested by the
the same? [2%] guard after being radioed by the store
personnel who caught the act in the store's
SUGGESTED ANSWER: moving camera. Is the crime
consummated, frustrated, or attempted?
1. Jerry and Buddy are liable for the (5%)
so-called impossible crime because,
with intent to kill, they tried to poison SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Jun and thus perpetrate murder, a crime
against persons. Jun was not poisoned The crime is consummated theft
only because the would-be killers were because the taking of the bracelets was
unaware that what they mixed with the complete after Julia succeeded in
food of Jun was powdered milk, not putting them in her purse. Julia
poison. In short, the act done with acquired complete control of the
criminal intent by Jerry and Buddy, bracelets after putting them in her
would have constituted a crime against purse; hence, the taking with intent to
persons were it not for the inherent gain is complete and thus the crime is
inefficacy of the means employed. consummated.
Criminal liability is incurred by them ART.6- Stages of execution - Crime of

although no crime resulted, because theft; attempted; consummated (2000)
their act of trying to poison Jun is
criminal, Sunshine, a beauteous colegiala but a
shoplifter, went to the Ever Department
2. No, the answer would not be the Store and proceeded to the womens wear
same as above. Jerry and Buddy would section. The saleslady was of the
be liable instead for less serious impression that she brought to the fitting
physical injuries for causing the room three (3) pieces of swimsuits of
hospitalization and medical attendance different colors. When she came out of the
for 10 days to Jun. Their act of mixing fitting room, she returned only two (2)
with the food eaten by Jun the matter pieces to the clothes rack. The saleslady
which required such medical became suspicious and alerted the store
attendance, committed with criminal detective. Sunshine was stopped by the
intent, renders them liable for the detective before she could leave the store
resulting injury. and brought to the office of the store
manager. The detective and the manager
searched her and found her wearing the
STAGES OF EXECUTION third swimsuit under her blouse and pants.
37
Was the theft of the swimsuit

Page
consummated, frustrated or attempted? ART.6--Stages of execution Frustrated

Explain. (5%) murder (2009)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Delmo learned that his enemy, Oscar, was

confined at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of
The theft was consummated because the Philippine Medical Center. Intending to
the taking or asportation was complete. kill Oscar, Delmo disguised himself as a
The asportation is complete when the nurse, entered the ICU, and saw a man
offender acquired exclusive control of lying on the hospital bed with several life-
the personal property being taken; in saving tubes attached to the body. Delmo
this case, when Sunshine wore the disconnected the tubes and left. Later, the
swimsuit under her blouse and pants resident physician doing his rounds
and was on her way out of the store. entered the ICU and, seeing the
With evident intent to gain the taking disconnected tubes, replaced them. The
constitutes theft and being complete, it patient survived. It turned out that the
is consummated. It is not necessary that patient was Larry, as Oscar had been
the offender is in a position to dispose discharged from the hospital earlier.
of the property.
Delmo was charged with frustrated murder,
ART.6--Stages of execution qualified by evident premeditation and
Frustrated felony (2005) treachery as aggravating circumstances.
Discuss the propriety of the charge. (4%)
Taking into account the nature and
elements of the felonies of coup detat and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
rape, may one be criminally liable for
frustrated coup d'etat or frustrated rape? Delmo was correctly charged with the
Explain. (2%) crime of frustrated murder qualified by
treacherynot evident premeditation
SUGGESTED ANSWER: because the victim was different from
the one premeditated against. Delmo
No, a person may not be held liable for has performed all the acts of execution
frustrated coup d'etat or for frustrated that would produce the death of the
rape because in a frustrated felony, it is victim but for reasons independent of
required that all acts of execution that the will of the perpetrator, the death of
could produce the felony as a the victim was not accomplished.
consequence must have been Treachery qualifies the crime, because
performed by the offender but the felony the means, manner and method of
was not produced by reason of causes committing the intended killing were
independent of the will of the offender. consciously adopted to insure its
In the said felonies, however, one execution without risk that may arise
cannot perform all the acts of execution from the defense the victim may make.
without consummating the felony. The Evident premeditation is absorbed in
said felonies, therefore, do not admit of the treachery.
the frustrated stage.
38
Art 6: Consummated theft (1998)

Page
In the jewelry section of a big department

store, Julia snatched a couple of bracelets The theft was consummated because
and put these in her purse. At the store's the taking or asportation was complete.
exit, however, she was arrested by the The asportation is complete when the
guard after being radioed by the store offender acquired exclusive control of
personnel who caught the act in the store's the personal property being taken; in
moving camera. Is the crime this case, when Sunshine wore the
consummated, frustrated, or attempted? swimsuit under her blouse and pants
(5%) and was on her way out of the store.
With evident intent to gain the taking
SUGGESTED ANSWER: constitutes theft and being complete, it
is consummated. It is not necessary that
The crime is consummated theft the offender is in a position to dispose
because the taking of the bracelets was of the property.
complete after Julia succeeded in
putting them in her purse. Julia Art. 6 (consummated carnapping) Art.
acquired complete control of the 249; Art. 263; Homicide, Serious
bracelets after putting them in her Physical Injuries and Damage to
purse; hence, the taking with intent to property resulting from reckless
gain is complete and thus the crime is imprudence (1993)
consummated.
Dodoy, possessing only a student driver's
Art 6: Theft; attempted; consummated permit, found a parked car with the key left
(2000) in the ignition, he proceeded to drive it
away, intending to sell it. Just then Ting, the
Sunshine, a beauteous colegiala but a owner of the car, arrived. Failing to make
shoplifter, went to the Ever Department Dodoy stop. Ting boarded a taxi and
Store and proceeded to the womens wear pursued Dodoy, who in his haste to
section. The saleslady was of the escape, and because of his inexperience,
impression that she brought to the fitting violently collided with a jeepney full of
room three (3) pieces of swimsuits of passengers. The jeepney overturned and
different colors. When she came out of the was wrecked. One passenger was killed:
fitting room, she returned only two (2) the leg of the other passenger was crushed
pieces to the clothes rack. The saleslady and had to be amputated. The car of Ting
became suspicious and alerted the store was damaged to the tune of P20.000.00.
detective. Sunshine was stopped by the
detective before she could leave the store What offense or offenses may Dodoy be
and brought to the office of the store charged with? Discuss.
manager. The detective and the manager
searched her and found her wearing the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
third swimsuit under her blouse and pants.
Was the theft of the swimsuit Dodong may be charged with
consummated, frustrated or attempted? consummated carnnaping. Homicide,
Explain. (5%) Serious Physical Injuries and Damage
39
to property resulting from reckless

Page
SUGGESTED ANSWER: imprudence.

patient survived. It turned out that the

Please take note that with respect to patient was Larry, as Oscar had been
Espiritu Case, taking hold of the object is discharged from the hospital earlier.
enough to consummate the crime: although
in the Dino case, it is still frustrated Delmo was charged with frustrated murder,
because there is inability to dispose freely qualified by evident premeditation and
the object. treachery as aggravating circumstances.
Discuss the propriety of the charge. (4%)
Art 6: Frustrated felony (2005)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Taking into account the nature and
elements of the felonies of coup detat and Delmo was correctly charged with the
rape, may one be criminally liable for crime of frustrated murder. Delmo has
frustrated coup d'etat or frustrated rape? performed all the acts of execution that
Explain. (2%) would produce the death of the victim
but for reasons independent of the will
SUGGESTED ANSWER: of the perpetrator, the death of the
victim was not accomplished.
No, a person may not be held liable for
frustrated coup d'etat or for frustrated LIGHT FELONIES
rape because in a frustrated felony, it is
required that all acts of execution that
could produce the felony as a Art 7 Light Felonies in relation to Art 16
consequence must have been (1988)
performed by the offender but the felony
was not produced by reason of causes When are light felonies punishable and
independent of the will of the offender. who are liable in light felonies?
In the said felonies, however, one
cannot perform all the acts of execution SUGGESTED ANSWER:
without consummating the felony. The Light felonies, according to Article 7 of
said felonies, therefore, do not admit of the Revised Penal Code are punishable
the frustrated stage. only when they have been
consummated, with the exception of
Art 6: Frustrated murder (2009) those committed against persons or
property.
Delmo learned that his enemy, Oscar, was
confined at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Article. 16 of the Revised Penal Code
the Philippine Medical Center. Intending to provides that the following are
kill Oscar, Delmo disguised himself as a criminally liable for light felonies:
nurse, entered the ICU, and saw a man 1. Principals
lying on the hospital bed with several life- 2. Accomplices.
saving tubes attached to the body. Delmo
disconnected the tubes and left. Later, the
resident physician doing his rounds
40
entered the ICU and, seeing the

Page
disconnected tubes, replaced them. The

CONSPIRACY
ART. 8-[b] Wheel vs Circle and Chain Art. 8: Conspiracy as a Felony vs as a
(2016) Manner (2012)
Differentiate wheel conspiracy and chain Distinguish by way of illustration

conspiracy. (2.5%) conspiracy as a felony from conspiracy as
a manner of incurring liability in relation to
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the crimes of rebellion and murder.
There are two structures of Conspiracy to commit rebellion if A

multiple conspiracies, namely: wheel or and B conspired to overthrow the
circle conspiracy and chain conspiracy. government, conspiracy is punishable.
Conspiracy to commit rebellion is a
A wheel conspiracy occurs felony.
when there is a single person or group
(the hub) dealing individually with two Rebellion if they committed rebellion,
or more other persons or groups they are equally liable for the crime of
(spokes). The spoke typically interacts rebellion. However, they will not be
with the hub rather than with another additionally charged with conspiracy to
spoke. In the event that the spoke commit rebellion. Since they committed
shares a common purpose to succeed, what they conspired, conspiracy will not
there is a single conspiracy. However, in be considered as an independent felony
the instances when each spoke is but as a manner of incurring criminal
unconcerned with the success of the responsibility.
other spokes, there are multiple
conspiracies. Art. 8: Conspiracy (1991)
A chain conspiracy, on the During a fiesta, Simeon Marco, brandishing

other hand, exists when there is a knife, asked Constancio whether he was
successive communication and the one who slapped his (Simeon's) son the
cooperation in much the same way as year previous. Vicente (father of
with legitimate business operations Constancio) shouted at Constancio and his
between manufacturer and wholesaler, other son, Bien- venido, telling them to run
then wholesaler and retailer, and then away. When Bienvenido passed by Rafael
retailer and consumer (Estrada v. Marco (brother of Simeon), Rafael stabbed
Sandiganbayan, G.R. 138965, 26 him. Bienvenido parried the blow but fell
February 2002). down, his feet entangled with some vines.
While Bienvenido was lying on the ground,
Art. 8: Define conspiracy (2012) Rafael continued to stab him, inflicting
slight injuries on the shoulder of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Bienvenido, after which Rafael stood up. At
that moment, Dulcisimo Beltran (no relation
Conspiracy exists when two or more to the Marco brothers), came out of
nowhere and, together with Simeon,
41
persons come to an agreement

concerning the commission of a felony stabbed Bienvenido. Both of them inflicted
Page
and decide to commit it.

fatal wounds resulting in the death of the the victim and hence, liable collectively.
victim. The act of one is the act of all.
Discuss the criminal liability of Dulcisimo, The existence of a conspiracy among

Simeon and Rafael. the offenders can be clearly deduced or
inferred from the manner they
SUGGESTED ANSWER: committed the killing, demonstrating a
common criminal purpose and intent.
Simeon and Dulcisimo will be liable for There being a conspiracy, the individual
the death of Bienvenido as the fatal acts of each participant is not
injuries sustained by the victim were considered because their liability is
inflicted by the two. collective.
Rafael is not liable for slight physical Art. 8: Conspiracy to commit robbery
injuries as conspiracy was not present, (1996)
and there was no apparent intent to kill
when he inflicted the slight physical Jose, Domingo. Manolo, and Fernando,
injuries on the aim of the victim. armed with bolos, at about one o'clock in
the morning, robbed a house at a desolate
place where Danilo, his wife, and three
Art. 8: Conspiracy (1993) daughters were living. While the four were
in the process of ransacking Danilos
As a result of a misunderstanding during a house, Fernando, noticing that one of
meeting, Joe was mauled by Nestor, Jolan, Danilos daughters was trying to get away,
Reden and Arthur. He ran towards his ran after her and finally caught up with her
house but the four chased and caught him. in a thicket somewhat distant from the
Thereafter, they tied Joes hands at his house. Fernando, before bringing back the
back and attacked him. Nestor used a daughter to the house, raped her first.
knife; Jolan, a shovel; Arthur, his fists; and Thereafter, the four carted away the
Reden, a piece of wood. After killing Joe, belongings of Danilo and his family.
Reden ordered the digging of a grave to
bury Joes lifeless body. Thereafter, the What crime did Jose, Domingo. Manolo
four (4) left together. Convicted for the and Fernando commit? Explain.
killing of Joe,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Arthur now claims that his conviction is
erroneous as it was not he who inflicted the Jose, Domingo, and Manolo committed
fatal blow. Robbery, while Fernando committed
complex crime of Robbery with Rape.
Would you sustain his claim? Why? Conspiracy can be inferred from the
manner the offenders committed the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: robbery but the rape was committed by
Fernando at a place distant from the
No. Arthurs claim is without merit. The house where the robbery was
42
offenders acted in conspiracy in killing committed, not in the presence of the

Page
other conspirators. Hence, Fernando

alone should answer for the rape, foot to the house of F. B positioned himself
rendering him liable for the special at a distance as the group's lookout. C and
complex crime. [People vs. Cardurta et D stood guard outside the house. Before A
at, G.R. 108490. 22 June 1995) could enter the house, D left the scene
without the knowledge of the others. A
Art. 8: Conspiracy (1994) stealthily entered the house and stabbed F.
F ran to the street but was blocked by C,
At about 9:30 in the evening, while Dino forcing him to flee towards another
and Raffy were walking along Padre Faura direction. Immediately after A had stabbed
Street, Manila. Johnny hit them with a rock F. A also stabbed G who was visiting F.
injuring Dino at the back. Raffy approached Thereafter, A exited from the house and,
Dino but suddenly, Bobby, Steve, Danny together with B and C, returned to the
and Nonoy surrounded the duo. Then waiting taxicab and motored away.
Bobby stabbed Dino. Steve, Danny. Nonoy
and Johnny kept on hitting Dino and Raffy G died, F survived.
with rocks. As a result, Dino died.
Who are liable for the death of G and the
Bobby, Steve, Danny, Nonoy and Johnny physical injuries of F?
were charged with homicide.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Is there conspiracy in this case?
A alone should be held liable for the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: death of G. The object of the conspiracy
of A
Yes, there is conspiracy among the B, C, and D was to kill F only.
offenders, as manifested by their
concerted actions against the victims, Since B, C, and D did not know of the
demonstrating a common felonious stabbing of G by A, they cannot be held
purpose of assaulting the victims. The criminally therefor E. the driver, cannot
existence of the conspiracy can be be also held liable for the death of G
inferred or deduced from the manner since the former was completely
the offenders acted in commonly unaware of said killing.
attacking Dino and Raffy with rocks,
thereby demonstrating a unity of For the physical injuries of A, B and C,
criminal design to inflict harm on their should be held liable therefore. Even if it
victims. was only A who actually stabbed and
caused physical injuries to G, B and C
Art. 8: Criminal law Conspiracy (1997) are nonetheless liable for conspiring
with A and for contributing positive acts
A had a grudge against F. Deciding to kill which led to the realization of a common
F, A and his friends, B, C, and D, armed criminal intent. B positioned himself as
themselves with knives and proceeded to a lookout, while C blocked F's escape.
the house of F, taking a taxicab for the D, however, although part of the
purpose. About 20 meters from their conspiracy, cannot be held liable
43
destination, the group alighted and after because he left the scene before A could
Page
instructing B, the driver, to wait, traveled on enter the house where the stabbing
occurred. Although he was earlier part concert in the commission of the crime,
of the conspiracy, he did not personally meaning that their acts are coordinated
participate in the execution of the crime or synchronized in a way indicative that
by acts which directly tended toward the they are pursuing a common criminal
same end (People vs. Tamaro. et al, 44 objective, they shall be deemed to be
Phil. 38). acting in conspiracy and their criminal
liability shall be collective, not
In the same breath, E, the driver, cannot individual.
be also held liable for the infliction of
physical injuries upon F because there The legal effects of an implied
is no showing that he had knowledge of conspiracy are:
the plan to kill F.
1. Not all those who are present at
Art. 8: Implied conspiracy (1998) the scene of the crime will be
considered conspirators;
What is the doctrine of implied conspiracy? 2. Only those who participated by
[3%] criminal acts in the commission of the
crime will be considered as
SUGGESTED ANSWER: coconspirators; and
3. Mere acquiescence to or approval
The doctrine of conspiracy holds two or of the commission of the crime, without
more persons participating in the any act of criminal participation, shall
commission of a crime collectively not render one criminally liable as
responsible and liable as co- coconspirator.
conspirators although absent any
agreement to that effect, when they act Art. 8: Conspiracy (1988)
in concert, demonstrating unity of
criminal intent and a common purpose In the course of funeral procession, a
or objective. The existence of a young mourner who was marching in front
conspiracy shall be inferred or deduced of the funeral hearse, momentarily stooped
from their criminal participation in down to tie her shoelaces which had
pursuing the crime and thus the act of become untied. The driver of the hearse,
one shall be deemed the act of all. who was driving at 5 miles an hour, was
then looking at the stores by the roadside
Art. 8: Implied conspiracy (2003) and did not see her. He continued to drive
on and ran over the girl. When the people
State the concept of implied conspiracy around shouted and gestured, he backed
and give its legal effects. up and ran over the girl a second time,
killing her.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If you were the-parent of the girl-victim,
(a) An implied conspiracy is one what crime would you charge, if you think a
which is only inferred or deduced from crime had been committed, and against
the manner the participants in the whom? Explain your answer briefly.
44
commission of crime carried out its

Page
execution. Where the offenders acted in

At a pre-wedding celebration where plenty implementation of the Land Reform Law in

of people were milling and walking about or Cotabato Province. Jose and Pedro
standing close together, a mad killer shot promised to finance the group and to buy
up the wedding party. The three appellants firearms for the purpose. The former
were convicted by the owner court as co- soldiers agreed. After Jose and Pedro left,
conspirators of the killer because they were A, the leader of the former soldiers, said
allegedly with him before, during, and after that in the meanwhile he needed money to
the shooting. It was proven conclusively support his family. D suggested that they
that the appellant were friends of the killer; rob a bank and agreed to carry out the plan
that they went together with the killer to the on the 15 th day of the month. Unknown to
celebration; and that they left at the same all of them, as they were conferring with
time with the killer, after the shooting. Jose and Pedro and as they were planning
However, the appellants had no guns and to rob the bank, Rosauro, a house boy, was
passively witnessed the without intervening within hearing distance. On the pretext of
in the killing in any way nor shielding killer. buying cigarettes, Ro6auro instead went
directly to the Police and told them what
Is there conspiracy among them? Why? transpired. All the former soldiers, as well
as Jose and Pedro, were arrested.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. What crime, if any, did the former
Only the driver could be charged of soldiers commit?
homicide thru reckless imprudence or
homicide thru simple negligence which B. What about Jose and Pedro?
preclude conspiracy against those who
shouted and gestured. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
There is no conspiracy among them A. The former soldiers committed

because as the problem has stated, they the crime of conspiracy to commit
passively witnessed the shooting. No sedition. What Jose and Pedro
overt act was committed therefore the proposed to the soldiers that they
element that the conspiracy must be recruit their comrades and organize a
proved as the essence of the crime itself group of 100 for the purpose of
is not present. challenging the government by force of
arms in order to prevent the
Art. 8: Conspiracy to commit sedition implementation of the Land Reform Law
(1987) in Cotabato Province is to commit
sedition. Proposal to commit sedition is
A, B, C, D, and E were former soldiers who not punished. But since the soldiers
deserted their command in Mindanao. Jose agreed, a conspiracy to commit sedition
and Pedro, two big landowners, called A. B, resulted which is now punishable.
C, D, and E to a conference. Jose and Conspiracy arises on the very moment
Pedro proposed to these former soldiers the plotters agree (People vs. Peralta 25
that they recruit their comrades and SCRA 759; People vs. Tiongson 12
organize a group of 100 for the purpose of SCRA 402).
45
challenging the government by force of

Page
arms in order to prevent the enforcement or

B. Jose and Pedro will also be liable What AA did was to stop a lawful
for conspiracy to commit sedition since defense, not greater evil, to allow BB
they are members of the conspiracy and CC achieve their criminal objective
where the act of one is the act of all. If of stabbing FT.
the soldiers did not agree to their
proposal, they would not incur any Art. 8: Conspiracy to commit robbery
criminal liability because there is no (2005)
pro-posal to commit sedition.
Jose employed Mario as gardener and
Art. 8: Act of one is the act of all (2004) Henry as cook. They learned that Jose won
P5, 000,000.00 in the-lotto, and decided to
A. BB and CC, both armed with knives, rob him. Mario positioned himself about 30
attacked FT. The victims son, ST, upon meters away from Jose's house and acted
seeing the attack, drew his gun but was as lookout. For his part. Henry
prevented from shooting the attackers by surreptitiously gained entry into the house
AA, who grappled with him for possession and killed Jose who was then having his
of the gun. FT died from knife wounds. AA, dinner. Henry found the P5,000,000.00 and
BB and CC were charged with murder. took it. Henry then took a can of gasoline
from the garage and burned the house to
In his defense, AA invoked the justifying conceal the acts.
circumstance of avoidance of greater evil Mario and Henry fled, but were arrested
or injury, contending that by preventing ST around 200 meters away from the house by
from shooting BB and CC, he merely alert barangay tanods. The tanods
avoided a greater evil. recovered the P500,000.00.
Will AAs defense prosper? Reason briefly. Mario and Henry were charged with and
(5%) convicted of robbery with homicide, with
the aggravating circumstances of arson,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: dwelling, and nighttime.
A. No, AAs defense will not prosper Mario moved to reconsider the decision
because obviously there was a maintaining that he was not at the scene of
conspiracy among BB, CC and AA, such the crime and was not aware that Henry
that the principle that when there is a killed the victim; hence, he was guilty only
conspiracy, the act of one is the act of of robber, as an accomplice. Mario also
all, shall govern. claimed that he conspired with Hemy to
commit robbery but not to kill Jose. Henry,
The act of ST, the victims son, appears likewise, moved to reconsider the decision,
to be a legitimate defense of relatives; asserting that he is liable only for attempted
hence, justified as a defense of his robbery with homicide with no aggravating
father against the unlawful aggression circumstance; dwelling is not aggravating
by BB and CC. STs act to defend his in attempted robbery with homicide; and
fathers life, cannot be regarded as an nighttime is not aggravating because the
evil inasmuch as it is, in the eyes of the house of Jose was lighted at the time he
46
law, a lawful act. was killed.

Page
Resolve with reasons the respective giving rise to the special complex crime
motions of Mario and Henry. (7%) of robbery with homicide. Since Henry
alone committed the killing of Jose a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: fact unknown to Mario, Henry alone
should be convicted for said crime.
The motion of Mario contending that he Dwelling, although not aggravating in
should be liable only as an accomplice robbery with force upon things where
is without merit. There was conspiracy the circumstance is inherent, is
to commit the robbery between him and aggravating in robbery with violence
Henry. Thus, the act of one is the act of against or with intimidation of persons.
all. Since the conspiracy was only to
commit robbery, Mario should be liable The burning of the house or arson
only for robbery as a co-principal, not accompanying the robbery is only a
for the composite crime of robbery with component of the robbery under Article
homicide. 294 (1), Revised Penal Code. Such
burning does not constitute a separate
Mario, being 30 meters away from the crime from robbery with homicide.
victim's house, could not have known
what Henry was doing inside the Nighttime is aggravating, applying the
victims (Jose's) house, so much so that subjective test, unless the house of
he was not in a position to stop the Jose was indeed well-lighted during the
same. Mario, therefore, cannot properly commission of the crime.
be made answerable for what Henry did
inside Jose's house which was not Art. 8: Conspiracy; Special complex
agreed upon. Applying the subjective crime of robbery with serious physical
test to his participation as a co- injuries (1992)
conspirator to the robbery, Marios
criminal liability should be aggravated Efren, Greggy and Hilario, wearing fatigues
by nighttime but not by dwelling or and carrying unlicensed firearms, barged
arson. into the residence of Amulfo Dilat at Scout
Lazcano St. (Before making their entrance,
Henry's motion to reconsider the they gave instructions to their companion
decision is, likewise, without merit and Sakay to stand watch outside). Once
should be denied. He is criminally liable inside, they announced that they were
for robbery with homicide. His members of the Philippine National Police
contention that he is only liable for (PNP) on an official mission. Inside the
attempted robbery with homicide is not master bedroom, they demanded from
correct because the unlawful taking of Luningning, the wife of Amulfo, cash and
the P500,000.00 is deemed complete jewelries. After receiving the jewelries but
from the moment he gained control of before the money could be handed to them,
the money even if he had no opportunity they heard their companion Sakay
to dispose of the same. shouting: Pulis! Pulis!" Panic-stricken,
Efren shot Amulfo who was seriously
The killing of Jose, having been injured. Greggy and Hilarto picked up the
47
committed on the occasion of a robbery, jewelry box whose contents spilled all over
Page
becomes a component of the robbery, the floor as they rushed out. Before they
could make good their escape, however, What crime or crimes did XA, YB and ZC
the police blocked their way, one of them commit, and what is the criminal liability of
clutching Sakay by the collar. They were each? Explain briefly. (5%)
forthwith brought to the Police
Headquarters nearby. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Discuss the individual and collective B. The crime committed by XA, YB and
criminal liabilities of Efren, Greggy, ZC is the composite crime of Robbery
Hilario and Sakay. with Rape, a single, indivisible offense
under Art. 294(1) of the Revised Penal
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Code.
There appears to be conspiracy Although the conspiracy among the

amongst the four offenders; in which offenders was only to commit robbery
case the act of one becomes the act of and only XA raped CD, the other
all. Ergo, they are all liable for the robbers, YB and ZC, were present and
consequent crime, which is robbery aware of the rape being committed by
under Art. 299, special complex crime of their co-conspirator. Having done
robbery with serious physical injuries, nothing to stop XA from committing the
committed in an inhabited house, by rape, YB and ZC thereby concurred in
pretending to be persons in authority. the commission of the rape by their
There is no band as only three are coconspirator XA.
armed.
The criminal liability of all, XA, YZ and
Sakay, who seems to have participated ZC, shall be the same, as principals in
only as lookout, still will be liable as the special complex crime of robbery
principal because of the conspiracy. with rape which is a single, indivisible
Even if there is none, he is criminally offense where the rape accompanying
liable as a principal by indispensable the robbery is just a component.
cooperation.
Art. 8 Criminal law Conspiracy In
Art. 8: Conspiracy - Special complex relation to Special complex crime of
crime of robbery with rape (Art 294) robbery with homicide (2003)
(2004)
A and B, both store janitors, planned to kill
B. Together XA, YB and ZC planned to rob their employer C at midnight and take the
Miss OD. They entered her house by money kept in the cash register. A and B
breaking one of the windows in her house. together drew the sketch of the store,
After taking her personal properties and as where they knew C would be sleeping, and
they were about to leave, XA decided on planned the sequence of their attack.
impulse to rape OD. As XA was molesting Shortly before midnight, A and B were
her, YB and ZC stood outside the door of ready to carry out the plan. When A was
her bedroom and did nothing to prevent XA about to lift C's mosquito net to thrust his
from raping OD. dagger, a police car with sirens blaring
48
passed by. Scared, B ran out of the store

Page
and fled, while A went on to stab C to death,

put the money in the bag, and ran outside Jervis and Marlon asked their friend,
to look for B. The latter was nowhere in Jonathan, to help them rob a bank. Jervis
sight. Unknown to him, B had already left and Marlon went inside the bank, but were
the place. What was the participation and unable to get any money from the vault
corresponding criminal liability of each, if because the same was protected by a
any? Reasons. time-delay mechanism. They contented
themselves with the customers' cellphones
SUGGESTED ANSWER: and a total of P5,000 in cash. After they
dashed out of the bank and rushed into the
There was an expressed conspiracy car, Jonathan pulled the car out of the curb,
between A and B to kill C and take the hitting a pedestrian which resulted in the
latters money. The planned killing and latter's death.
taking of the money appears to be
intimately related as component crimes,
hence a special complex crime of What crime or crimes did Jervis, Marlon
robbery with homicide. The conspiracy and Jonathan commit? Explain your
being expressed, not just implied, A and answer.
B are bound as co-conspirators after
they have planned and agreed on the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
sequence of their attack even before
they committed the crime. Therefore, Jervis and Marlon committed the crime
the principle in law that when there is a of robbery, while Jonathan committed
conspiracy, the act of one is the act of the special complex crime of robbery
all, already governs them, in fact, A and with homicide.
B were already in the store to carry out
their criminal plan. Jervis and Marlon are criminally liable
for the robbery only, because that was
That B ran out of the store and fled upon the crime conspired upon and actually
hearing the sirens of the police car, is committed by them, assuming that the
not spontaneous desistance but flight taking of the cellphones and the cash
to evade apprehension. It would be from the bank's customers was effected
different if B then tried to stop A from with intimidation. They will not incur
continuing with the commission of the liability for the death of the pedestrian
crime; he did not. So the act of A in because they have nothing to do with it.
pursuing the commission of the crime Only Jonathan will incur liability for the
which both he and B designed, planned, death of the pedestrian, aside from the
and commenced to commit, would also robbery, because he alone brought
be the act of B because of their about such death. Although the death
expressed conspiracy. Both are liable caused was not intentional but
for the composite crime of robbery with accidental, it shall be a component of
homicide. the special complex crime of robbery
with homicide because it was
committed in the course of the
Art. 8 Conspiracy and proposal in commission of the robbery.
relation to Special complex crime of
49
robbery with homicide (2007)

Page
Art. 8: Conspiracy and proposal In should be given retroactive effect

relation to PENALTIES (2006) because it is favorable to the culprits
who are not habitual delinquents and
Dang was a beauty queen in a university. there being no provision of law to the
Job, a rich classmate, was so enamored contrary. Hence, reclusion perpetua for
with her that he persistently wooed and each count of rape with homicide. The
pursued her. Dang, being in love with accessory penalty under Art. 40 of the
another man, rejected him. This angered Revised Penal Code will not follow
Job. Sometime in September 2003, while because RA 9346, Sec. 2 does not so
Dang and her sister Lyn were on their way provide: it is the accessory penalty for
home, Job and his minor friend Nonoy reclusion perpetua that shall now
grabbed them and pushed them inside a adhere to the principal penalty.
white van. They brought them in an
abandoned warehouse where they forced Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal (2008)
them to dance naked. Thereafter, they
brought them to a hill in a nearby barangay Ricky was reviewing for the bar exam when
where they took turns raping them. After the commander of a vigilante group came
satisfying their lust, Job ordered Nonoy to to him and showed him a list of five
push Dang down a ravine, resulting in her policemen to be liquidated by them for graft
death. Lyn ran away but Job and Nonoy and corruption. He was further asked if any
chased her and pushed her inside the van. of them is innocent. After going over the list,
Then the duo drove away. Lyn was never Ricky pointed to two of the policemen as
seen again. honest. Later, the vigilante group liquidated
the three other policemen in the list. The
What crime or crimes were committed by commander of the vigilante group reported
Job and Nonoy? 2.5% the liquidation to Ricky. Is Ricky criminally
liable? Explain. (7%)
What penalties should be imposed on
them? 2.5% SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, Ricky is not criminally liable

because he has not done any overt act
Because of obvious conspiracy, each of that the law punishes as a crime. He did
the culprits should be punished not only not conspire with the vigilante group.
for the rape he committed but also for Although his act of pointing out two
the rape committed by the other; hence, policemen as honest men may imply his
for as many counts of rape committed acquiescence to the vigilante's
by him plus those committed by the conclusion that the others were corrupt
other culprit against each of the victims. and deserved to be killed, mere
acquiescence to a crime, absent any
Although the penalty for the crime of criminal participation, does not make
rape with homicide was death at the one a coconspirator.
time the accused committed them, and
the law (Rep. Act No. 9346) prohibiting Art. 8: Conspiracy and proposal (2008)
50
the imposition of the death penalty took

Page
effect only this year (2006), said new law

Eman, a vagrant, found a bag containing the happening from a window and did
identification cards and a diamond ring nothing to stop the rape.
along Roxas Blvd.
Is B as criminally liable as A for robbery
Knowing that it was not his, he went to the with rape? Explain. (4%) (1999 Bar
nearest police station to seek help in Question)
finding the owner of the bag. At the precinct
P01 Melvin attended to him. In the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
investigation Eman proposed to P01
Melvin, "in case you don't find the owner Yes, B is as criminally liable as A for the
let's just pawn the ring and split the composite crime of robbery with rape
proceeds fifty-fifty (50/50)." P01 Melvin under Art. 294 (1). Although the
then went straight to the pawnshop and conspiracy of A and B was only to rob,
pawned the ring for P50,000. Eman never B was present when the rape was being
saw P01 Melvin again. committed which gave rise to a
composite crime, a single indivisible
a) What is the criminal liability of Eman, if offense of robbery with rape. B would
any? Explain. (3%) not have been liable had he endeavored
to prevent the commission of the rape.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: But since he did not when he could have
done so, he in effect acquiesced with
a) Eman has no criminal liability, the rape as a component of the robbery
unless he received part of the proceeds and so he is also liable for robbery with
of the pawned ring. The facts do not rape.
state that Eman received any part of the
P50,000.00 proceeds of the ring ART.8-Define conspiracy. (2012)
pledged. The facts state that after
turning over the bag to P01 Melvin, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Eman never saw P01 Melvin again. The
proposal Eman made to P01 Melvin is Conspiracy exists when two or more
not a crime as to bring about criminal persons come to an agreement
liability. concerning the commission of a felony
and decide to commit it.
Art. 8 Conspiracy In relation to Art. 294
robbery with rape (1999) ART.8--Distinguish by way of illustration
conspiracy as a felony from conspiracy as
Two young men, A and B, conspired to rob a manner of incurring liability in relation to
a residential house of things of value. They the crimes of rebellion and murder.
succeeded in the commission of their
original plan to simply rob. A, however, was Conspiracy to commit rebellion if A
sexually aroused when he saw the lady and B conspired to overthrow the
owner of the house and so, raped her. government, conspiracy is punishable.
Conspiracy to commit rebellion is a
The lady victim testified that B did not in any felony. Rebellion if they committed
51
way participate in the rape but B watched rebellion, they are equally liable for the
Page
crime of rebellion. However, they will

not be additionally charged with

conspiracy to commit rebellion. Since SUGGESTED ANSWER:
they committed what they conspired,
conspiracy will not be considered as an Simeon and Dulcisimo will be liable for
independent felony but as a manner of the death of Bienvenido as the fatal
incurring criminal responsibility. injuries sustained by the victim were
inflicted by the two.
Conspiracy to commit homicide, not
punishable if A and B conspire to Rafael is not liable for slight physical
kill X, conspiracy is not punishable. injuries as conspiracy was not present,
The law provides no penalty for and there was no apparent intent to kill
conspiracy to be commit homicide. when he inflicted the slight physical
Homicide if pursuant to conspiracy to injuries on the aim of the victim.
commit homicide, A embraced X
and then B stabbed and killed X, the ART.8-- Conspiracy; murder (1993)
conspirators are equally liable for
homicide. Conspirators are equally As a result of a misunderstanding during a
liable for homicide. Conspiracy in this meeting, Joe was mauled by Nestor, Jolan,
case will be considered as a manner of Reden and Arthur. He ran towards his
incurring liability. house but the four chased and caught him.
Thereafter, they tied Joes hands at his
ART.8-- Conspiracy (1991) back and attacked him. Nestor used a
knife; Jolan, a shovel; Arthur, his fists; and
During a fiesta, Simeon Marco, brandishing Reden, a piece of wood. After killing Joe,
a knife, asked Constancio whether he was Reden ordered the digging of a grave to
the one who slapped his (Simeon's) son the bury Joes lifeless body. Thereafter, the
year previous. Vicente (father of four (4) left together. Convicted for the
Constancio) shouted at Constancio and his killing of Joe,
other son, Bien- venido, telling them to run
away. When Bienvenido passed by Rafael Arthur now claims that his conviction is
Marco (brother of Simeon), Rafael stabbed erroneous as it was not he who inflicted the
him. Bienvenido parried the blow but fell fatal blow.
down, his feet entangled with some vines.
While Bienvenido was lying on the ground, Would you sustain his claim? Why?
Rafael continued to stab him, inflicting
slight injuries on the shoulder of What was the crime committed by the four
Bienvenido, after which Rafael stood up. At assailants? Discuss with reasons.
that moment, Dulcisimo Beltran (no relation
to the Marco brothers), came out of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
nowhere and, together with Simeon,
stabbed Bienvenido. Both of them inflicted No. Arthurs claim is without merit. The
fatal wounds resulting in the death of the offenders acted in conspiracy in killing
victim. the victim and hence, liable collectively.
The act of one is the act of all.
52
Discuss the criminal liability of Dulcisimo,

Page
Simeon and Rafael.

The existence of a conspiracy among complex crime of Robbery with Rape.

the offenders can be clearly deduced or Conspiracy can be inferred from the
inferred from the manner they manner the offenders committed the
committed the killing, demonstrating a robbery but the rape was committed by
common criminal purpose and intent. Fernando at a place distant from the
There being a conspiracy, the individual house where the robbery was
acts of each participant is not committed, not in the presence of the
considered because their liability is other conspirators. Hence, Fernando
collective. alone should answer for the rape,
rendering him liable for the special
The crime committed is murder, complex crime. [People vs. Cardurta et
qualified by treachery because the at, G.R. 108490. 22 June 1995)
offenders, taking advantage of their
superiority in number, rendered the ART.8- Felonies Proposal to commit
victim defenseless and without any kidnapping (1996)
chance to retaliate, by tying his hands at
his back before attacking him. Edgardo induced his friend Vicente, in
Treachery exists at least in the second consideration of money, to kidnap a girl he
and final stage of the attack, after the is courting so that he may succeed in
offenders caught up with the victim. raping her and eventually making her
accede to marry him. Vicente asked for
ART.8-Conspiracy to commit robbery more money which Edgardo failed to put
(1996) up. Angered because Edgardo did not put
up the money he required, he reported.
Jose, Domingo. Manolo, and Fernando, Edgardo to the police.
armed with bolos, at about one o'clock in
the morning, robbed a house at a desolate May Edgardo be charged with attempted
place where Danilo, his wife, and three kidnapping? Explain.
daughters were living. While the four were
in the process of ransacking Danilos SUGGESTED ANSWER:
house, Fernando, noticing that one of
Danilos daughters was trying to get away, No, Edgardo may not be charged with
ran after her and finally caught up with her attempted kidnapping inasmuch as no
in a thicket somewhat distant from the overtact to kidnap or restrain the liberty
house. Fernando, before bringing back the of the girl had been commenced. At
daughter to the house, raped her first. most, what Edgardo has done in the
Thereafter, the four carted away the premises was a proposal to Vicente to
belongings of Danilo and his family. kidnap the girl, which is only a
preparatory act and not an overt act. The
What crime did Jose, Domingo. Manolo attempt to commit a felony commences
and Fernando commit? Explain. with the commission of overt act, not
preparatory act. Proposal to commit
SUGGESTED ANSWER: kidnapping is not a crime.
53
Jose, Domingo, and Manolo committed ART.8--Conspiracy (1994)

Page
Robbery, while Fernando committed

At about 9:30 in the evening, while Dino forcing him to flee towards another
and Raffy were walking along Padre Faura direction. Immediately after A had stabbed
Street, Manila. Johnny hit them with a rock F. A also stabbed G who was visiting F.
injuring Dino at the back. Raffy approached Thereafter, A exited from the house and,
Dino but suddenly, Bobby, Steve, Danny together with B and C, returned to the
and Nonoy surrounded the duo. Then waiting taxicab and motored away.
Bobby stabbed Dino. Steve, Danny. Nonoy
and Johnny kept on hitting Dino and Raffy G died, F survived.
with rocks. As a result, Dino died.
Who are liable for the death of G and the
Bobby, Steve, Danny, Nonoy and Johnny physical injuries of F?
were charged with homicide.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Is there conspiracy in this case?
A alone should be held liable for the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: death of G. The object of the conspiracy
of A B, C, and D was to kill F only
Yes, there is conspiracy among the
offenders, as manifested by their Since B, C, and D did not know of the
concerted actions against the victims, stabbing of G by A, they cannot be held
demonstrating a common felonious criminally therefor E. the driver, cannot
purpose of assaulting the victims. The be also held liable for the death of G
existence of the conspiracy can be since the former was completely
inferred or deduced from themannerthe unaware of said killing.
offenders acted in commonly attacking
Dino and Raffy with rocks, thereby For the physical injuries of A, B and C,
demonstrating a unity of criminal should be held liable therefore. Even if it
design to inflict harm on their victims. was only A who actually stabbed and
caused physical injuries to G, B and C
ART.8-- Conspiracy Who are liable are nonetheless liable for conspiring
(1997) with A and for contributing positive acts
which led to the realization of a common
A had a grudge against F. Deciding to kill criminal intent. B positioned himself as
F, A and his friends, B, C, and D, armed a lookout, while C blocked F's escape.
themselves with knives and proceeded to D, however, although part of the
the house of F, taking a taxicab for the conspiracy, cannot be held liable
purpose. About 20 meters from their because he left the scene before A could
destination, the group alighted and after enter the house where the stabbing
instructing B, the driver, to wait, traveled on occurred. Although he was earlier part
foot to the house of F. B positioned himself of the conspiracy, he did not personally
at a distance as the group's lookout. C and participate in the execution of the crime
D stood guard outside the house. Before A by acts which directly tended toward the
could enter the house, D left the scene same end (People vs. Tamaro. et al, 44
without the knowledge of the others. A Phil. 38).
54
stealthily entered the house and stabbed F.

Page
F ran to the street but was blocked by C,

In the same breath, E, the driver, cannot acting in conspiracy and their criminal
be also held liable for the infliction of liability shall be collective, not
physical injuries upon F because there individual.
is no showing that he had knowledge of
the plan to kill F. The legal effects of an implied
conspiracy are:
ART.8- Conspiracy - Implied conspiracy Not all those who are present at the
(1998) scene of the crime will be considered
conspirators;
What is the doctrine of implied conspiracy? 1. Only those who participated by
[3%] (Distinguish between recidivism and criminal acts in the commission of the
quasi-recidivism. (2%) crime will be considered as
coconspirators; and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 2. Mere acquiescence to or approval
of the commission of the crime, without
The doctrine of conspiracy holds two or any act of criminal participation, shall
more persons participating in the not render one criminally liable as
commission of a crime collectively coconspirator.
responsible and liable as co-
conspirators although absent any Art. 8: Proposal (1996)
agreement to that effect, when they act
in concert, demonstrating unity of Edgardo induced his friend Vicente, in
criminal intent and a common purpose consideration of money, to kidnap a girl he
or objective. The existence of a is courting so that he may succeed in
conspiracy shall be inferred or deduced raping her and eventually making her
from their criminal participation in accede to marry him. Vicente asked for
pursuing the crime and thus the act of more money which Edgardo failed to put
one shall be deemed the act of all. up. Angered because Edgardo did not put
up the money he required, he reported.
ART.8- Implied conspiracy (2003) Edgardo to the police.
State the concept of implied conspiracy May Edgardo be charged with attempted
and give its legal effects. kidnapping? Explain.
(a) An implied conspiracy is one No, Edgardo may not be charged with
which is only inferred or deduced from attempted kidnapping inasmuch as no
the manner the participants in the overt act to kidnap or restrain the liberty
commission of crime carried out its of the girl had been commenced. At
execution. Where the offenders acted in most, what Edgardo has done in the
concert in the commission of the crime, premises was a proposal to Vicente to
meaning that their acts are coordinated kidnap the girl, which is only a
or synchronized in a way indicative that preparatory act and not an overt act. The
55
they are pursuing a common criminal attempt to commit a felony commences

Page
objective, they shall be deemed to be with the commission of overt act, not
preparatory act. Proposal to commit Penal Code, a person who defends a

kidnapping is not a crime. person who is not his relative may
invoke the defense of a stranger
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES provided that all its elements exist, to
wit: (a) unlawful aggression, (b)
Art.11 Defense Of Relative And Stranger reasonable necessity of the means
(2016) employed to prevent or repel the attack;
and (c) the person defending be not
Pedro is married to Tessie. Juan is the first induced by revenge, resentment, or
cousin of Tessie. While in the market, other evil motive.
Pedro saw a man stabbing Juan. Seeing
the attack on Juan, Pedro picked up a Art. 11: Self-Defense (1987)
spade nearby and hit the attacker on his
head which caused the latter's death. Pedro confronted Jose one morning near
the letter's house and angrily inquired why
Can Pedro be absolved of the killing on the he let loose his carabaos which destroyed
ground that it is in defense of a relative? his plants. Pedro saw that Jose was aimed
Explain. (5%) with a dagger tucked on his waist and
thinking that Jose would react violently.
SUGGESTED ANSWER Pedro immediately drew his revolver.
Instinctively, Jose grabbed the gun from
No. the relatives of the accused Pedros hand and a struggle for possession
for purpose of defense of relative under of the gun ensued, as a result of which the
Article 11 (2) of the Revised Penal Code gun was thrown one meter away. Pedro
are his spouse, ascendants, jumped for the gun, and Jose unsheathed
descendants, or legitimate, natural or his dagger and stabbed Pedro at the base
adopted brothers or sisters, or of his of his neck, causing the latter to fall down.
relatives by affinity in the same degrees, Jose ran away as he was afraid Pedros
and those by consanguinity within the relatives might kill him. He was
fourth civil degree. Relative by affinity apprehended three days later in another
within the same degree includes the barrio. Fortunately, Pedro survived after 40
ascendant, descendant, brother or days of hospitalization. The gun turned out
sister of the spouse of the accused. In to be without live bullets. During the trial for
this case, Juan is not the ascendant, frustrated homicide against Jose, Pedro
descendant, brother or sister of Tessie, testified that he drew his gun even while he
the spouse of Pedro. Relative by knew it had no bullets, merely to scare
consanguinity within the fourth civil Jose, and he jumped for it when it was
degree includes first cousin. But in this thrown away for the same purpose. Jose
case Juan is the cousin of Pedro by pleaded self-defense. The Fiscal argued
affinity but not by consanguinity. Juan, that Joses act of running away is evidence
therefore is not a relative of Pedro for of guilt and negates self-defense. He also
purpose of applying the provision on said that, in any event, there was no
defense of relative. reasonable necessity of the means
employed namely, stabbing with a
56
Pedro, however can invoke dagger because Pedros gun had no

Page
defense of stranger. Under the Revised bullets.

attacked Pat. Negre with a bamboo spear.

Decide the case. Filemon missed in his first attempt to hit
Pat. Negre, and before he could strike
SUGGESTED ANSWER: again, Pat. Negre shot and killed him.
Jose is entitled to self-defense. Can Pat. Negre claim self defense?

Explain.
Considering the circumstance of the
case, unlawful aggression, the first Suppose Pat Negre missed in his shot, and
element of self-defense is present. Filemon ran away without parting with his
Pedro loose his carabaos which weapon. Pat Negre pursued Filemon but
destroyed his plants and he then loose the latter was running so fast that Pat
his carabaos whicn destroyed his plants Negre fired warning shots into the air
and then immediately drew his revolver shouting for Filemon to stop. Inasmuch as
which Jose instinctively grabbed from Filemon continued running Pat. Negre fired
Pedros hand. In the struggle for the at him hitting and killing him.
possession for the revolver, it was
thrown one meter away, and when Is the plea of self-defense sustainable?
Pedro jumped for the gun, Jose Why would you then hold Pat. Negre
unsheathed his dagger and stabbed criminally liable? Discuss. (1993 Bar
Pedro who fell down. Jose ran away. Question)
The intimidating attitude of Pedro when
he drew his revolver constitutes SUGGESTED ANSWER:
imminent unlawful aggression. Jose did
not give any provocation to Pedro. Yes, self-defense can be claimed as
Pedro was in a violent mood and in the there is an imminent and great peril on
mind of Jose, was armed, with revolver, the life of Negre;
in hand, and what Jose did in grabbing
the gun was to prevent an aggression No, self-defense is no longer
that is expected (People vs. Domingo sustainable as there is no more peril on
CA 13 Rep. 1355). Stabbing Pedro with a his life;
dagger was the only available means to
prevent the expected aggression Yes, excessive force is used.
considering that Jose acted by
following his instinct of self- Art. 11: Avoid Greater Evil (1990)
preservation. The flight of Jose after
stabbing Pedro cannot be considered A. In mercy killing, is the attending
as evidence of guilt because he did so physician criminally liable for deliberately
as he was afraid the relatives of Pedro turning off the life support system
might kill him. consequently costing the life of the patient?
State reasons. (1990 Bar Question)
Art. 11: Self-Defense (1993) B. How about in an instance when in
saving the life of the mother, the doctor
Pat. Negre saw Filemon, an inmate, sacrificed the life of the unborn child?
57
escaping from jail and ordered the latter to Explain your answer.
Page
surrender. Instead of doing so, Filemon

SUGGESTED ANSWER: right to prevent or repel an actual

unlawful physical invasion or
a. The attending physician is usurpation of his property pursuant to
criminally liable. Euthanasia is not a Art. 429 of the Civil Code.
justifying circumstance in Philippine
jurisdiction.
Art. 11 Defense Of Property Rights
b. There is no criminal liability on (1990)
the part of the doctor because his acts
are justified under Article 11(4) of the In the middle of the night, Enyong heard the
Revised Penal Code which provides footsteps of an intruder inside their house.
that: "The following do not incur any Enyong picked up his rifle and saw a man,
criminal liability: x x x 4) any person, Gorio, with a pistol ransacking Enyongs
who in order to avoid an evil or injury, personal effects in his study. He shot and
does an act which causes damage to killed Gorio.
another, provided that the following
requisites are present: First: That the Is Enyong criminally liable for killing the
evil sought to be avoided actually robber Gorio? State your reasons.
exists; Second. That the injury feared be
greater than that done to avoid it; Third. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
That there be no other practical and less
harmful means of preventing it." Enyong is not criminally liable because
he was acting in defense of property
rights. Under the case of People v.
Art 11 Lawful Defense Of Property Narvaez (G.R. Nos. L-33466-67. April 20,
(2008)
1983, 121 SCRA 389) defense of
property need not necessarily be
While Carlos was approaching his car, he coupled with aggression against
saw it being driven away by Paolo, a thief. persons.
Carlos tried to stop Paolo by shouting at
him, but Paolo ignored him. To prevent his
car from being carnapped, Carlos drew his Art. 11: Defense Of Honor When Not
gun, aimed at the rear wheel of the car and Sustained (2000)
fired. The shot blew the tire which caused
the car to veer out of control and collide Osang, a married woman in her early
with an oncoming tricycle, killing the tricycle twenties, was sleeping on a banig on the
driver. floor of their nipa hut beside the seashore
when she was awakened by the act of a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: man mounting her. Thinking that it was her
husband, Gardo, who had returned from
Carlos did not incur criminal fishing in the sea, Osang continued her
liability because his act of firing at the sleep but allowed the man, who was
rear wheel of the car to stop the vehicle actually their neighbor, Julio, to have
and prevent Paolo from taking away his sexual intercourse with her. After Julio
(Carlos') car is neither done with dolo satisfied himself, he said Salamat Osang"
58
nor culpa. The act does not constitute a as he turned to leave. Only then did Osang
realize that the man was not her husband.
Page
crime; it is a reasonable exercise of his

Enraged, Osang grabbed a balisong from
the wall and stabbed Julio to death. When did." Not recognizing the voice, it dawned
tried for homicide, Osang claimed defense upon Lina that the man was not Tito, her
of honor. Should the claim be sustained? husband. Furious. Una took out Tito's gun
Why? (5%) and shot the man. Charged with homicide
Una denies culpability on the ground of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: defense of honor. Is her claim tenable?
15%.
No, Osang's claim of defense of honor
should not be sustained because the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
aggression on her honor had ceased
when she stabbed the aggressor. In No, Lina's claim that she acted in
defense of rights under paragraph 1, defense of honor, is not tenable
Art. 11 of the RPC, it is required inter alia because the unlawful aggression on her
that there be (1) unlawful aggression, honor had already ceased. Defense of
and (2) reasonable necessity of the honor as included in self-defense, must
means employed to prevent or repel it. have been done to prevent or repel an
The unlawful aggression must be unlawful aggression. There is no
continuing when the aggressor was defense to speak of where the unlawful
injured or disabled by the person aggression no longer exists.
making a defense.
Art. 11: Defense Of Property (2003)
But if the aggression that was begun by
the injured or disabled party already The accused lived with his family in a
ceased to exist when the accused neighborhood that often was the scene of
attacked him, as in the case at bar, the frequent robberies. At one time, past
attack made is a retaliation, and not a midnight, the accused went downstairs with
defense. Paragraph 1, Article 11 of the a loaded gun to investigate he thought
Code does not govern. were footsteps of an uninvited guest. After
seeing what appeared to him an armed
Hence, Osang's act of stabbing Julio to stranger looking around and out to rob the
death after the sexual intercourse was house, he fired his gun seriously injuring
finished, is not defense of honor but an the man. When the lights were turned on,
immediate vindication of a grave the unfortunate victim turned out to be a
offense committed against her, which is brotherin-law on his way to the kitchen to
only mitigating. get some light snacks. The accused was
indicted for serious physical injuries.
Art. 11: Defense Of Honor; When Should the accused, given the
Untenable (1998) circumstances, be convicted or acquitted?
Why?
One night, Lina, a young married woman,
was sound asleep in her bedroom when SUGGESTED ANSWER:
she felt a man on top of her. Thinking it was
her husband Tito, who came home a day The accused should be convicted because,
early from his business trip, Una let him even assuming the facts to be true in his
59
have sex with her. After the act, the man belief, his act of shooting a burglar when
Page
said, I hope you enjoyed it as much as I there is no unlawful aggression on his

person is not justified. Defense of property incidents, Ms. A suffered a deep stab
or property right does not justify the act of wound on her tummy that required a
firing a gun at a burglar unless the life and prolonged stay in the hospital. Due to the
limb of the accused is already in imminent beatings and verbal abuses committed
and immediate danger. Although the against her, she consulted a psychologist
accused acted out of a misapprehension of several times, as she was slowly beginning
the facts, he is not absolved from criminal to lose her mind. One night, when Mr. B
liability. arrived dead drunk, he suddenly stabbed
Ms. A several times while shouting
Art. 11: Defense of a stranger (2002) invectives against her. Defending herself
from the attack, Ms. A grappled for the
A chanced upon three men who were possession of a knife and she succeeded.
attacking B with fist blows. C, one of the She then stabbed Mr. B several times
men, was about to stab B with a knife. Not which caused his instantaneous death.
knowing that B was actually the aggressor Medico-Legal Report showed that the
because he had earlier challenged the husband suffered three (3) stab wounds.
three men to a fight, A shot C as the latter Can Ms. A validly put up a defense?
was about to stab B. May A invoke the Explain.
defense of a stranger as a justifying
circumstance in his favor? Why? (2%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Ms. A can put up the defense of

battered woman syndrome. It appears
Yes. A may invoke the justifying that she is suffering from physical and
circumstance of defense of stranger since psychological or emotional distress
he was not involved in the fight and he shot resulting from cumulative abuse by her
C when the latter was about to stab B. husband. Under Sec. 3 of R.A. 9262,
There being no indication that A was victim survivors who are found by
induced by revenge, resentment, or any courts to be suffering from battered
other evil motive in shooting C, his act is woman syndrome do not incur any
justified under par. 3, Article 11 of the criminal and civil liability
Revised Penal Code, as amended. notwithstanding the absence of any of
the elements for justifying
Art. 11: Battered Woman Syndrome circumstances of self defense under the
(2014, 2010) RPC.
Ms. A had been married to Mr. B for 10 Art. 11: Battered Woman Syndrome
years. Since their marriage, Mr. B had been (2015)
jobless and a drunkard, preferring to stay
with his "barkadas" until the wee hours of Dion and Talia were spouses. Dion always
the morning. Ms. A was the breadwinner came home drunk since he lost his job a
and attended to the needs of their three (3) couple of months ago. Talia had gotten
growing children. Many times, when Mr. B used to the verbal abuse from Dion. One
was drunk, he would beat Ms. A and their night, in addition to the usual verbal abuse,
60
three (3) children, and shout invectives Dion beat up Talia. The next morning, Dion
Page
against them. In fact, in one of the beating saw the injury that he had inflicted upon
Talia and promised her that he would stop

drinking and never beat her again. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
However, Dion did not make good on his
promise. Just after one week, he started Yes, Talia can invoke the defense of
drinking again. Talia once more endured Battered Woman Syndrome to free
the usual verbal abuse. Afraid that he might herself from criminal liability for killing
beat her up again, Talia stabbed Dion with her husband since she suffered
a kitchen knife while he was passed out physical and emotional distress arising
from imbibing too much alcohol. Talia was from cumulative abuse or battery. Under
charged with the crime of parricide. Section 26 of RA 9262, victim survivors
of Battered Woman Syndrome do not
a) May Talia invoke the defense of incur any criminal or civil liability
Battered Woman Syndrome to free herself despite the absence of the requisites of
from criminal liability? Explain. self-defense.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Art. 11: Justifying Circumstance-

Battered Woman Syndrome (2010)
No, a single act of battery or physical
harm committed by Dion against Talia Jack and Jill have been married for seven
resulting to the physical and years. One night, Jack came home drunk.
psychological or emotional distress on Finding no food on the table, Jack started
her part is not sufficient to avail of the hitting Jill only to apologize the following
benefit of the justifying circumstance of day.
Battered Woman Syndrome. The
defense of Battered Woman Syndrome A week later, the same episode occurred -
can be invoked if the woman with Jack came home drunk and started hitting
marital relationship with the victim is Jill.
subjected to cumulative abuse or
battery involving the infliction of Fearing for her life, Jill left and stayed with
physical harm resulting to the physical her sister. To woo Jill back, Jack sent her
and psychological or emotional floral arrangements of spotted lilies and
distress. Cumulative means resulting confectioneries. Two days later, Jill
from successive addition. In sum, there returned home and decided to give Jack
must be at least two battering another chance. After several days,
episodes between the accused and her however, Jack again came home drunk.
intimate partner and such final episode The following day, he was found dead.
produced in the battered persons mind
an actual fear of an imminent harm from Jill was charged with parricide but raised
her batterer and an honest belief that the defense of "battered woman
she needed to use force in order to save syndrome."
her life (People v. Genosa, G.R. No.
135981, January 15, 2004). A. Define "Battered Woman Syndrome?
(2%)
b) Will your answer be the same, B. What are the three phases of the
61
assuming that Talia killed Dion after being "Battered Woman Syndrome"? (3%)
Page
beaten up after a second time? Explain.

C. Would the defense prosper despite the

absence of any of the elements for Justifying circumstance affects the act, not
justifying circumstances of self-defense the actor; while exempting circumstance
under the Revised Penal Code? Explain. affects the actor, not the act. In justifying
(2%) circumstance, no criminal and, generally,
no civil liability is incurred; while in
SUGGESTED ANSWER: exempting circumstance, civil liability is
generally incurred although there is no
A. "Battered Woman Syndrome" criminal liability
refers to a scientifically defined pattern
of psychological and behavioral Art. 11; Art 12: Exempting
symptoms found in women living in circumstances in comparison with
battering relationships as a result of justifying circumstances; illustration of
cumulative abuse (Section 31dj, Rep. exempting circumstances; minor below
Act No. 9262). nine (9) years old; (1998)
B. The three (3) phases of the A. Distinguish between justifying and

"Battered Woman Syndrome" are: (1) exempting circumstances. [3%] (1998 Bar
the tensionbuilding phase; (2) the acute Question)
battering incident; and (3) the tranquil,
loving, or nonviolent phase (People v. B. John, an eight-year old boy, is fond
Genosa, G.R. No. 135981, January 15, of watching the television program "Zeo
2004). Rangers." One evening while he was
engrossed watching his favorite television
C. Yes. Section 26 of Rep. Act No. show.
9262 provides that victim-survivors who
are found by the courts to be suffering Petra, a maid changed the channel to
from battered woman syndrome do not enable her to watch Home Along the
incur any criminal and civil liability Riles."
notwithstanding the absence of any of
the elements for justifying This enraged John who got his father's
circumstances of self-defense under the revolver, and without warning, shot Petra at
Revised Penal Code. the back of her head causing her
instantaneous death. is John criminally
liable? (2%)
Art 11: Justifying Circumstances in
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
relation to Art 12: Exempting
Circumstances
A. In justifying circumstances:
Distinction (2004)
1. The circumstance affects the act,
Distinguish clearly but briefly: (10%) not the actor;
Between justifying and exempting 2. The act is done within legal bounds,
circumstances in criminal law. hence considered as not a crime;
62
3. Since the act is not a crime, there is

Page
SUGGESTED ANSWER: no criminal;

4. There being no crime nor criminal, to be accidental, the requisites of

there is no criminal nor civil liability. exempting circumstance of accident are
not all present. Said requisites are:
Whereas, in an exempting circumstances:
a. A person is performing a lawful act;
1. The circumstance affects the actor, b. With due care;
not the act; c. He causes an injury to another by
2. The act is felonious and hence a mere accident;
crime but the actor acted without d. Without fault or intention of causing
voluntariness; it (Art. 12, par. 4, RPC).
3. Although there is a crime, there is no
criminal because the actor is regarded only When Nicandro borrowed Valerianos high
as an instrument of the crime; powered M-16 rifle and used it for hunting
4. There being a wrong done but no wild pigs, he committed the crime of illegal
criminal, there is civil liability but no criminal possession of firearms, as he does not
liability. appear to have either a license to possess
a high-powered gun or to carry the same
B. No, John is not criminally liable for killing outside of his residence. At the time he shot
Petra because he is only 8 years old when at the wild pig, therefore, Nicandro was not
he committed the killing. A minor below performing a lawful act.
nine (9) years old is absolutely exempt from
criminal liability although not from civil Furthermore, considering that the M-16 is a
liability. (Art. 12, par. 2, RPC). high- powered gun. Nicandro was negligent
in not foreseeing that bullets fired from said
EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES gun may ricochet.
Two separate crimes of serious physical

Art. 12: Exempting circumstances; injuries (against the first neighbor whose
when not appreciated (1989) injuries requires 35 days of medical
attendance), and slight physical injuries
Nicandro borrowed Valerianos, gun, a (against the second neighbor), both
high-powered M-16 rifle, to hunt wild pigs. through reckless imprudence, were
Nicandro was accompanied by his friend, committed by Rodolfo. Although both of
Felix. On their way to the hunting ground, these offenses were the result of one single
Nicandro and Felix met Pedro near a hut. act, a complex crime is not committed
Pedro told them where to hunt. Later, because it is only when a single act
Nicandro saw a pig and then shot and killed constitutes two or more grave or less grave
it. The same bullet, however, that killed the felonies that a complex crime may be
pig struck a stone and ricocheted hitting committed under the first clause of article
Pedro on his breast. Pedro later died. May 48, RPC. Slight physical injuries is not a
Nicandro be held liable for the death of grave or less grave felonies
Pedro? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Art. 12: Insanity (1991)
63
Nicandro may be held liable for the death

Page
of Pedro. While Pedros death would seem

A raped X. In the process, X resisted and crime committed and the acts done by the
slapped A Angered. A grabbed a stone and accused in the commission of the crime
hit X. She was dying when A consummated hardly reconciles with insanity of the
the sexual attack. A psychiatrist from the offender, as rape presupposes evident
National Center for Mental Health testified premeditation.
that he conducted physical, mental and
psychological examinations on A and found The sentence of life imprisonment" is not a
him to be suffering from a mental disorder correct imposition of penalty for the rape: it
classified under organic mental disorder should be reclusion perpetua, the technical
with psychosis. A's father testified that A designation of the penalty for the crime
was playful but cruel to his brothers and under the Revised Penal Code. It is not
sisters, stole his mothers jewelry which he correct to use the term life imprisonment
sold for low sums, wandered naked because the accessory penalties to
sometimes, and oftentimes did not come reclusion perpetua does not follow the
home for extended periods of time. The penalty of life imprisonment".
prosecution on the other hand, presented Furthermore, in reclusion perpetua the
an array of witnesses to prove A that was duration is stated to be for 30 years.
lucid before and after the crime was
committed and that he acted with Art. 12: Insanity (2010)
discernment. After trial, the court convicted
the accused and sentenced him to life While he was on a 2-year scholarship
imprisonment" considering that under the abroad, Romeo was having an affair with
Constitution death penalty could no longer his maid Dulcinea. Realizing that the affair
be imposed. was going nowhere, Dulcinea told Romeo
that she was going back to the province to
Given the conflicting testimonies as to marry her childhood sweetheart. Clouded
sanity of the accused, was the trial court by anger and jealousy, Romeo strangled
correct in ruling out insanity as an Dulcinea to death while she was sleeping
exempting circumstances in this case? Is in the maids quarters.
the sentence of life imprisonment a
correct imposition of penalty? The following day, Romeo was found
catatonic inside the maids quarters. He
SUGGESTED ANSWER: was brought to the National Center for
Mental health (NCMH) where he was
Yes, the court is correct in ruling out diagnosed to be mentally unstable.
insanity as an exempting circumstance.
While there was testimony that A was Charged with murder, Romeo pleaded
suffering from a mental disorder, the insanity as a defense.
testimony of As father disclosed that A had
lucid intervals. Because what is presumed Will Romeos defense prosper? Explain.
is sanity, not insanity, it is to be presumed (2%)
that A was sane when he committed the
crime. Consequently, evidence being SUGGESTED ANSWER:
wanting that A is completely deprived of
64
reason at the moment of committing the No, Romeos defense of insanity will not
Page
crime, he should be liable. Besides, the prosper because, even assuming that
Romeo was insane when diagnosed after from criminal liability under Art. 12, par. 7,
he committed the crime, insanity as a as his failure to report can be considered
defense to the commission of a crime must as due to insuperable cause", as this
have existed and proven to be existing at involves the sanctity and inviolability of a
the precise moment when the crime was confession.
being committed. The facts of the case
indicate that Romeo committed the crime Conspiracy to commit rebellion results in
with discernment. criminal liability to the co-conspirators, but
not to a person who learned of such and did
What is the effect of the diagnosis of the not report to the proper authorities (US vs.
NCMH on the case (2%) Vergara, 3 Phil. 432; People vs. Atienza, 56
Phil. 353).
SUGGESTED ANSWER
Art. 12: Exempting Circumstance-
The effect of the diagnosis made by NCMH Suspended sentence under The Child
is possibly a suspension of the proceedings and Youth Welfare Code; when not
against Romeo and his commitment to applicable (2013)
appropriate institution for treatment until he
could already understand the proceedings. Michael was 17 years old when he was
charged for violation of Sec. 5 of R.A. 9165
Art.12:Insuperable cause (1994) (illegal sale of prohibited drug). By the time
he was convicted and sentenced, he was
VC, JG, GG and JG conspired to overthrow already 21 years old. The court sentenced
the Philippine Government. VG was him to suffer an indeterminate penalty of
recognized as the titular head of the imprisonment of six (6) years and one (1)
conspiracy. Several meetings were held day of prision mayor, as minimum, to
and the plan was finalized. JJ, bothered by seventeen (17) years and four (4) months
his conscience, confessed to Father of reclusion temporal, as maximum, and a
Abraham that he, VG, JG and GG have fine of P500,000. Michael applied for
conspired to overthrow the government. probation but his application was denied
Father Abraham did not report this because the probation law does not apply
information to the proper authorities. to drug offenders under R.A. 9165. Michael
then sought the suspension of his sentence
Did Father Abraham commit a crime? If so, under R.A. 9344 or the Juvenile Justice
what crime was committed? and Youth Welfare Code. Can Michael
What is his criminal liability? avail of the suspension of his sentence
provided under this law?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Father Abraham did not commit a
crime because the conspiracy involved is The benefits of a suspended sentence can
one to commit rebellion, not a conspiracy to no longer apply to Michael. The suspension
commit treason which makes a person of sentence lasts only until the law reaches
criminally liable under Art. 116, RPC. And the maximum age and thus, could no
65
even assuming that it will fall as misprision longer be considered a child for purposes
Page
of treason. Father Abraham is exempted of applying R.A. 9344. However, he shall

be entitled to the right of restoration, SUGGESTED ANSWER:

rehabilitation and reintegration in
accordance with the law to give him the Although Rod is only 14years old, his act of
chance to live a normal life and become a boxing Lucy to prevent her from helping
productive member of the community. Mang Pandoy is a clear sign of
Accordingly, Michael may be confined in an discernment, thus he cannot invoke
agricultural camp and other training facility exemption from crimi-nal liability under Art.
in accordance with Sec. 51 of R.A. 9344 12, par. 3, RPC. Rod and Ronnie are,
(People v. Jacinto, G.R. No. 182239, however, entitled to two and one degrees
March 16, 2011). lower, respectively from the penalty of the
principal under Art. 68. RPC.
Art. 12: Suspended sentence under The
Child and Youth Welfare Code; when No, because the benefits of suspension of
not applicable (1995) sentence is not available where the
youthful offender has been convicted of an
Victor, Ricky, Rod and Ronnie went to the offense punishable by life imprisonment or
store of Mang Pandoy. Victor and Ricky death, pursuant to P.D. No. 603, Art. 192.
entered the store while Rod and Ronnie The complex crime of robbery with
posted themselves at the door. homicide is punishable by reclusion
After ordering beer Ricky complained that perpetua to death under Art. 294 (1), RPC
he was shortchanged although Mang (People vs. Galit, 230 SCRA 486).
Pandoy vehemently denied it.
Art. 12: Suspended sentence under The
Suddenly Ricky whipped out a knife as he Child and Youth Welfare Code; when
announced Hold-up ito!" and stabbed not applicable (2003)
Mang Pandoy to death. Rod boxed the
stores salesgirl Lucy to prevent her from A was 2 months below 18 years of age
helping Mang when he committed the crime. He was
charged with the crime 3 months later. He
Pandoy. When Lucy ran out of the store to was 23 when he was finally convicted and
seek help from people next door she was sentenced. Instead of preparing to serve a
chased by Ronnie. As soon as Ricky had jail term, he sought a suspension of the
stabbed Mang Pandoy, Victor scooped up sentence on the ground that he was a
the money from the cash box. Then Victor juvenile offender. Should he be entitled to
and Ricky dashed to the street and a suspension of sentence? Reasons. (2003
shouted, Tumakbo na kayo! Bar Question)
Rod was 14 and Ronnie was 17. The (a) Can juvenile offenders, who are
money and other articles looted from the recidivists, validly ask for suspension of
store of Mang Pandoy were later found in sentence? Explain.
the houses of Victor and Ricky.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Are the minors Rod and Ronnie entitled to
suspended sentence under The Child and a. No, A is not entitled to a suspension
66
Youth Welfare Code? Explain. of the sentence because he is no longer a

Page
minor at the time of promulgation of the

sentence. For purposes of suspension of satisfying their lust, Job ordered Nonoy to
sentence, the offenders age at the time of push Dang down a ravine, resulting in her
promulgation of the sentence is the one death. Lyn ran away but Job and Nonoy
considered, not his age when he committed chased her and pushed her inside the van.
the crime. So although A was below 18 Then the duo drove away. Lyn was never
years old when he committed the crime, but seen again.
he was already 23 years old when
sentenced, he is no longer eligible for Will Nonoys minority exculpate him? 2.5%
suspension of the sentence.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b. Yes, so long as the offender is still a
minor at the time of the promulgation of the Nonoys minority will exculpate him under
sentence. The law establishing Family Rep. Act 9344, referred to as the Juvenile
Courts, Rep. Act 8369, provides to this Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, if he was
effect: that if the minor is found guilty, the 15 years old or less: otherwise he will be
court should promulgate the sentence and criminally and civilly liable considering that
ascertain any civil liability which the he acted with discernment when he also
accused may have incurred. However, the raped the victims. At most, his minority will
sentence shall be suspended without the be appreciated as privileged mitigating
need of application pursuant to PD 603, circumstance.
otherwise known as the Child and Youth
Welfare Code (RA 8369, Sec. 5a). It is Art 12: Persons exempt from criminal
under PD 603 that an application for liability In relation to Art 332 (2008)
suspension of the sentence is required and
thereunder it is one of the conditions for Dennis leased his apartment to Myla for
suspension of sentence that the offender P10,000 a month. Myla failed to pay the
be a first time convict: rent for 3 months. Gabriel, the son of
this has been displaced by RA 8369. Dennis, prepared a demand letter falsely
alleging that his father had authorized him
Art. 12: RA 9344) When applicable to collect the unpaid rentals. Myla paid the
(2006) unpaid rentals to Gabriel who kept the
payment.
Dang was a beauty queen in a university.
Job, a rich classmate, was so enamored Can Gabriel invoke his relationship with
with her that he persistently wooed and Dennis to avoid criminal liability? Explain.
pursued her. Dang, being in love with (3%)
another man, rejected him. This angered
Job. Sometime in September 2003, while SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Dang and her sister Lyn were on their way
home, Job and his minor friend Nonoy If Gabriel would be made criminally liable
grabbed them and pushed them inside a for falsification of a private document, he
white van. They brought them in an cannot invoke his relationship with Dennis,
abandoned warehouse where they forced his father, to avoid criminal liability because
them to dance naked. Thereafter, they Art. 332 of the Revised Penal Code
67
brought them to a hill in a nearby barangay provides exemption from criminal liability in
Page
where they took turns raping them. After crimes against property only for theft,
swindling or malicious mischief but not for upon the prosecution to prove that the
falsification of documents. accused acted with discernment.
If he would be made criminally liable for The presumption is that such minor acted
swindling, he can invoke his relationship without discernment and this is
with Dennis because this crime cannot be strengthened by the fact that Katreena only
complexed with falsification of a private reacted with a ballpen which she must be
document. The charge could, therefore, using in class at the time, and only to stop
stand alone. The exemption in Art. 332 will Pompings vexatious act of repeatedly
obtain. pulling her ponytail. In other words, the
injury was accidental.
Art 12: Minority;
In relation to Art 13: Mitigating The attendant circumstances which may be
circumstances (2000) considered are:
While they were standing in line awaiting 1. Minority of the accused as an exempting
their vaccination at the school clinic, circumstance under Article 12, paragraph
Pomping repeatedly pulled the ponytail of 3, Rev. Penal Code, where she shall be
Katreena, his 11 years, 2 months and 13 exempt from criminal liability, unless it was
days old classmate in Grade 5 at the proved that she acted with discernment
Sampaloc Elementary School. Irritated, She is however civilly liable;
Katreena turned around and swung at
Pomping with a ballpen. The top of the If found criminally liable, the minority of the
ballpen hit the right eye of Pomping which accused as a privileged mitigating
bled profusely. Realizing what she had circumstance. A discretionary penalty
caused, Katreena immediately helped lower by at least two (2) degrees than that
Pomping. When investigated, she freely prescribed for the crime committed shall be
admitted to the school principal that she imposed in accordance with Article 68,
was responsible for the injury to Pomping's paragraph 1, Rev. Penal Code. The
eye. After the incident, she executed a sentence, however, should automatically
statement admitting her culpability. Due to be suspended in accordance with Section
the injury, Pomping lost his right eye. 5(a) of Rep. Act No. 8369otherwise known
as the Family Courts Act of 1997";
Discuss the attendant circumstances and
effects thereof. (2%) Also if found criminally liable, the ordinary
mitigating circumstance of not intending to
SUGGESTED ANSWER: commit so grave a wrong as that
committed, under Article 13, paragraph 3,
Katreena is not criminally liable although Rev. Penal Code; and
she is civilly liable. Being a minor less than
fifteen (15) years old although over nine (9) The ordinary mitigating circumstance of
years of age, she is generally exempt from sufficient provocation on the part of the
criminal liability. The exception is where the offended party immediately preceded the
prosecution proved that the act was act.
68
committed with discernment The burden is

Page
(i) Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of Discuss fully the criminal liability of Victor,
2006 (R.A. No. 9344); also refer to Ricky, Rod and Ronnie.
Child and Youth Welfare Code (P.D. 603,
as amended) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) Definition of child in conflict with the
law All are liable for the special complex crime
(b) Minimum age of criminal of robbery with homicide. The acts of Ricky
responsibility in stabbing Mang Pandoy to death, of Rod
(c) Determination of age in boxing the salesgirl to prevent her from
(d) Exemption from criminal liability helping Mang Pandoy, of Ronnie in chasing
(e) Treatment of child below age of the salesgirl to prevent her in seeking help,
responsibility of Victor in scooping up money from the
(f) Status offenses under Sec. 57 of cash box, and of Ricky and Victor in
R.A. No. 9344 dashing to the street and announcing the
Offenses not applicable to children under escape, are all indicative of conspiracy.
Sec. 58 of R.A. No. 9344
The rule is settled that when homicide
Art. 12 Minority In relation to robbery takes place as a consequence or on the
with homicide (1995) occasion of a robbery, all those who took
part in the robbery are guilty as principals
Victor, Ricky, Rod and Ronnie went to the of the crime of robbery with homicide,
store of Mang Pandoy. Victor and Ricky unless the accused tried to prevent the
entered the store while Rod and Ronnie killing {People vs. BaeUo, 224 SCRA 218).
posted themselves at the door. After
ordering beer Ricky complained that he Although Rod is only 14 years old, his act
was shortchanged although Mang Pandoy of boxing Lucy to prevent her from helping
vehemently denied it. Mang Pandoy is a clear sign of
discernment, thus he cannot invoke
Suddenly Ricky whipped out a knife as he exemption from criminal liability.
announced Hold-up ito!" and stabbed
Mang Pandoy to death. Rod boxed the
stores salesgirl Lucy to prevent her from ART. 12 Warrantless arrest;
helping Mang Pandoy. When Lucy ran out entrapment; in relation to prohibited
of the store to seek help from people next drugs (1992)
door she was chased by Ronnie. As soon
as Ricky had stabbed Mang Pandoy, Victor Members of the Narcotics Command, upon
scooped up the money from the cash box. learning from an informer that Tee Moy,
Then Victor and Ricky dashed to the street notorious drug lord was plying his trade and
and shouted, Tumakbo na kayo! selling methamphetamine hydrocholide
(popularly known as shabu) in a motel at
Rod was 14 and Ronnie was 17. The Bambang St, planned a buy-bust operation
money and other articles looted from the to capture him. Camotes was to enter the
store of Mang Pandoy were later found in lobby of the motel where Tee Mqy hangs
the houses of Victor and Ricky. around and pose as buyer. The moment
69
the drug vendor hands the drug to him.

Page
Camotes would scratch his ear as a signal

to his companions deployed near the motel If you were the prosecutor, how would you
entrance. traverse the above arguments of counsel
for the accused? Take up each number
So Camotes, upon espying Tee Moy near separately.
the registration desk, approached the
latter. When asked if he would like a SUGGESTED ANSWER:
score, he answered in the affirmative. He
was then handed a matchbox with the a. There is no need for a warrant of
assurance that it contained the drug, for arrest, as this falls under the instances of
which he gave a P100.00 marked bill. Upon warrantless airest sanctioned by law,
giving the pre-arranged signal, the where a public officer or private individual
NARCOM agents rushed inside and may arrest a person if, in his personal
arrested Tee Moy. presence, the person arrested is actually
committing, is about to commit, or has just
In the course of time, Tee Moy was committed a crime.
prosecuted for the crimes of possession
and sale of prohibited drugs under the b. This is a pure case of entrapment as
Dangerous Drugs Act. During the trial, his Tee Moy has already decided to commit a
counsel interposed the following defenses: crime and the agents of persons in
authority merely devised ways and means
a) The arrest, having been effected to entrap him. There was no inducement of
without a warrant of arrest, was violative of Tee Moy as the latter precisely decided to
Tee Moys constitutional rights. make a score or sale. No pressure or
b) Accused was the victim of a frame- investigation was applied on him.
up instigated by the law enforcement c. Failure to present the informer is not
officers, such that he was practically forced fatal to the cause of the prosecution as the
to sell his goods to a total stranger which testimony of the latter will be merely
was abnormal and unrealistic for one in the corroborative to the testimony of the other
kind of business he is in. witnesses who were eye-witnesses to the
c) The prosecution deliberately failed commission of the crime. There are
to present the informer as a witness so that sufficient evidence to convict the accused
he could have been subjected to cross- beyond reasonable doubt.
examination by the counsel for the d. While as a general rule the offense
accused. of possession is integrated in selling
d) Tee Moy cannot be prosecuted for prohibited drugs, in this case, I will argue
the separate offenses of possession and that, the quantity of the drugs confiscated
sale of prohibited drugs but of only one from Tee Moy was so large that it cannot
criminal offense. be deemed absorbed in the crime of
e) Tee Moy was made to sign a pushing. Besides, I will contend that the
Confiscation Receipt at NARCOM matchbox with shabu inside, was not the
headquarters which has been admitted as only evidence taken from the accused.
evidence against him, thus violating his
constitutional right against self- The Confiscation Receipt signed by Tee
incrimination. Moy was merely presented as part of the
70
testimony of the prosecution witnesses and

Page
such evidence is not material to the

conviction of the accused. Again, the mall. After fifteen minutes, Juan
overwhelming evidence are presented that returned with ten sticks of marijuana
inevitably supports conviction cigarettes which he gave to SP02 Mercado
who thereupon placed Juan under arrest
ART. 12--Entrapment and instigation and charged him with violation of The
(1990) Dangerous Drugs Law by selling marijuana
cigarettes.
Rodolfo is an informer who told the police
authorities that Aldo is a drug pusher. Is Juan guilty of any ofense punishable
Policeman Taba then posed as a buyer and under The Dangerous Drugs Act?
persuaded Aldo to sell marijuana worth Discuss fully.
P10.00 to the former. Aldo agreed. He
delivered the goods and so was SUGGESTED ANSWER:
apprehended with the marked money. He
is now prosecuted for violation of the A. In instigation, the instigator
Dangerous Drugs Act. practically induces the prospective
accused into commission of the offense
Aldos defense is that he1 was the victim of and himself becomes co-principal. In
an instigation of the police who persuaded entrapment, ways and means are resorted
him to sell the goods to him. Decide the to for the purpose of trapping and capturing
case with reasons. the lawbreaker while executing his criminal
plan,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B. Juan cannot be charged of any
Aldos defense in untenable as what offense punishable under The Dangerous
happened here was entrapment. With or Drugs Act Although Juan is a suspected
without the act of Policemen Taba, Aldo drug pusher, he cannot be charged on the
would have went on selling the marijuana basis of a mere suspicion. By providing the
to another buyer. The finding, it must be money with which to buy marijuana
noted, was that Aldo was continously cigarettes, SP02 Mercado practically
engaged in the act of pushing drugs. induced and prodded Juan to commit the
(People v. Tia, 51 O.G. 1863). offense of illegal possession of marijuana.
Set against the facts instigation is a valid
ART.12 Entrapment and instigation; defense available to Juan.
illustration of instigation (1995)
ART.12 Entrapment and instigation
A. Distinguished entrapment from
instigation. Discuss fully. Distinguish fully between entrapment and
instigation in Criminal Law. Exemplify each.
B. Suspecting that Juan was a drug
pusher, SP02 Mercado, leader of the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Narcom team, gave Juan a P 100-bill and
asked him to buy some marijuana In entrapment -
cigarettes. Desirous of pleasing SP02 a. the criminal design originates from
71
Mercado, Juan went inside the shopping and is already in the mind of the lawbreaker
Page
mall while the officer waited at the comer of even before entrapment;
b. the law enforcers resort to ways and MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

means for the purpose of capturing the
lawbreaker in flagrante delicto; and Art 13 Incomplete self-defense (1990)
c. this circumstance is no bar to
prosecution and conviction of the In the middle of the night, Enyong heard the
lawbreaker. footsteps of an intruder inside their house.
Enyong picked up his rifle and saw a man,
In instigation - Gorio, with a pistol ransacking Enyongs
a. the idea and design to bring about personal effects in his study. Suppose
the commission of the crime originated and Enyong shot Gorio while he was running
developed in the mind of the law enforcers; away from Enyongs house with his
b. the law enforcers induce, lure, or television set, what is Enyong liable for?
incite a person who is not minded to commit Explain your answer.
a crime and would not otherwise commit it,
into committing the crime; and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c. this circumstance absolves the
accused from criminal liability (People v. There is criminal liability this time with the
Dante Marcos, 185 SCRA154. [1990]). mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-
defense. Under the case of People v.
Example of entrapment: Narvaez, defense of property can be
availed of even when there is no assault
A, an anti-narcotic agent of the against a person. It is recognized as an
Government acted as a poseur buyer of unlawful aggression.
shabu and negotiated with B, a suspected
drug pusher who is unaware that A is a
police officer. A then issued marked money Art. 13: Intoxication (2002)
to B who handed a sachet of shabu to B.
Thereupon, A signalled his anti-narcotic A was invited to a drinking spree by friends.
team to close-in and arrest B. This is a case After having had a drink too many, A and B
of entrapment because the criminal mind is had a heated argument, during which A
in B already when A transacted with him. stabbed B. Asa result, B suffered serious
physical injuries. May the intoxication of A
Example of instigation: be considered aggravating or mitigating?
Because the members of an anti-narcotic (5%)
team are already known to drug pushers,
A, the team leader, money to be used in SUGGESTED ANSWER:
buying shabu from C. After C handed the
sachet of shabu to B and the latter handed The intoxication of A may be prima facie
the marked money to C, the team closed-in considered mitigating since it was merely
and placed B and C under arrest. Under the incidental to the commission of the crime. It
facts, B is not criminally liable for his may not be considered aggravating as
participation in the transaction because he there is no clear indication from the facts of
was acting only under instigation by the law the case that it was habitual or intentional
enforcers. on the part of A. Aggravating
72
circumstances are not to be presumed;

Page
they should be proved beyond reasonable Privileged mitigating circumstances are not
doubt subject to the offset rule.
Art. 13: Mitigating Circumstance Art. 13: Mitigating Circumstance In

Privileged In relation to Penalties (2012) relation to Penalties (2014)
What is a privileged mitigating A, a young boy aged sixteen (16) at the

circumstance? Distinguish a privileged time of the commission of the crime, was
mitigating circumstance from an ordinary convicted when he was already seventeen
mitigating circumstance as to reduction of (17) years of age for violation of Section 11
penalty and offsetting against aggravating of R.A. 9165 or Illegal Possession of
circumstance/s. Dangerous Drugs for which the imposable
penalty is life imprisonment and a fine.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Section 98 of the same law provides that if
the penalty imposed is life imprisonment to
Privileged mitigating circumstances are death on minor offenders, the penalty shall
those that mitigate the criminal liability of be reclusion perpetua to death. Under R.A.
the accused by graduating the imposable 9344, a minor offender is entitled to a
penalty for the crime being modified to one privileged mitigating circumstance.
or two degrees lower. These
circumstances cannot be offset by (A) May the privileged mitigating
aggravating circumstance. The circumstance of minority be appreciated
circumstance of incomplete justification or considering that the penalty imposed by
exemption (when majority of the conditions law is life imprisonment and fine?
are present), and the circumstance of (B) Is the Indeterminate Sentence Law
minority (if the child above 15 years of age applicable considering that life
acted with discernment) are privileged imprisonment has no fixed duration and the
mitigating circumstance. Dangerous Drugs Law is malum
prohibitum?
The distinctions between ordinary and (C) If the penalty imposed is more than
privileged mitigating circumstances are as six (6) years and a notice of appeal was
follows: filed by A and given due course by the
court, may A still file an application for
i. Under the rules for application of divisible probation?
penalties (RPC, Art. 64), the presence of a (D) If probation is not allowed by the
mitigating circumstance, if not off-set by court, how will A serve his sentence?
aggravating circumstance, has the effect of
applying the divisible penalty in its SUGGESTED ANSWER:
minimum period. Under the rules on
graduation of penalty (RPC, Art. 68, 69), (A) Yes. As stated above, under Section
the presence of privileged mitigating 98, RA 9165, if the offender is a minor, the
circumstance has the effect of reducing the penalty of life imprisonment shall be
penalty one to two degrees lower; considered as reclusion perpetua. Now that
it has the nomenclature of penalties under
73
Ordinary mitigating circumstances can be the RPC, the modifying circumstances

Page
off-set by aggravating circumstances. therein may also be applied. Even if

reclusion perpetua is a single indivisible Art. 13 Immediate Vindication (1988)

penalty, the privileged mitigating
circumstance of minority would still be The victim Dario went to the Civil Service
considered to lower the imposable penalty. Commission at about 11:00 a.m. to have
The rule in Article 63, RPC that if the some documents signed, and because his
penalty prescribed by law is a single efforts were frustrated, he angrily remarked
indivisible penalty, it shall be imposed in the presence of the accused Benito that
regardless of mitigating and aggravating the Civil Service Commission is a hang-out
circumstance refers only to ordinary of thieves. The accused felt alluded to
mitigating circumstances. because he was then facing criminal and
(B) Yes. The Indeterminate Sentence administrative charges on several counts
Law is applicable even to special penal involving his honesty and integrity, and
laws. Since life imprisonment was pulling out a gun from his desk, he shot
converted into reclusion perpetua, which in Dario, inflicting a fatal wound. Benito is now
turn was graduated to reclusion temporal invoking the mitigating circumstances of
because of the privileged mitigating immediate vindication of grave offense.
circumstance of minority, the Indeterminate
Sentence Law is applicable. (People vs. Decide the case. (1988 Bar Question)
Mantalaba, GR 186227, July 20, 2011)
(C) Yes. A may still file an application for SUGGESTED ANSWER:
probation even if he filed a notice of appeal.
Section 42, RA 9344 provides: The court The mitigating circumstances of immediate
may, after it shall have convicted and vindication of grave offense cannot be
sentenced a child in conflict with the law, considered because to be applicable,
and upon application at any time, place the Article 13 par. 5 requires that: Mitigating
child on probation in lieu of service of circumstances. xxxx 5. That the act was
his/her sentence taking into account the committed in the immediate vindication of a
best interest of the child. For this purpose, grave offense to the one committing the
Section 4 of PD 968, otherwise known as felony (delito) his spouse, ascendants,
the Probation Law of 1976, is hereby descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted
amended accordingly. brothers or sisters or relatives by affinity
within the same degrees.
The phrase at any time mentioned in
Section 42 means that the child in conflict Instead, the circumstances of passion or
with the law may file an application for obfuscation should be considered. Benito
probation at any time, even beyond the should be charged with frustrated homicide
period for perfecting an appeal and even if with the mitigating circumstances of
the child has perfected the appeal from the passion.
judgment of conviction.
(D) If probation is not allowed by the Art. 13: Voluntary surrender (1996)
court, the minor offender shall serve his
sentence in agricultural camp or other Hilario, upon seeing his son engaged in a
training facility in accordance with Section scuffle with Rene, stabbed and killed the
51 of RA 9344 as amended. latter. After the stabbing, he brought his
74
son home. The Chief of Police of the town,

Page
accompanied by several policemen, went visit the police station to make inquiries. On
to Hilarios house. his way, he met a policeman who
immediately served upon him the warrant
Hilario, upon seeing the approaching for his arrest. During the trial, in the course
policemen, came down from his house to of the presentation of the prosecutions
meet them and voluntarily went with them evidence. Jeprox withdrew his plea of not
to the Police Station to be investigated in guilty and entered a plea of guilty.
connection with the killing. When Can he invoke the mitigating
eventually charged with and convicted of circumstances of voluntary surrender and
homicide, Hilario, on appeal, faulted the plea of guilty? Explain.
trial court for not appreciating in his favor
the mitigating circumstance of voluntary SUGGESTED ANSWER:
surrender. Is he entitled to such a
mitigating circumstance? Explain. Jeprox is not entitled to the mitigating
circumstance of voluntary surrender as his
SUGGESTED ANSWER: going to the police station was only for the
purpose of verification of the news that he
Yes, Hilario is entitled to the mitigating is wanted by the authorities. In order to be
circumstance of voluntary surrender. The mitigating, surrender must be spontaneous
crux of the issue is whether the fact that and that he acknowledges his guilt.
Hilario went home after the incident, but
came down and met the police officers and Neither is plea of guilty a mitigating
went with them is considered voluntary circumstances because it was qualified
surrender." plea; besides. Art. 13, par. 7 provides that
confession of guilt must be done before the
The voluntariness of surrender is tested if prosecution had started to present
the same is spontaneous showing the evidence.
intent of the accused to submit himself
unconditionally to the authorities. This must Art. 13: Voluntary surrender; plea of
be either (a) because he acknowledges his guilty (1997)
guilt, or (b) because he wishes to save
them the trouble and expenses necessarily After killing the victim, the accused
incurred in his search and capture. (Reyes absconded. He succeeded in eluding the
Commentaries, p. 303). Thus, the act of the police until he surfaced and surrendered to
accused in hiding after commission of the the authorities about two years later.
crime, but voluntarily went with the Charged with murder, he pleaded not guilty
policemen who had gone to his hiding but, after the prosecution had presented
place to investigate, was held to be two witnesses implicating him to the crime,
mitigating circumstance.[People vs. Dayrit, he changed his plea to that of guilty.
cited in Reyes Commentaries, p. 299)
Should the mitigating circumstances of
Art. 13: Voluntary surrender and plea of voluntary surrender and plea of guilty be
guilty; when not considered (1992) considered in favor of the accused?
75
Upon learning that the police wanted him SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Page
for the killing of Polistico. Jeprox decided to

1. Voluntary surrender should be B. Yes, his plea of guilty before the

considered as a mitigating circumstance. Regional Trial Court can be considered
After two years, the police were still spontaneous, for which he is entitled to the
unaware of the whereabouts of the mitigating circumstance of plea of guilty.
accused and the latter could have His plea of not guilty before the Municipal
continued to elude arrest. Accordingly, the Court is immaterial as it was made during
surrender of the accused should be preliminary investigation only and before a
considered mitigating because it was done court not competent to render judgment.
spontaneously, indicative of the remorse or
repentance on the part of said accused and Art. 13: Voluntary surrender (1999)
therefore, by his surrender, the accused
saved the Government expenses, efforts, When is surrender by an accused
and time. considered voluntarily, and constitutive of
the mitigating circumstance of voluntary
Art 13 Plea of Guilty (1999) surrender? (3%)
A. In order that the plea of guilty may SUGGESTED ANSWER:

be mitigating, what requisites must be
complied with? (2%) A surrender by an offender is considered
voluntary when it is spontaneous, indicative
B. An accused charged with the crime of an intent to submit unconditionally to the
of homicide pleaded not guilty" during the authorities.
preliminary investigation before the
Municipal Court. Upon the elevation of the To be mitigating, the surrender must be:
case to the Regional Trial Court the Court - spontaneous, i.e., indicative of
of competent jurisdiction, he pleaded guilty acknowledgment of guilt and not for
freely and voluntarily upon arraignment. convenience nor conditional;
Can his plea of guilty before the RTC be - made before the government incurs
considered spontaneous and thus entitle expenses, time and effort in tracking down
him to the mitigating circumstance of the offender's whereabouts; and
spontaneous plea of guilty under Art. 13(7), - made to a person in authority or the
RPC? (3%) letter's agents.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Art. 13: Voluntary surrender (2009)
A. For plea of guilty to be mitigating, TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the

the requisites are: statement is true, or FALSE if the
1. That the accused spontaneously statement is false. Explain your answer in
pleaded guilty to the crime charged; not more than two (2) sentences. (5%)
2. That such plea was made before the
court competent to try the case and render Voluntary surrender is a mitigating
judgment; and circumstance in all acts and omissions
3. That such plea was made prior to punishable under the Revised Penal Code.
the presentation of evidence for the
76
prosecution. SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Page
False. Voluntary surrender may not be of his house. When Jepoy came out, Jonas
appreciated in cases of criminal negligence immediately shot him with Jajas .45 caliber
under Art. 365 since in such cases, the gun but missed his target. Instead, the
courts are authorized to impose a penalty bullet hit Jepoy's five year old son who was
without considering Art. 62 regarding following behind him, killing the boy
mitigating and aggravating circumstances. instantaneously.If you were Jonas' and
Jajas lawyer, what possible defenses
would you set up in favor of your clients?
Art. 13: No intention to commit so grave Explain. (2%)
a wrong as that committed; intoxication
(2000) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Despite the massive advertising campaign If I were Jonas' and Jaja's lawyer, I will use
in media against firecrackers and gun-firing the following defenses:
during the New Year's celebrations. Jonas
and Jaja bought ten boxes of super lolo and (1) That the accused had no intention to
pla-pla in Bocaue, Bulacan. Before commit so grave a wrong as that committed
midnight of December 31,1999, Jonas and as they merely intended to frighten Jepoy;
Jaja started their celebration by having a
drinking spree at Jona's place by exploding (2) That Jonas committed the crime in a
their high-powered firecrackers in their state of intoxication thereby impairing his
neighborhood. In the course of their will power or capacity to understand the
conversation, Jonas confided to Jaja that wrongfulness of his act. Non-intentional
he has been keeping a long-time grudge intoxication is a mitigating circumstance
against his neighbor Jepoy in view of the [People us. Forttch, 281 SCRA 600 [1997]:
tatter's refusal to lend him some money. Art 15, RFC).
While under the influence of liquor, Jonas
started throwing lighted super lolos inside Art. 13: No intention to commit so grave
Jepoy's fence to irritate him and the same a wrong as that which was committed
exploded inside the tatter's yard. Upon (2001)
knowing that the throwing of the super lolo
was deliberate, Jepoy became furious and Maryjane had two suitors - Felipe and
sternly warned Jonas to stop his malicious Cesar. She did not openly show her
act or he would get what he wanted. A preference but on two occasions, accepted
heated argument between Jonas and Cesars invitation to concerts by Regine
Jepoy ensued but Jaja tried to calm down and Pops. Felipe was a working student
his friend. At midnight, Jonas convinced and could only ask Mary to see a movie
Jaja to lend him his .45 caliber pistol so that which was declined. Felipe felt insulted and
he could use it to knock down Jepoy and to made plans to get even with Cesar by
end his arrogance. Jonas thought that after scaring him off somehow. One day, he
all, explosions were everywhere and entered Cesars room in their boarding
nobody would know who shot Jepoy. After house and placed a rubber snake which
Jaja lent his firearm to Jonas, the latter appeared to be real in Cesars backpack.
again started started throwing lighted super Because Cesar had a weak heart, he
77
lolos and pla-plas at Jepoys yard in order suffered a heart attack upon opening his
Page
to provoke him so that he would come out backpack and seeing the snake. Cesar
died without regaining consciousness. The any mitigating circumstance or

police investigation resulted in pinpointing circumstances? (3%) (2002 Bar Question)
Felipe as the culprit and he was charged
with homicide for Cesars death. In his SUGGESTED ANSWER:
defense, Felipe claimed that he did not
know about Cesars weak heart and that he No, A cannot validly invoke defense of his
only intended to play a practical joke on daughters honor in having killed B since
Cesar. the rape was already consummated;
moreover, B already ran away, hence,
Is Felipe liable for the death of Cesar there was no aggression to defend against
or will his defense prosper? Why? (5%) and no defense to speak of.
A may, however, invoke the benefit of the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: mitigating circumstance of having acted in
immediate vindication of a grave offense to
Yes, Felipe is liable for the death of Cesar a descendant, his daughter, under par. 5,
but he shall be given the benefit of the Article 13 of the Revised Penal Code, as
mitigating circumstance that he did not amended.
intend to commit so grave a wrong as that
which was committed (Art. 13, par. 3, Art. 13: Lack of intention to commit so
RPC). grave a wrong as that committed (2005)
When Felipe intruded into Cesars room Belle saw Gaston stealing the prized cock
without the letter's consent and took liberty of a neighbor and reported him to the
with the letter's backpack where he placed police. Thereafter, Gaston, while driving a
the rubber snake, Felipe was already car saw Belle crossing the street. Incensed
committing a felony. And any act done by that Belle had reported him, Gaston
him while committing a felony is no less decided to scare her by trying to make it
wrongful, considering that they were part of appear that he was about to run her over.
"plans to get even with Cesar1'. He rewed the engine of his car and drove
towards her but he applied the brakes.
Felipe's claim that he intended only "to play Since the road was slippery at that time, the
a practical joke on Cesar" does not vehicle skidded and hit Belle causing her
persuade, considering that they are not death.
friends but in fact rivals in courting
Maryjane. This case is parallel to the case What is the liability of Gaston? Why? (4%)
of People vs. Pugay, et al.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Art. 13: Immediate vindication of a
grave offense to a descendant (2002) Gaston is criminally liable for homicide in
doing the felonious act which caused
When A arrived home, he found B raping Belles death, although the penalty therefor
his daughter. Upon seeing A, B ran away. shall be mitigated by lack of intention to
A took his gun and shot B, killing him. commit so grave a wrong as that committed
Charged with homicide, A claimed he acted (Art. 13 (3), RPC). The act, having been
78
in defense of his daughter's honor. Is A deliberately done with malice, is felonious

Page
correct? If not, can A claim the benefit of and being the proximate cause of Belles
death, brings about criminal liability Cadevida, et al, G.R. No. L-94528, March
although the wrong done was different from 1. 1993).
what was intended (Art. 4, [1], RPC). b) The aggravating circumstance of
motor vehicle under paragraph 20 of Article
Art. 13: Mitigating and Art; 14: 14 of the Code, all the accused having used
aggravating circumstances (1993) a motorized tricyle;
c) Treachery should be aggravating
B, who is blind in one eye, conspired with against all of the accused including M who
M, a sixteen year old boy, with C, who had acted as a lookout because all of them
been previously convicted of Serious were present when X was shot (Article 62.
Physical Injuries, and with R, whose sister paragraph 4 of the Revised Penal Code). X
was raped by X a day before, to kill the was sleeping when shot to death.
latter. B, C and R were armed with .38
caliber revolvers, while M carried no AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
weapon and acted only as a look out. They
proceeded to the house of X riding in a Art 14: Cruelty (1988)
motorized tricycle. Thereupon, C, on
instruction of B to give X no chance, shot X The robbers killed a mother and her baby,
who was then sleeping. Indicted for then threw the body of the baby outside the
Homicide, as the information alleges no window. Can the aggravating
qualifying circumstance, specify the circumstances of cruelty be considered in
mitigating and aggravating circumstances this case?
present, and explain in whose favor, and
against whom, must they be considered. Reasons. (1988 Bar Question)
(a) Cruelty cannot be considered in this
SUGGESTED ANSWER: case because the aggravating
circumstance of cruelty requires
1. Mitigating circumstances: deliberates prolongation of the suffering of
a) B is entitled to the mitigating the victim. In this case, the baby was dead
circumstance under paragraph 8 of Article already so that there is no more
13 of the Revised Penal Code; prolongation to speak of.
b) M is entitled to the privileged
mitigating circumstances of minority under Art. 14 Recidivism In relation to Art. 62
Article Habitual Delinquency (2012)
68 of the Revised Penal Code;
c) Vindication of a grave offense in Who is a habitual delinquent? Distinguish
favor of R because his sister was raped by habitual delinquency from recidivism as to
X a day before the shooting, and even if the crimes committed, the period of time
there was an interval of one (1) day the crimes are committed, the number of
between the rape and the killing. crimes committed and their effects in
relation to the penalty to be imposed on a
2. Aggravating circumstances: convict.
a) The aggravating circumstance of
recidivism under paragraph 9. Article 14 SUGGESTED ANSWER:
79
should be considered against C if alleged

Page
in the Information (People vs. Peter

A person shall be deemed to be habitual Art. 14: Recidivism (2014)

delinquent, if within a period of ten years
from the date of his release or last During trial for theft in 2014, the
conviction of the crimes of serious or less prosecution managed to show that
serious physical injuries, robo, hurto estafa accused AA has also been convicted by
or falsification, he is found guilty of any of final judgment for robbery in 2003, but she
said crimes a third time or oftener (Art. 62, eluded capture. A subsequent verification
RPC). showed that AA had several convictions, to
wit:
The following are the differences between 1. In 1998, she was convicted of
recidivism and habitual delinquency: estafa;
First crime and the First, second and third 2. In 2002, she was convicted of theft;
aggravated second crimes must be a 3. In 2004, she was convicted of
crime are embraced habitual delinquency frustrated homicide;
Nature in the same Title of crime, that is, serious or
of crime the RPC. less serious physical
injuries, theft, robbery, The judge trying the theft case in 2014 is
estafa or falsification of about to convict AA. What circumstances
document. affecting the liability or penalty may the
Accused was The accused was judge appreciate against AA?
convicted of the convicted of first
first crime by final habitual delinquency
judgment at the crime; within ten years SUGGESTED ANSWER:
time of the trial of after conviction or
the second crime. release, he was found The judge may appreciate the aggravating
guilty or habitual- circumstance of recidivism. A recidivist is
Time
delinquency crime for
element one who, at the time of his trial for one
the second time; within
10 years after conviction crime, shall have been previously
or release, he was found convicted by final judgment of another
guilty of habitual- crime embraced in the same title of the
delinquency crime for RPC. Robbery, theft, estafa are crimes
the third time or oftener.
against property embraced in Title Ten of
Number At least two crimes At least three crimes the RPC. The judge may also appreciate
of committed committed the aggravating circumstance of habituality
Crimes or reiteracion, because there have been
Ordinary Extraordinary or special two or more crimes committed for which
aggravating aggravating she has been published, regardless of the
circumstance the circumstance, the
presence of any of presence of which will
degree of penalty.
Nature
which will trigger trigger the imposition of
of the
aggravat
the application of additional penalty for the Art. 14. Recidivist (2009)
the penalty for the third or subsequent
ing
second crime crime.
circumst
committed in its
TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
ance statement is true, or FALSE if the
maximum period This is not subject of the
unless it is off-set off-set rule. statement is false. Explain your answer in
by a mitigating not more than two (2) sentences. (5%)
circumstance
80
[a] Amado, convicted of rape but granted

Page
an absolute pardon by the President, and

one year thereafter, convicted of homicide, c. Both the first and second offenses
is a recidivist. are embraced in the same title of the Code;
and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: d. The offender is convicted of the new
offense (Art. 14, par. 9 RPC).
True. Rape is now a crime against persons
and, like the crime of homicide, is At the time of his trial for homicide, Andres
embraced in the same Title of the Revised was not previously convicted by final
Penal Code under which Amado had been judgment of another crime embraced in the
previously convicted by final judgment. The same title of the Revised Penal Code.
absolute pardon granted him for rape, only Adultery, which is his only previous
excused him from serving the sentence for conviction by final judgment is a crime
rape but did not erase the effects of the against chastity, and therefore is not
conviction therefore unless expressly embraced in the same title of the Code as
remitted by the pardon. homicide, which is a crime against person.
Arti. 14 Recidivism In relation to Art. 62 As for the charge of serious physical

reiteracion (1989) injuries, although serious physical is also a
crime against person, it appears that he
Andres was earlier convicted of adultery had not as yet been conviced, much less
and served an indeterminate penalty, the by final judgment, of the charge at the time
maximum term of which did not exceed two that he was facing trial for homicide.
(2) years, four (4) months and one (1) day
of prision correctional. A month after his The aggravating circumstance of habitually
release from prison, he was charge with the or reiteracion can likewise not be taken
crime of serious physical injuries. Later, against Andres because in order that this
Andres was again charged with homicide circumstance can exist, it is necessary that
punishable by re-clusion temporal. He he was facing trial for homicide.
entered a plea of guilty in the homicide
case. May the aggravating circumstances The aggravating circumstance of
of recidivism and/or habituality (reiteracion) habituality or reiteracion can likewise not
be appreciated against Andres? be taken against Andres because in order
Explain. for this circumstance to exist, it is
necessary that
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. The accused is on trial for an
The aggravating circumstance of offense;
recidivism cannot be taken against Andres. b. He previously served sentence for
For this circumstance to exist, it is another offense to which the law attaches
necessary that an equal or greater penalty, or for two or
more crimes to which it attaches a lighter
a. The offender is on trial for an penalty than that for the new offense;
offense; c. He is convicted of the new offense.
b. He was previously convicted by final
81
judgment of another crime; In the case at bar, Andres had previously

Page
served sentence only for one offense that

of adultery, but the penalty for adultery convictions by final judgment for theft and
(prison correctional) is lighter than then again convicted for Robbery With
penalty for homicide (reclusion-temporal). Homicide. And the crimes specified as
Consequently, there is no aggravating basis for habitual delinquency includes,
circumstance of habituality or reiteracion. inter alia, theft and robbery.
Art. 14. Recidivism; In relation to Art. 62

habitual delinquency (2001)
Art. 14 Recidivism And Art. 160. Quasi-
Juan de Castro already had three (3) recidivism (1998)
previous convictions by final judgment for
theft when he was found guilty of Robbery Distinguish between recidivism and quasi-
with Homicide. In the last case, the trial recidivism. (2%)
judge considered against the accused both
recidivism and habitual delinquency. The SUGGESTED ANSWER:
accused appealed and contended that in
his last conviction, the trial court cannot In recidivism -
consider against him a finding of recidivism a. The convictions of the offender are
and, again, of habitual delinquency. Is the for crimes embraced in the same Title of
appeal meritorious? Explain. (5%) the Revised Penal Code; and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: b. This circumstance is generic

aggravating and therefore can be offset by
No, the appeal is not meritorious. an ordinary mitigating circumstance.
Recidivism and habitual delinquency are
correctly considered in this case because Whereas in quasi-recidivism -
the basis of recidivism is different from that
of habitual delinquency. a. The convictions are not for crimes
embraced in the same Title of the Revised
Juan is a recidivist because he had been Penal Code, provided that it is a felony that
previously convicted by final judgment for was committed by the offender before
theft and again found guilty for Robbery serving sentence by final judgment for
with Homicide, which are both crimes another crime or while serving sentence for
against property, embraced under the another crime; and
same Title (Title Ten, Book Two) of the
Revised Penal Code. The implication is b. This circumstance is a special
that he is specializing in the commission of aggravating circumstance which cannot be
crimes against property, hence aggravating offset by any mitigating circumstance.
in the conviction for Robbery with
Homicide. Art. 14. Quasi recidivism Art 160
(1991)
Habitual delinquency, which brings about
an additional penalty when an offender is During a fiesta, Simeon Marco, brandishing
convicted a third time or more for specified a knife, asked Constancio whether he was
82
crimes, is correctly considered because the one who slapped his (Simeon's) son the
Page
Juan had already three (3) previous year previous. Vicente (father of
Constancio) shouted at Constancio and his syndicate, arrived at Antonio's home and
other son, Bien- venido, telling them to run hurled a grenade into an open window of
away. When Bienvenido passed by Rafael the bedroom where Antonio, his wife and
Marco (brother of Simeon), Rafael stabbed their three year-old daughter were
him. Bienvenido parried the blow but fell sleeping. All three of them were killed
down, his feet entangled with some vines. instantly when the grenade exploded.
While Bienvenido was lying on the ground,
Rafael continued to stab him, inflicting State, with reasons, the crime or crimes
slight injuries on the shoulder of that had been committed as well as the
Bienvenido, after which Rafael stood up. At aggravating circumstances, if any,
that moment, Dulcisimo Beltran (no relation attendant thereto. (7%)
to the Marco brothers), came out of
nowhere and, together with Simeon, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
stabbed Bienvenido. Both of them inflicted
fatal wounds resulting in the death of the Roger & Mauro conspired to commit the
victim. crime of murder qualified by treachery, with
the use of means involving great waste and
Supposing Dulcisimo is a convict out on ruin. In this case, Mauro is liable as a
parole, will the aggravating circumstances principal by direct participation by using a
of quasi-recidivism be appreciated against grenade and hurled into an open window of
him? the victims bedroom. Killing the victims
while they were sleeping and in no position
SUGGESTED ANSWER: to defend themselves, is a treacherous act
(People v. Aguilar, 88 Phil 693, 1951).
No, because quasi-recidivism under Art. The following are the aggravating
160, RPC occurs when the accused circumstances:
commits a felony while serving or about to 1. Sec. 3, R.A. 8294 when a person
serve sentence (or if he escapes from commits any of the crime under the RPC or
prison). A parolee who commits a felony special laws with the use of explosive, etc.
cannot be a quasi-recidivist. and alike incendiary devices which resulted
in the death of any person.
Art. 14 Treachery (2008) 2. Art. 23, R.A. 7659
organized/syndicated crime group.
Roger, the leader of a crime syndicate in
Malate, Manila, demanded the payment by Art. 14: Treachery; when not considered
Antonio, the owner of a motel in that area, (1992)
of P10,000 a month as protection money".
With the monthly payments, Roger As Sergio, Yoyong, Zoilo and Warlilo
assured, the syndicate would provide engaged in a drinking spree at Heartthrob
protection to Antonio, his business, and his Disco, Special Police Officer 3 (SPO 3)
employees. Should Antonio refuse, Roger Manolo Yabang suddenly approached
warned, the motel owner would either be them, aimed his revolver at Sergio whom
killed or his establishment destroyed. he recognized as a wanted killer and fatally
Antonio refused to pay the protection shot the latter. Whereupon, Yoyong.Zoilo
83
money. Days later, at around 3:00 in the and Warlito ganged up on Yabang. Warlito,
Page
morning, Mauro, a member of the criminal

using his own pistol, shot and wounded the prosecution, without objection from the
Yabang. de officio counsel for the accused, proved
evident premeditation. It likewise
B. Was there conspiracy and treachery? successfully proved the qualifying and the
Explain. generic aggravating circumstances alleged
in the information.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. For the purpose of determining the
The acts of Yoyong, Zoilo and Warlito are appropriate penalty to be imposed upon the
justified under pars. 1 and 2 of Article 11, accused, may the court take into account
RPG, that is, self-defense or defense of a evident premeditation and the other
stranger, as they have reason to suspect generic aggravating circumstances?
that Yabang might not be satisfied in killing
Sergio ONLY, the three being friends and B. Supposing that treachery was not
companions of the victim. Hence, they are proved, may evident premeditation, which
entitled to protect their own lives and limbs was duly proved, be considered as the
from the unlawful aggression of Yabang. qualifying circumstances?
Alternatively they have the justified right to
defend a stranger (Sergio) whose life at C. If the prosecution failed to prove
that moment might still be saved by treachery and did not offer any evidence to
ganging up on Yabang to prevent the latter prove evident premeditation, does acquittal
from any further attack by the latter. In of the accused follow?
either case reasonable necessity of the
means employed and lack of sufficient SUGGESTED ANSWER:
provocation are present.
A. Yes, as far as evident premeditation is
In turn, is yabang criminally liable for the concerned, but only as a generic a
death of Sergio? gravating circumstance.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Since treachery absorbs nocturnity, abuse

of superior strength and employing means
Yabang is liable for Homicide for the killing to weaken the defense, they can no longer
of Sergio as the attack was frontal Sergio, be considered as additional circumstances.
being a suspected killer, is no jurisdiction to
be killed by Yabang (People vs. Oanis). B. No, since it was not alleged in the
information; qualifying circumstances
Art. 14: Evident Premeditation, not alleged if proved during trial will only
Treachery (1991) be considered as generic.
In an information for Murder against A. B, C. No, but liability will only be for homicide,
and C, the prosecution alleges Treachery as there is no circumstances to qualify
as the qualifying circumstance and the it to murder.
following generic aggravating
circumstances: (1) noctumity, (2) abuse of Art. 14: Nighttime (1994)
84
superior strength, and (3) employing

Page
means to weaken the defense. At the trial,

At about 9:30 in the evening, while Dino SUGGESTED ANSWER:

and Raffy were walking along Padre Faura
Street, Manila. Johnny hit them with a rock Cruelty, for burning the victims face with a
injuring Dino at the back. Raffy approached lighted cigarrete, thereby deliberately
Dino but suddenly, Bobby, Steve, Danny augmenting the victims suffering by acts
and Nonoy surrounded the duo. Then clearly unnecessary to the rape, while the
Bobby stabbed Dino. Steve, Danny. Nonoy offender delighted and enjoyed seeing the
and Johnny kept on hitting Dino and Raffy victim suffer in pain (People vs. Lucas, 181
with rocks. As a result, Dino died. SCRA 316).
Bobby, Steve, Danny, Nonoy and Johnny Relationship, because the offended party
were charged with homicide. is a descendant (daughter) of the offender
and considering that the crime is one
Can the court appreciate the aggravating against chastity.
circumstances of nighttime and band?
Art. 14: Band, Nocturnity, Dwelling,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Uninhabitted Place (1996)
No, nighttime cannot be appreciated as an Jose, Domingo. Manolo, and Fernando,

aggravating circumstance because there is armed with bolos, at about one o'clock in
no indication that the offenders deliberately the morning, robbed a house at a desolate
sought the cover of darkness to facilitate place where Danilo, his wife, and three
the commission of the crime or that they daughters were living. While the four were
took advantage of nighttime (People vs. De in the process of ransacking Danilos
los Reyes, 203 SCRA 707). Besides, house, Fernando, noticing that one of
judicial notice can be taken of the fact that Danilos daughters was trying to get away,
Padre Faura Street is well-lighted. ran after her and finally caught up with her
in a thicket somewhat distant from the
However, band should be considered as house. Fernando, before bringing back the
the crime was committed by more than daughter to the house, raped her first.
three armed malefactors; in a recent Thereafter, the four carted away the
Supreme Court decision, stones or rocks belongings of Danilo and his family.
are considered deadly weapons.
Under the facts of the case, what
Art. 14: Cruelty; Relationship (1994) aggravating circumstances may be
appreciated against the four? Explain.
Ben, a widower, driven by bestial desire,
poked a gun on his daughter Zeny, forcibly SUGGESTED ANSWER:
undressed her and tied her legs to the bed.
He also burned her face with a lighted The aggravating circumstances which may
cigarrete. Like a madman, he laughed be considered in the premises are:
while raping her.
i) Band because all the four offenders are
What aggravating circumstances are armed:
85
present in this case? (1994 Bar Question) ii) Nocturnity because evidently the
Page
offenders took advantage of night time;

iii) dwelling: and Treachery may be present because the

iv) Uninhabited place because the house accused stabbed the victim while the latter
where the crimes were committed was at was sound asleep. Accordingly, he
a desolate place" and obviously the employed means and methods which
offenders took advantage of this directly and specially insured the execution
circumstance in committing the crime. of the act without risk himself arising from
the defense which the victim might have
Art. 14: Evident premeditation, made (People us. Dequifto. 60 Phil. 279
treachery, night time and unlawful entry People vs. Miranda, et aL, 90 Phil. 91).
(1997)
Nighttime cannot be appreciated because
The accused and the victim occupied there is no showing that the accused
adjacent apartments, each being a deliberately sought or availed of nighttime
separate dwelling unit of one big house. to insure the success of his act The
The accused suspected his wife of having Intention to commit the crime was
an illicit relation with the victim. One conceived shortly before its commission
afternoon, he saw the victim and his wife (People vs. Pardo. 79 Phil. 568). Moreover,
together on board a vehicle. In the evening nighttime is absorbed in treachery.
of that day, the accused went to bed early
and tried to sleep, but being so annoyed Unlawful entry may be appreciated as an
over the suspected relation between his aggravating circumstance, Inasmuch as
wife and the victim, he could not sleep. the accused entered the room of the victim
Later in the night, he resolved to kill the through the window, which is not the proper
victim. He rose from bed and took hold of a place for entrance into the house (Art. 14,
knife. He entered the apartment of the par. 18, Revised Penal Code. People vs.
victim through an unlocked window. Inside, Baruga. 61 Phil. 318).
he saw the victim soundly asleep. He
thereupon stabbed the victim, inflicting Art. 14: Aggravating circumstances
several wounds, which caused his death Four Kinds; Generic vs Qualifying
within a few hours. (1999)
Would you say that the killing was attended A. Name the four (4) kinds of
by the qualifying or aggravating aggravating circumstances and state their
circumstances of evident premeditation, effect on the penalty of crimes and nature
treachery, nighttime and unlawful entry? thereof. (3%)
B. Distinguish generic aggravating
SUGGESTED ANSWER: circumstance from qualifying aggravating
circumstance.
Evident premeditation cannot be
considered against the accused because SUGGESTED ANSWER:
he resolved to kill the victim 'later in the
night" and there was no sufficient lapse of A. The four (4) kinds of aggravating
time between the determination and circumstances are:
execution, to allow his conscience to
86
overcome the resolution of his will. 1. Generic aggravating or those that

Page
can generally apply to all crimes, and can

be offset by mitigating circumstances, but if employees. Should Antonio refuse, Roger

not offset, would affect only the maximum warned, the motel owner would either be
of the penalty prescribed by law; killed or his establishment destroyed.
2. Specific aggravating or those that Antonio refused to pay the protection
apply only to particular crimes and cannot money. Days later, at around 3:00 in the
be offset by mitigating circumstances; morning, Mauro, a member of the criminal
3. Qualifying circumstances or those syndicate, arrived at Antonio's home and
that change the nature of the crime to a hurled a grenade into an open window of
graver one, or brings about a penalty next the bedroom where Antonio, his wife and
higher in degree, and cannot be offset by their three year-old daughter were
mitigating circumstances; sleeping. All three of them were killed
4. Inherent aggravating or those that instantly when the grenade exploded.
essentially accompany the commission of
the crime and does not affect the penalty State, with reasons, the crime or crimes
whatsoever. that had been committed as well as the
aggravating circumstances, if any,
B. Generic aggravating circumstances: attendant thereto. (7%)
1. affects the nature of the crime or SUGGESTED ANSWER:

brings about a penalty higher in degree
than that ordinarily prescribed. The killing is qualified by the use of an
2. Can be offset by ordinary mitigating explosive (hand grenade). The treachery
circumstances; attending the killing shall be separately
3. need not be alleged in the appreciated as another aggravating
Information as long as proven during the circumstance aside from the use of
trial, the same shall be considered in explosive as the qualifying circumstance.
imposing the sentence.
Other aggravating circumstances which
Qualifying circumstances: may be appreciated are:
1. must be alleged In the Information
and proven during trial; 1. Dwelling, because the killings were
2. cannot be offset by mitigating committed in the home of the victims who
circumstances; had not given any provocation;
3. affects the nature of the crime or 2. Nocturnity, considering that the
brings about a penalty higher in degree offenders carried out the killing at around
than that ordinarily prescribed. 3:00 AM, indicative of a deliberate choice
of night time for the commission of the
Art. 14: Explosive, Treachery (2008) crime;
3. Treachery, under Art. 14, par. 16,
Roger, the leader of a crime syndicate in RPC, mentioned above, considering that
Malate, Manila, demanded the payment by victims were all asleep when killed; and
Antonio, the owner of a motel in that area, 4. The offense was committed by a
of P10,000 a month as 'protection money". person who belongs to an
With the monthly payments, Roger organized/syndicated crime group under
87
assured, the syndicate would provide the Heinous Crimes Law (Sec. 23 R.A.
Page
protection to Antonio, his business, and his

7659), amending for this purpose Art. 62(1) picklocks is equivalent to force upon things
of the Revised Penal Code. in robbery with force upon things.
Art. 14: Dwelling, Nighttime (2009) Art. 14: Qualifying circumstance in rape
cases (2004)
Wenceslao and Loretta were staying in the
same boarding house, occupying different GV was convicted of raping TC, his niece,
rooms. One late evening, when everyone in and he was sentenced to death. It was
the house was asleep, Wenceslao entered alleged in the information that the victim
Loretta's room with the use of a picklock. was a minor below seven years old, and
Then, with force and violence, Wenceslao her mother testified that she was only six
ravished Loretta. After he had satisfied his years and ten months old, which her aunt
lust, Wenceslao stabbed Loretta to death corroborated on the witness stand. The
and, before leaving the room, took her information also alleged that the accused
jewelry. was the victims uncle, a fact proved by the
prosecution.
[b] Discuss the applicability of the relevant
aggravating circumstances of dwelling, On automatic review before the Supreme
nocturnity and the use of the picklock to Court, accused- appellant contends that
enter the room of the victim. (3%) capital punishment could not be imposed
on him because of the inadequacy of the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: charges and the insufficiency of the
evidence to prove all the elements of the
Dwelling is aggravating because the crimes heinous crime of rape beyond reasonable
were committed in the privacy of Loretta's doubt.
room which in law is considered as her
dwelling. It is well settled that "dwelling" Is appellants contention correct? Reason
includes a room in a boarding house being briefly. (5%)
occupied by the offended party where she
enjoys privacy, peace of mind and sanctity SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of an abode.
Yes, appellant's contention is correct
Nocturnity or nighttime is also aggravating insofar as the age of the victim is
because although it was not purposely or concerned. The age of the victim raped has
especially sought for by Wenceslao, not been proved beyond reasonable doubt
nighttime was obviously taken advantaged to constitute the crime as qualified rape and
of by him in committing the other crimes. deserving of the death penalty. The
Under the objective test, nocturnity is guidelines in appreciating age as a
aggravating when taken advantaged of by qualifying circumstance in rape cases have
the offender during the commission of the not been met, to wit:
crime thus facilitating the same. The use of
a picklock to enter the room of the victim is 1. The primary evidence of the age of
not an aggravating circumstance under Art. the victim is her birth certificate;
14 of the Code but punished as a crime by 2. In the absence of the birth
88
itself where the offender has no lawful certificate, age of the victim may be proven
Page
cause for possessing it. The use of

by authentic document, such as baptismal 2) it is essential to the crime involved,

certificate and school records; otherwise some other crime is committed;
3. If the aforesaid documents are and
shown to have been lost or destroyed or 3) it is specifically alleged in the
otherwise unavailable, the testimony, if Information and proven during the trial.
clear and credible of the victims mother or
any member of the family, by consanguinity Art. 14: Special aggravating
or affinity, who is qualified to testify on circumstance
matters respecting pedigree such as the Use of an unlicensed firearm in the
exact age or date of birth of the offended commission of a crime (2004)
party pursuant to Section 40, Rule 130 of
the Rules on Evidence shall be sufficient A. PH killed OJ, his political rival in the
but only under the following circumstances: election campaign for Mayor of their town.
(a) If the victim is alleged to be below 3 The Information against PH alleged that he
years of age and what is sought to be used an unlicensed firearm in the killing of
proved is that she is less than 7 years old; the victim, and this was proved beyond
(b) If the victim is alleged to be below 7 reasonable doubt by the prosecution. The
years of age and what is sought to be trial court convicted PH of two crimes:
proved is that she is less than 12 years old; murder and illegal possession of firearms.
4. If the victim is alleged to be below 12
years of age and what is sought to be Is the conviction correct? Reason briefly.
proved is that she is less than 18 years old. (5%)
5. In the absence of a certificate of live
birth, authentic document, or the testimony SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of the victim's mother or relatives
concerning the victim's age under the A. No, the conviction of PH for two crimes,
circumstances above-stated, murder and illegal possession of firearm is
complainants sole testimony can suffice, not correct. Under the new law on illegal
provided that it is expressly and clearly possession of firearms and explosives,
admitted by the accused (People vs. Rep. Act No. 8294, a person may only be
Pruna, 390 SCRA 577 [2002D]) criminally liable for illegal possession of
firearm if no other crime is committed
Art. 14: Qualifying Aggravating therewith; if a homicide or murder is
circumstances (2003) committed with the use of an unlicensed
firearm, such use shall be considered as an
When qualifying circumstances would be aggravating circumstance.
deemed, if at all, elements of a crime?
PH therefore may only be convicted of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: murder and the use of an unlicensed
firearm in its commission may only be
A qualifying circumstance would be appreciated as a special aggravating
deemed an element of a crime when - circumstance, provided that such use is
alleged specifically in the information for
1) it changes the nature of the crime, Murder.
89
bringing about a more serious crime and a

Page
heavier penalty;
Art. 14: Use of an unlicensed firearm in rendered the victim defenseless and
homicide or murder (2009) without any chance to retaliate, by tying his
hands at his back before attacking him.
TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the Treachery exists at least in the second and
statement is true, or FALSE if the final stage of the attack, after the offenders
statement is false. Explain your answer in caught up with the victim.
not more than two (2) sentences. (5%)
PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR
[c] The use of an unlicensed firearm in FELONIES
homicide is considered a generic
aggravating circumstance which can be ART. 17- Principals By Direct
offset by an ordinary mitigating Participation
circumstance.
Mr. Red was drinking with his buddies, Mr.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: White and Mr. Blue when he saw Mr. Green
with his former girlfriend, Ms. Yellow.
False. Offsetting may not take place Already drunk, Mr. Red declared in a loud
because the use of an unlicensed firearm voice that if he could not have Ms. Yellow,
in homicide or murder is a specific no one can. He then proceeded to the
aggravating circumstance provided for by mens room but told Mr. White and Mr. Blue
Rep. Act No. 8294. It is not one of the to take care of Mr. Green. Mr. Blue and Mr.
generic aggravating circumstances under White asked Mr. Red what he meant but
Art.14 of the Revised Penal Code (People Mr. Red simply said, "You already know
v. Avecilla, 351 SCRA 635 [20011). what I want," and then left. Mr. Blue and Mr.
White proceeded to kill Mr. Green and hurt
Article 14 Treachery (1993) Ms. Yellow. (2014 BAR)
As a result of a misunderstanding during a A. What, if any, are the respective

meeting, Joe was mauled by Nestor, Jolan, liabilities of Mr. Red, Mr. White and
Reden and Arthur. He ran towards his Mr. Blue for the death of Mr. Green?
house but the four chased and caught him. B. What, if any, are the respective
Thereafter, they tied Joes hands at his liabilities of Mr. Red, Mr. White and
back and attacked him. Nestor used a Mr. Blue for the injuries of Ms.
knife; Jolan, a shovel; Arthur, his fists; and Yellow?
Reden, a piece of wood. After killing Joe,
Reden ordered the digging of a grave to SUGGESTED ANSWER
bury Joes lifeless body. Thereafter, the
four (4) left together. Convicted for the A. Mr. Blue and Mr. White are liable for
killing of Joe, the death of Mr. Green as principals by
direct participation. They were the ones
What was the crime committed by the four who participated in the criminal resolution
assailants? Discuss with reasons and who carried out their plan and
personally took part in its execution by acts
The crime committed is murder, qualified which directly tended to the same end. Mr.
90
by treachery because the offenders, taking Red cannot be held criminally liable as
Page
advantage of their superiority in number, principal by inducement because his

statement that Mr. Blue and Mr. White are sternly warned Jonas to stop his malicious
to take care of Mr. Green was not made act or he would get what he wanted. A
directly with the intention of procuring the heated argument between Jonas and
commission of the crime. There is no Jepoy ensued but Jaja tried to calm down
showing that the words uttered by him may his friend. At midnight, Jonas convinced
be considered as so efficacious and Jaja to lend him his .45 caliber pistol so that
powerful so as to amount to physical or he could use it to knock down Jepoy and to
moral coercion (People v. Assad, G.R. No. end his arrogance. Jonas thought that after
L-33673, February 24, 1931). Neither is all, explosions were everywhere and
there evidence to show that Mr. Red has an nobody would know who shot Jepoy. After
ascendancy or influence over Mr. White Jaja lent his firearm to Jonas, the latter
and Mr. Blue (People v. Abarri, F.R. No. again started started throwing lighted super
90815, March 1, 1995). lolos and pla-plas at Jepoys yard in order
to provoke him so that he would come out
B. Mr. Blue and Mr. White are liable as of his house. When Jepoy came out, Jonas
principals by direct participation for the immediately shot him with Jajas .45 caliber
crime of physical injuries for hurting Ms. gun but missed his target. Instead, the
Yellow to the extent of the injuries inflicted. bullet hit Jepoy's five year old son who was
Having no participation in the attack upon following behind him, killing the boy
Ms. Yellow, Mr. Red would have no instantaneously.
criminal liability therefor.
If you were the judge, how would you
ART. 17- Principals by direct decide the case? Explain. (1%)
participation and co-principal by
indispensable cooperation (2000) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Despite the massive advertising campaign I would convict Jonas as principal by direct
in media against firecrackers and gun-firing participation and Jaja as co-principal by
during the New Year's celebrations. Jonas indispensable cooperation for the complex
and Jaja bought ten boxes of super lolo and crime of murder with homicide. Jaja should
pla-pla in Bocaue, Bulacan. Before be held liable as co-principal and not only
midnight of December 31,1999, Jonas and as an accomplice because he knew of
Jaja started their celebration by having a Jonas' criminal design even before he lent
drinking spree at Jona's place by exploding his firearm to Jonas and still he concurred
their high-powered firecrackers in their in that criminal design by providing the
neighborhood. In the course of their firearm.
conversation, Jonas confided to Jaja that
he has been keeping a long-time grudge ART. 17 Principal by inducement;
against his neighbor Jepoy in view of the Accessory (1987)
tatter's refusal to lend him some money.
While under the influence of liquor, Jonas Juan had a land dispute with Pedro for a
started throwing lighted super lolos inside number of years. As Juan was earning
Jepoy's fence to irritate him and the same down his house, he saw his brother,
exploded inside the tatter's yard. Upon Rodolfo attack Pedro with a bolo from
91
knowing that the throwing of the super lolo behind. Rodolfo was about to hit Pedro a
Page
was deliberate, Jepoy became furious and second time while the latter was prostrate
on the ground, when Carling, Pedros son, ART. 17 Principal by inducement;

shouted, Ill kill you. This distracted Accessory (2015)
Rodolfo who then turned ter Carling.
Rodolfo and Carling fought with their bolos. Nel learned that Elgar, the owner of the
While the two were fighting, Juan shouted biggest house in the place, would be out of
to his brother Rodolfo: Kill them both, they town for three days with no one left to watch
are our enemies. Calling suffered a the house. He called his friends Ben, Ardo
number of wounds and died on the spot, and Gorio and they planned to take the
Pedro who was in serious condition was valuables in the house while Elgar was
rushed to the hospital. He died five days away. Nel and Ben would go inside the
later for loss of blood because the blood house, Ardo would serve as the lookout,
purchased from Manila which could have while Gorio would stay in the getaway car.
saved him, according to the doctor, did not When Elgar left, they carried out their plan
arrive on time, Jose, father of Juan and to the letter. Nel and Ben went inside the
Rodolfo, told his sons to hide in Manila and house through the backdoor which was left
he gave them money for the purpose. unlocked. None of the rooms and drawers
When the police investigators saw Jose, he inside were locked. They took the money,
told the police investigators that Juan and jewelry and other valuables therefrom and
Rodolfo went to Mindanao. immediately left using the getaway car.
After driving for about one kilometer, Nel
What crimes, if any, did (a) Rodolfo, (b) realized he left his bag and wallet with IDs
Juan and Jose commit? Explain your in the house and so he instructed Gorio to
answer and state whether the acts drive back to the house. Nel just went in
committed are accompanied by thinking that the house was still empty. But
circumstances affecting criminal liability. to his surprise, Nel found Fermin seated on
a bench with Nel's bag and wallet beside
SUGGESTED ANSWER: him and appeared to be texting using his
smart phone. Nel took a golf club near him
Jose, father of Juan and Rodolfo, is an and hit Fermin with it. Fermin shouted for
accessory to the crime of murder help, but Nel kept hitting him until he
committed by Rodolfo because he assisted stopped making noise. The noise alerted
him to escape to Manila. But he is not the neighbor who called the police. Nel,
criminally liable because of his relationship Ben, Ardo and Gorio were caught. Fermin
to Rodolfo (Article 20). He is not an died. What is the criminal liability of Nel,
accessory to the crime of homicide, Ben, Ardo and Gorio? Explain.
because this crime is not included in
treason, parricide, muraer, attempt against SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the life of the Chief Executive or the
principal is known to be habitually guilty of Nel, Ben, Ardo and Gorio are criminally
some other crime if the accessory is a liable as principals for the crime of Theft.
private person. However, this is moot and They conspired to take Elgars personal
academic because of the relationship of properties without his knowledge, with
Jose to Rodolfo. intent to gain, and without violence against
or intimidation of persons or force upon
92
things (Art. 308, RPC) Nel and Ben entered

Page
the house through an unlocked backdoor

and took the valuables from the rooms and co-principal with Dalmacio for the killing of
drawers that wer likewise left unlocked. Nel Pedro? Give your reasons.
and Ben are liable as principals by direct
participation while Ardo and Gorio are SUGGESTED ANSWER:
principals by indispensable cooperation
because they have concurred in the Mario is a principal by inducement. By
criminal resolution and cooperated by promising to give P50,000.00 to Dalmacio,
performing another act as lookout and which is an agreement for a consideration
driver of a getaway car, respectively, which for the purpose of avenging his brother's
were indispensable for the commission of death the inducement was made directly
the crime (Art. 17, RPC). with the intention of procuring the
commission of the crime. Furthermore, the
Nel, however, is also liable for the separate facts show that Dalmacio has no personal
crime of Homicide for the death of Fermin. reason to kill Pedro except the inducement,
The killing of Fermin was a separate act which is therefore the determining cause
and was not a necessary means for for the commission of the crime by
committing Theft (Art. 48, RPC) because Dalmacio.
the latter crime was already consummated.
Nel killed Fermin for a different reason Mario's change of mind and heart at the last
perhaps because of his anger that Fermin minute, which did not, after all, prevent the
was in possession of his bag and wallet and consummation of the crime, because it was
appeared to be using his smart phone to too late, does not alter the course of his
contact the police. criminal liability as a co-principal by
inducement. Desistance from carrying out
ART. 17 Principal by inducement; a criminal design is no defense if such
Accessory (1989) desistance has not actually and
successfully prevented the commission of
Mario, a law student, wanted to avenge the the crime.
death of his brother, Jose, in the hands of
Pedro and his gang. So, Mario talked to ART. 17 Principal by inducement;
Dalmacio, known tough guy, to kill Pedro Accessory (2002)
by promising him P50,000 to be paid after
he had accomplished the killing. Dalmacio A asked B to kill C because of a grave
agreed. Since Pedro was to appear in court injustice done to A by C. A promised B a
the following day at 9:00 a.m. at the city hall reward. B was willing to kill C, not so much
to attend the hearing involving the death of because of the reward promised to him but
Jose, Mario told Dalmacio to carry out the because he also had his own long-standing
plan at that exact time in the court room, to grudge against C, who had wronged him in
which Dalmacio assented. At 8:50 a.m., the past. If C is killed by B, would A be liable
Mario went to see Captain Malonso of the as a principal by inducement? (5%)
Police Department and told him that
Dalmacio would kill Pedro at 9:00 a.m. at SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the city hall. He asked Captain Malonso to No. A would not be liable as a principal by
prevent it and so the latter rushed to the city inducement because the reward he
93
hall but arrived at 9:05 a.m. when Dalmacio promised S is not the sole impelling reason
Page
had already killed Pedro. Is Mario liable as which made B to kill C. To bring about
criminal liability of a co-principal, the

inducement made by the inducer must be Chito committed the crimes of -
the sole consideration which caused the Delivery of Prisoners from Jail (Art. 156,
person induced to commit the crime and RPC) for working out the escape of
without which the crime would not have prisoners Willy and Vincent;
been committed. The facts of the case Two counts of Corruption of Public Officials
indicate that B, the killer supposedly (Art. 212, RPC); and 3. Falsification of
induced by A, had his own reason to kill C Public Documents, as a principal by
out of a long standing grudge. inducement (Art. 172 [1], RPC).
Willy committed the crime of Delivery of

ART 17- Principal by indispensable Prisoners from Jail (Art. 156, RPC) as a
cooperation; principal by inducement principal by indispensable cooperation if he
(2009) was aware of the criminal plan of Chito to
have them escape from prison and he did
To secure a release of his brother Willy, a escape pursuant to such criminal plan;
detention prisoner, and his cousin Vincent, otherwise he would not be liable for said
who is serving sentence for homicide, Chito crime if he escaped pursuant to human
asked the RTC Branch Clerk of Court to instinct only.
issue an Order which would allow the two
prisoners to be brought out of jail. At first, Vincent, being a prisoner serving sentence
the Clerk refused, but when Chita gave her by final judgment, committed the crime of
P50,000.00, she consented. Evasion of Service of Sentence (Art. 157,
RPC) for escaping during the term of his
She then prepared an Order requiring the imprisonment.
appearance in court of Willy and Vincent,
ostensibly as witnesses in a pending case. The Branch Clerk of Court
She forged the judge's signature, and committed the crimes of:
delivered the Order to the jail warden who, 1. Direct Bribery (Art. 210, RPC) for
in turn, allowed Willy and Vincent to go out accepting the P50,000.00 - in consideration
of jail in the company of an armed escort, of the order she issued to enable the
Edwin. Chito also gave Edwin P50,000.00 prisoners to get out of jail;
to leave the two inmates unguarded for
three minutes and provide them with an 2. Falsification of Public Document for
opportunity to escape. Thus, Willy and forging the judge's signature on said Order
Vincent were able to escape. (Art. 171, RPC);
3. Delivery of Prisoners from Jail (Art.
What crime or crimes, if any, had been 156, RPC), as a co-principal of Chito by
committed by Chito, Willy, Vincent, the indispensable cooperation for making the
Branch Clerk of court, Edwin, and the jail false Order and forging the judge's
warden? Explain your answer. (5%) signature thereon, to enable the prisoners
to get out of jail;
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 4. 4. Evasion of Service of Sentence
(Art. 157, RPC); as a co-principal of
94
The crimes committed in this case are as Vincent by indispensable cooperation for
Page
follows:
making the false Order that enabled execution of the crime without participating
Vincent to evade service of his sentence; as a principal, by prior or simultaneous
acts; whereas a conspirator participates in
Edwin, the jail guard who escorted the the commission of a crime as a co-
prisoners in getting out of jail, committed principal.
the crimes of 2. An accomplice incurs criminal
liability in an individual capacity by his act
1. Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners, alone of cooperating in the execution of the
specifically conniving with or consenting to crime; while a conspirator incurs criminal
Evasion for leaving unguarded the liability not only for his individual acts in the
prisoners escorted by him and provide execution of the crime but also for the acts
them an opportunity to escape (Art. 223, of the other participants in the commission
RPC); of the crime collectively. The acts of the
2. Direct Bribery for receiving the other participants in the execution of the
P50,000.00 as consideration for leaving the crime are considered also as acts of a
prisoners unguarded and allowing them the conspirator for purposes of collective
opportunity to escape (Art. 210, RPC); criminal responsibility.
3. An accomplice participates in the
The jail warden did not commit nor incur a execution of a crime when the criminal
crime there being no showing that he was design or plan is already in place; whereas
aware of what his subordinates had done a conspirator participates in the adoption or
nor of any negligence on his part that would making of the criminal design.
amount to infidelity in the custody of 4. An accomplice is subjected to a
prisoners. penalty one degree lower than that of a
principal; whereas a conspirator incurs the
ACCOMPLICES penalty of a principal.
5. As to Requisites
ART. 18- Who is an accomplice? (2012) Accomplice
A: Accomplices are those persons who, not (1) Community of criminal design; that is,
being the principal, cooperate in the knowing the criminal design of the principal
execution of the offense by previous or by direct participation, he concurs with the
simultaneous acts (Art. 18, RPC). latter in his purpose;
(2) the performance of the previous or
ART. 18 Accomplice vs Conspirator: simultaneous acts that are not
Distinctions (2007, 2012) indispensible to the commission of the
crime
Distinguish between an accomplice and a
conspirator. Conspirator
(1) that the agreement concerned the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: commission of a crime;
(2) that two or more persons come to an
The distinctions between an accomplice agreement;
and a conspirator are: (3) that the execution of the felony was
95
decided upon.
1. An accomplice incurs criminal
Page
liability by merely cooperating in the

ART. 18 Accomplice vs Conspirator ACCESSORIES

(1998)
Juan and Arturo devised a plan to murder Art. 19. Accessories And Art. 20
Joel. In a narrow alley near Joel's house, Accessories who are exempt; In relation
Juan will hide behind the big lamppost and to Composite crime of rape with
shoot Joel where the latter passes through homicide; theft (1998)
on his way to work. Arturo will come from
the other end of the alley and King went to the house of Laura who was
simultaneously shoot Joel from behind. On alone. Laura offered him a drink and after
the appointed day, Arturo was consuming three bottles of beer. King
apprehended by the authorities before made advances to her and with force and
reaching the alley. When Juan shot Joel as violence, ravished her. Then King killed
planned, he was unaware that Arturo was Laura and took her jewelry.
arrested earlier. Discuss the criminal
liability of Arturo, if any. 15% Doming, King's adopted brother, learned
about the incident. He went to Laura's
SUGGESTED ANSWER: house, hid her body, cleaned everything
and washed the bloodstains inside the
Arturo, being one of the two who devised room.
the plan to murder Joel, thereby becomes
a co-principal by direct conspiracy. What is Later, King gave Jose, his legitimate
needed only is an overt act and both will brother, one piece of jewelry belonging to
incur criminal liability. Arturo's liability as a Laura. Jose knew that the jewelry was
conspirator arose from his participation in taken from Laura but nonetheless he sold it
jointly devising the criminal plan with Juan, for P2.000.
to kill Jose. And it was pursuant to that
conspiracy that Juan killed Joel. The What crime or crimes did King, Doming and
conspiracy here is actual, not by inference Jose commit? Discuss their criminal
only. The overt act was done pursuant to liabilities. (10%
that conspiracy whereof Arturo is co-
conspirator. There being a conspiracy, the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
act of one is the act of all. Arturo, therefore,
should be liable as a co-conspirator but the King committed the composite crime of
penalty on him may be that of an Rape with homicide as a single indivisible
accomplice only (People vs. Nierra, 96 offense, not a complex crime, and Theft.
SCRA1; People vs. Medrano, 114 SCRA The taking of Laura's jewelry when she is
335) because he was not able to actually already dead is only theft.
participate in the shooting of Joel, having
been apprehended before reaching the Doming's acts, having been done with
place where the crime was committed. knowledge of the commission of the crime
and obviously to conceal the body of the
crime to prevent its discovery, makes him
an accessory to the crime of rape with
96
homicide under Art. 19, par. 2 of the Rev.

Penal Code, but he is exempt from criminal
Page
liability therefor under Article 20 of the

Code, being an adopted brother of the knowledge under the law is not
principal. synonymous with suspicion. Mere
suspicion that the crime has been
Jose incurs criminal liability either as an committed is not sufficient. Even if he can
accessory to the crime of theft committed be considered as an accessory under Art.
by King, or as fence. Although he is a 19(2) of RPC, Abelardo is not liable, being
legitimate brother of King, the exemption the brother of Modesto under Art. 20, RPC.
under Article 20 does not include the
participation he did, because he profited ART 19- Accessories (2009)
from the effects of such theft by selling the
jewelry knowing that the same was taken Ponciano borrowed Ruben's gun, saying
from Laura. Or Jose may be prosecuted for that he would use it to kill Freddie. Because
fencing under the Anti-Fencing Law of Ruben also resented Freddie, he readily
1979 (PD No. 1612) since the jewelry was lent his gun, but told Ponciano: "0,
the proceeds of theft and with intent to gain, pagkabaril mo kay Freddie, isauli mo
he received it from King and sold it. kaagad, ha." Later, Ponciano killed
Freddie, but used a knife because he did
ART 19- Accessories (2013) not want Freddie's neighbors to hear the
gunshot.
Modesto and Abelardo are brothers.
Sometime in August 1998 while Abelardo A. What, if any, is the liability of
was in his office, Modesto, together with Ruben? Explain. (3%)
two other men in police uniform, came with
two heavy bags. Modesto asked Abelardo B. Would your answer be the same if,
to keep the two bags in his vault until he instead of Freddie, it was Manuel, a relative
comes back to get them. When Abelardo of Ruben, who was killed by Ponciano
later examined the two bags, he saw using Ruben's gun? Explain. (3%)
bundles of money that, in his rough count,
could not be less than P5 Million. He kept SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the money inside the vault and soon he
heard the news that a gang that included A. Ruben's liability is that of an
Modesto had been engaged in bank accomplice only because he merely
robberies. Abelardo, unsure of what to do cooperated in Ponciano's determination to
under the circumstances, kept quiet about kill Freddie. Such cooperation is not
the two bags in his vault. Soon after, the indispensable to the killing, as in fact the
police captured, and secured a confession killing was carried out without the use of
from, Modesto who admitted that their loot Ruben's gun. Neither may Ruben be
had been deposited with Abelardo. What is regarded as a co-conspirator since he was
Abelardo's liability? not a participant in the decisionmaking of
Ponciano to kill Freddie; he merely
SUGGESTED ANSWER cooperated in carrying out the criminal plan
which was already in place (Art. 18, RPC).
Abelardo is not criminally liable. To be
criminally liable as an accessory under Art. B. No. The answer would not be the
97
19, such person must have knowledge of same because Ruben lent his gun
Page
the commission of the crime. The term purposely for the killing of Freddie only, not
for any other killing. Ponciano's using day, Juanito went to the NBI and told the
Ruben's gun in killing a person other than NBI what Ricardo narrated him. The NBI
Freddie is beyond Ruben's criminal intent alerted ABC Insurance Company, which
and willing involvement. Only Ponciano will immediately denied the daim for payment
answer for the crime against Manuel. of insurance and filed a complaint for
attempted estafa through arson against
It has been ruled that when the owner of Sing Hua and Ricardo.
the gun knew that it would be used to kill a
particular person, but the offender used it A. Did Juanito commit any crime?
to kill another person, the owner of the gun B. Would the situation be different if at
is not an accomplice as to the killing of the the time Ricardo secured the professional
other person. While there was community services of Juanito, ABC Insurance
of design to kill Freddie between Ponciano Company had already paid Sing Hua the
and Ruben, there was none with respect to insurance and the latter had in turn paid
the killing of Manuel. Ricardo 10% thereof?
ART. 19- Accessories (1987) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Ricardo secured the services of Atty. A. Juanito did not commit any crime.
Juanito to defend him in an arson case By telling Ricardo that he could not give him
pending in court. Juanito asked his client professional advice or services, after being
what actually happened. Ricardo informed informed that the owner of the department
his lawyer that Sing Hua, owner of a store hired him to bum the store because it
department store, hired him to bum the was losing heavily and wanted to get the
store because Sing Hua was losing heavily insurance on the store, and that he was
and wanted to get the insurance on the paid already P5,000 with a promise of an
store. Ricardo said that Sing Hua paid him additional 10% of the proceeds of the
P5,000.00, and promised an additional PI0,000,000 fire insurance once collected
10% of the proceeds of the PI0,000,000.00 from the insurance company, Atty. Juanito
lire insurance once this was collected from complied with his obligation as a lawyer to
the insurance company. He further said report to the authorities whatever
that Sing Hnas claim for payment of the fire knowledge he has regarding the
insurance was still pending and its approval commission of a crime.
depended on the outcome of the arson
case. This meant that the ABC Insurance B. Juanito will be liable as an
Company would pay the claim should accessory because by accepting 10% of
Ricardo be acquitted in the arson case. the insurance proceeds even in payment of
Then he would also get the 10% share of the professional services, he profited or
the fire insurance proceeds. He told lawyer assisted the principal, Ricardo, to profit
Juanito that by depending him in the arson from the proceeds of the commission of the
case, the latter would be helping collect the crime.
10% which would amount of
P1,000,000.00. After hearing Ricardos ART. 19- Accessories (1989)
story, Atty. Juanito told him he could not
98
further give him professional advice or Emilio and Andres were walking home from
Page
services and so Ricardo left That same the farm at 8:00 oclock in the evening
when they met Asiong whom Emilio causal or other connection between the act
suspected as the one who stole his fighting of killing and the act of taking the money.
cock two (2) days before; Emilio confronted 3. Andres is liable as an accessory in
Asiong and after a heated discussion, a the homicide case because he had no
bolo fight between the two (2) ensued. participation either as co-principal or
Asiong sustained fatal wounds and died. accomplice in the killing of Asiong who died
Emilio asked Andres to help him carry the solely because of the wounds inflicted on
body of Asiong and bury it behind the him in his bolo-fight with Emilio, the
bushes. After burying Asiong, Emilio picked principal. However, when Andres agreed to
up the jute bag Asiong was then holding help Emilio carry the body of Asiong and
and found inside P600 which Emilio and bury it behind the bushes, thus concealing
Andres divided each getting P300. A week or destroying the body of the crime (corpus
after the investigation by the police, a delicti) to prevent its discovery, he became
complaint was filed in the Office of an accessory to the crime of homicide (Art.
Provincial Fiscal against Emilio and Andres 19, RPC).
for robbery with homicide with the
aggravating circumstances of nighttime With respect to the taking of the P600.00
and uninhabited place. If you were the which Emilio and Andres divided between
fiscal, what information or information will themselves, they committed the crime of
you file against Emilio and Andres? What theft as co-principals. Theft because with
are their respective criminal liabilities? intent to gain but without violence against
or intimidation of persons no force upon
SUGGESTED ANSWER: things, they took personal property of
another without the latters consent. They
If I were the fiscal, I would file two separate acted with unity of purposes and intention,
informations against Emilio and Andres, thus making them co-principals by direct
one for homicide with Emilio as principal participation.
and Andres as accessory, and another for
theft against both Emilio and Andres as ART. 19- Accessories (2004)
principals. This is so because of the
following reasons: B. DCB, the daughter of MCB, stole the
earrings of XYZ, a stranger. MCB pawned
1. The killing of Asiong by Emilio is the earrings with TBI Pawnshop as a
homicide. It is not attended by any pledge for P500 loan. During the trial, MCB
qualifying circumstance of murder. It was a raised the defense that being the mother of
killing at the spur of the moment, in the DCB, she cannot be held liable as an
course of a bolo fight, as an aftermath of a accessory.
heated discussion.
2. Neither was the killing by reason of Will MCBs defense prosper? Reason
or on the occasion of a robbery. There was briefly. (5%)
no intention of either Emilio or Andres to
rob Asiong either prior to or in the course of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the killing. The taking of Asiongs P600.00
was only an AFTERTHOUGHT, after the B. No, MCBs defense will not prosper
99
killing was already perpetrated. There is no because the exemption from criminal
Page
liability of an accessory by virtue of

relationship with the principal does not Mancolo revealed to his friend Domeng his
cover accessories who themselves profited desire to kill Cece. He likewise confided to
from or assisted the offender to profit by the Domeng his desire to borrow his revolver.
effects or proceeds of the crime. This non- Domeng lent it. Manolo shot Cece in Manila
exemption of an accessory, though related with Domeng's revolver. As his gun was
to the principal of the crime, is expressly used in the killing, Domeng asked Mayor
provided in Art. 20 of the Revised Penal Tan to help him escape. The mayor gave
Code. Domeng P5,000 and told him to proceed to
Mindanao to hide. Domeng went to
ART. 19- Accessories (2010) Mindanao. The mayor was later charged as
an accessory to Cece's murder.
Immediately after murdering Bob, Jake
went to his mother to seek refuge. His a) Can he be held liable for the charge?
mother told him to hide in the maid's Explain. (4%) (2008 Bar Question)
quarters until she finds a better place for
him to hide. After two days, Jake SUGGESTED ANSWER:
transferred to his aunt's house. A week
later, Jake was apprehended by the police. a) Giving Domeng the benefit of a milder
Can Jake's mother and aunt be made criminal responsibility of an accomplice, not
criminally liable as accessories to the crime of a co-principal by indispensable
of murder? Explain. (3%) cooperation of Manolo, Mayor Tan could
not be liable as an accessory to Cece's
SUGGESTED ANSWER: murder. To incur criminal liability of an
accessory for helping or assisting in the
Obviously, Jake's mother was aware of her escape of an offender, he must be a
son's having committed a felony, such that principal of the crime committed. Unless
her act of harboring and concealing him Domeng would be considered as a co-
renders her liable as an accessory. But principal by indispensable cooperation in
being an ascendant of Jake, she is exempt the commission of the murder, the Mayor,
from criminal liability by express provision by assisting him to escape, would be an
of Article 20 of the Revised Penal Code. accessory to the felony.
On the other hand, the criminal liability of a) Decree Penalizing Obstruction of

Jake's aunt depends on her knowledge of Apprehension and Prosecution of Criminal
the felony committed by Jake. If she had Offenders (P.D.1829)
knowledge of his commission of the felony, (i) Punishable acts (ii) Compare with Art.
her act of harboring and concealing Jake 20, RPC (accessories exempt from
would render her criminally liable as criminal
accessory to the crime of murder; liability)
otherwise without knowledge of Jake's
commission of the felony, she would not be ART. 19- Accessories (2008)
liable.
Mancolo revealed to his friend Domeng his
100
ART. 19- Accessories (2008) desire to kill Cece. He likewise confided to

Domeng his desire to borrow his revolver.
Page
Domeng lent it. Manolo shot Cece in Manila

with Domeng's revolver. As his gun was A principal penalty is defined as that
used in the killing, Domeng asked Mayor provided for a felony and which is imposed
Tan to help him escape. The mayor gave by court expressly upon conviction.
Domeng P5,000 and told him to proceed to An accessory penalty is defined as that
Mindanao to hide. Domeng went to deemed included in the imposition of the
Mindanao. The mayor was later charged as principal penalty.
an accessory to Cece's murder.
B. Censure may not be included in a
Can he be held liable for any other sentence of acquittal, because a censure is
offense? Explain fully. (3%) a penalty. Censure is repugnant and is
essentially inconsistent and contrary to an
SUGGESTED ANSWER: acquittal (People vs. Abellera, 69 Phil.
623.)
b) Although the Mayor may not be held
liable as an accessory to the killing of Cece, C. At present, no offense may be
he may be held liable for obstruction of punished with the death penalty in our
justice under Presidential Decree No. 1829 jurisdiction at present. The 1987
for assisting Domeng, who was involved in Constitution has abolished the death
the commission of a crime, to escape from penalty and the abolition affects even those
Manila to Mindanao. who has already been sentenced to death
penalty. Therefore, unless Congress
PENALTIES enacts a law, no offense may be punished
ART 25- PENALTIES WHICH MAY BE with the death penalty at present. But until
IMPOSED today, Congress has not yet passed a law
to this effect.
A. State the two classes of penalties
under the revised Penal Code. Define Duration and Effect of Penalties,
each. (1988 Bar Question) Imposition (1991)
B. May censure be included in a
sentence of acquittal? Why or why not? Imagine that you are a Judge trying a case,
(1988 Bar Question) and based on the evidence presented and
C. What offenses, if any, may be the applicable law, you have decided on
punished with the death penalty in our the guilt of two (2) accused. Indicate the
jurisdiction at present? Explain. (1988 Bar five (5) steps you would follow to determine
Question) the exact penalty to be imposed. Stated
differently, what are the factors you must
SUGGESTED ANSWER: consider to arrive at the correct penalty?
(1991 Bar Question)
A. The two classes of penalties under
Article 25 of the Revise Penal Code are as SUGGESTED ANSWER:
follows:
1. Determine the crime committed;
Principal 2. Stage of execution and degree of
101
Accessory participation;
3. Determine the penalty;
Page
4. Consider the modifying falsification of public document is prision

circumstances; mayor plus fine not to exceed P5.000.00.
5. Determine whether Indeterminate
Sentence Law is applicable or not. Impose the proper prison penalty. (1997
Bar Question)
Imposition (1997) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A and B pleaded guilty to the crime of The proper penalty is ANY RANGE
parricide. The court found three mitigating WITHIN prision correccional (six (6)
circumstances, namely, plea of guilty, lack months and one (1) day to six (6) years) as
of instruction and lack of intent to commit MINIMUM, to ANY RANGE within prision
so grave a wrong as that committed. The mayor maximum (ten (10) years and one
prescribed penalty for parricide is reclusion (1) day to twelve (12) years) as MAXIMUM.
perpetua to death. This is in accordance with People vs.
Gonzales, 73 Phil. 549. where it was ruled
Impose the proper principal penalty. (1997 that for the purpose of determining the
Bar Question) penalty next lower in degree, the penalty
that should be considered as a starting
SUGGESTED ANSWER: point is the whole of prision mayor, it being
the penalty prescribed by law, and not
The proper penalty is reclusion perpetua. prision mayor in its maximum period, which
Even if there are two or more mitigating is only the penalty actually applied because
circumstances, a court cannot lower the of Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code.
penalty by one degree (Art. 63. par. 3, The penalty next lower in degree therefor is
Revised Penal Code; People vs. prision correctional and it is within the
Formigones, 87 Phil. 685). In U.S. vs. range of this penalty that the minimum
Relador, 60 Phil. 593, where the crime should be taken.
committed was parricide with the two (2)
mitigating circumstances of illiteracy and Duration and Effect of Penalties,
lack of intention to commit so grave a Imposition (1997)
wrong, and with no aggravating
circumstance, the Supreme Court held that Assume In the preceding problem that
the proper penalty to be imposed is there were two mitigating circumstances
reclusion perpetua. and no aggravating circumstance. Impose
the proper prison penalty. (1997 Bar
Duration and Effect of Penalties, Question)
Imposition (1997)
A was convicted of the complex crime of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
death through falsification of public
document. Since the amount involved did There being two (2) mitigating
not exceed P200.00, the penalty circumstances without any aggravating
prescribed by law for estafa is arresto circumstance, the proper prison penalty is
102
mayor in its medium and maximum arresto mayor (in any of Its periods, le.
periods. The penalty prescribed by law for ranging from one (1) month and one (1) day
Page
to six (6) months) as MINIMUM to prision

correctional in its maximum period four (4) accused who is insolvent and unable to pay
years, two (2) months, and one (1) day to the fine, shall serve the subsidiary
six (6) years as MAXIMUM. Under Art. 64, imprisonment.
par. 5 of the Revised Penal Code, when a b) The judge may not validly impose an
penalty contains three periods, each one of alternative penalty. Although the law may
which forms a period In accordance with prescribe an alternative penalty for a crime,
Article 76 and 77 of the same Code, and it does not mean that the court may impose
there are two or more mitigating the alternative penalties at the same time.
circumstances and no aggravating The sentence must be definite, otherwise
circumstances, the penalty next lower in the judgment cannot attain finality.
degree should be Imposed. For purposes
of the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Civil Indemnity
penalty next lower In degree should be The accused was found guilty of 10 counts
determined without regard as to whether of rape for having carnal knowledge with
the basic penalty provided by the Revised the same woman. In addition to the penalty
Penal Code should be applied In its of imprisonment, he was ordered to pay
maximum or minimum period as indemnity in the amount of P50,000.00 for
circumstances modifying liability may each count. On appeal, the accused
require. The penalty next lower In degree questions the award of civil indemnity for
to priskm correctional Therefore, as each count, considering that the victim is
previously stated, the minimum should be the same woman.
within the range of arresto mayor and the
maximum is within the range of prision How would you rule on the contention of the
correccional maltnits maximum period. accused? Explain. (3%) (2005 Bar
Question)
Alternative Penalty
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
E and M are convicted of a penal law that
imposes a penalty of fine or imprisonment The contention of the accused is without
or both fine and imprisonment. The judge merit. Each count of rape is a violation of
sentenced them to pay the fine, jointly and the person of the victim and thus gives rise
severally, with subsidiary imprisonment in to corresponding criminal and civil
case of insolvency. liabilities. The trial court is correct in
imposing a penalty for each rape and
a) Is the penalty proper? Explain. awarding corresponding civil indemnity for
b) May the judge impose an alternative each count even though the victim is the
penalty of fine or imprisonment? Explain. same woman. Rape is not a continued
(4%) (2005 Bar Question) crime.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Reclusion Perpetua vs Life

Imprisonment (1994)
a) Imposing the penalty of fine jointly
and severally on the two convicted accused Differentiate reclusion perpetua from life
103
is not proper. The penalty should be imprisonment.

imposed individually on every person
Page
accused of the crime. Any of the convicted SUGGESTED ANSWER:

The penalty of reclusion perpetua and the

Reclusion perpetua is that penalty provided penalty of life imprisonment are totally
for in the Revised Penal Code for crimes different from each other and therefore,
defined in and penalized therein except for should not he used interchangeably.
some crimes defined by special laws which
impose reclusion perpetua, such as Reclusion perpetua is a penalty prescribed
violations of Republic Act 6425, as by the Revised Penal Code, with a fixed
amended by Republic Act 7659 or of PD duration of imprisonment from 20 years
1860; while life imprisonment is a penalty and 1 day to 40 years, and carries it with
usually provided for in special laws. accessory penalties.
Reclusion perpetua has a duration of
twenty (20) years and one (1) day to forty Life imprisonment, on the other hand, is a
(40) years under Republic Act 7659, while penalty prescribed by special laws, with no
life imprisonment has no duration; fixed duration of imprisonment and without
reclusion perpetua maybe reduced by one any accessory penalty.
or two degrees; reclusion perpetua has
accessory penalties while life imprisonment Reclusion Perpetua vs Life
does not have any accessory penalties Imprisonment (2009)
(People vs. Baguio. 196 SCRA 459, People
vs. Panellos, 205 SCRA 546). TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
statement is true, or FALSE if the
Reclusion Perpetua vs Life statement is false. Explain your answer in
Imprisonment (2001) not more than two (2) sentences. (5%)
(2009 Bar Question)
After trial. Judge Juan Laya of the Manila
RTC found Benjamin Garcia guilty of Life imprisonment is a penalty more
Murder, the victim having sustained several favorable to the convict than reclusion
bullet wounds In his body so that he died perpetua.
despite medical assistance given in the
Ospital ng Maynlla Because the weapon SUGGESTED ANSWER:
usfed by Benjamin was unlicensed and the
qualifying circumstance of treachery was False. Life imprisonment is unfavorable to
found to be present, Judge Laya rendered a convict because the penalty is without a
his decision convicting Benjamin and fixed duration, unlike the penalty of
sentencing him to "reclusion perpetua or reclusion perpetua which has a fixed
life imprisonment". duration of 40 years and the convict may be
eligible for pardon after 30 years of
Are "reclusion perpetua" and life imprisonment (People v. Penillos, 205
imprisonment the same and can be SCRA 546 (1992).
imposed interchangeably as in the
foregoing sentence? Or are they totally ART 27 Penalties Reclusion
different? State your reasons. (3%) perpetua; pecuniary penalties;
pecuniary liabilities
104
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal
Page
Code, as amended by Republic Act (RA)

No. 7659, reclusion perpetua shall be from

20 years and 1 day to 40 years. Does this The first two liabilities (nos. 1 and 2) are
mean that reclusion perpetua is now a payable as civil indemnity to the private
divisible penalty? Explain. (2%) parties offended by the crime; while the last
(2005 Bar Question) two (nos. 3 and 4) are payable to the
Government.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ART 39-SUBSIDIARY PENALTY
No, reclusion perpetua is still an indivisible
penalty although it has been given a fixed Pedro was convicted of the crime of
duration by R.A. No. 7659 (an act to impose damage to property through reckless
the Death Penalty on certain Heinous imprudence for bumping the car of Jose
crimes). In an en banc ruling of the and the court of sentenced him to pay a fine
Supreme Court in People v. Conrado of P3,Q00. Pedro failed to pay die amount
Lucas 240 SCRA 66 (1995), it was held that of the fine for he was insolvent. Later, the
reclusion perpetua has remained an court ordered the incarceration of Pedro so
indivisible penalty as there is no clear that the latter could serve subsidiary
legislative intention to make the penalty imprisonment to satisfy the fine. Pedro filed
divisible. a petition for habeas corpus alleging that
his confinement is illegal. Will the petition
ART 38- PECUNIARY LIABILITIES prosper? Give your reasons. (1989 Bar
Question)
Distinguish pecuniary penalties from
pecuniary liabilities. (2%) (2005 Bar SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Question)
The petition for habeas corpus will prosper.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Subsidiary penalty is not an accessory
penalty which inheres to a principal penalty
Pecuniary penalties are those which a and may therefore be imposed even if it is
convicted offender may be required to pay not expressly provided in the sentence. It is
in money to the Government. These are: a penalty in lieu of the penalty imposed in
the sentence. Hence, unless the judgment
- fine; and or sentence expressly provides for
- costs of the proceedings. subsidiary imprisonment, the culprit cannot
be made to undergo the same (People vs.
Pecuniary liabilities, on the other hand, are Fajardo, 65 Phil. 639).
those which a convicted offender is
required to pay in money to the offended In this case, the court merely sentenced
party and to the Government. They are: Pedro to pay a P3,000.00 fine. It was only
LATER that the Court ordered the
- reparation of the damage caused; incarceration of Pedro to serve subsidiary
- indemnification of consequential imprisonment AFTER Pedro failed to pay
damages; the amount of the fine. Subsidiary
105
- fine; and imprisonment cannot be imposed unless it

- costs of the proceedings (Art. 38, is expressly provided in the sentence.
Page
RPC)
ART 47- CASES WHEREIN THE DEATH date of the sentence, (b) while she is
PENALTY SHALL NOT BE IMPOSED pregnant, (c) upon a person over 70 years
old (Art. 83 RPC), or (d) upon a convict who
(Note: no longer of any force or effect becomes insane after final sentence (Art.
because of the substantive provisions 79. RPC).
thereof being inconsistent with RA 9346) C. When the convict reaches the age of
70 years the death sentence is commuted
What are the instances when the death to reclusion perpetua (Art. 83, RPC).
penalty could not be imposed, although it
should otherwise ordinarily be meted out? Death Penalty
(1997 Bar Question)
The death penalty cannot be inflicted under
ANSWER: which of the following circumstances:
1. When the guilty party is below 18 1. When the guilty person is at least 18
years of age at the time of the commission years of age at the time of the commission
of the crime or when the offender is more of the crime.
than 70 years of age. 2. When the guilty person is more than
2. When upon appeal or automatic 70 years of age.
review of the case by the Supreme Court, 3. When, upon appeal to or automatic
the required majorityvoteisnot obtained for review by the Supreme Court, the required
the imposition of the penalty, in which case majority for the imposition of the death
the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua. penalty is not obtained.
4. When the person is convicted of a
Proscription on Death Penalty capital crime but before execution
A. When was the constitutional becomes insane.
proscription against the imposition of the 5. When the accused is a woman while
death penalty lifted? (1995 Bar Question) she is pregnant or within one year after
B. When is the execution of the death delivery.
penalty suspended under the Revised
Penal Code? (1995 Bar Question) Explain your answer or choice briefly. (5%)
C. When is the death penalty (2004 Bar Question)
commuted under the same Code? (1995
Bar Question) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Understanding the word inflicted" to mean

the imposition of the death penalty, not its
A. The constitutional proscription execution, the circumstance in which the
against the imposition of the death penalty death penalty cannot be inflicted is no. 2:
was lifted with the enactment of RA 7659, when the guilty person is more than 70
otherwise known as the Heinous Crimes years of age (Art. 47, Revised Penal
Law, which took effect fifteen (15) days Code). Instead, the penalty shall be
after publication on December commuted to reclusion perpetua, with the
16,1993,thatisonDecember31,1993 accessory penalties provided in Article 40,
106
{People vs. Martin Simon, 234 SCRA 555). RPC.

B. Death penalty shall not be executed
Page
(a) upon a woman within three years after

In circumstance no. I when the guilty reward of P50,000.00 each once the job is
person is at least 18 years of age at the done.
time of the commission of the crime, the
death penalty can be imposed since the At midnight, A, with the fully armed X, Y and
offender is already of legal age when he Z, forcibly opened the door and gained
committed the crime. entrance to the house of C and D. C put up
a struggle before he was subdued by A's
Circumstance no. 3 no longer operates, group. They boarded C and D in a van and
considering the decision of the Supreme brought the two to a small hut in a farm
Court in People vs. Etfren Mateo (G.R. outside Metro Manila. Both hands of C and
147678-87, July 7, 2004) providing an D were tied. With the help of X, Y and Z, A
intermediate review for such cases where raped D in front of C. X, Y and Z then took
the penalty imposed is death, reclusion turns in raping D, and subjected C to torture
perpetua or life imprisonment before they until he was black and blue and bleeding
are elevated to the Supreme Court. profusely from several stab wounds. A and
his group set the hut on fire before leaving,
In circumtances nos. 4 & 5, the death killing both C and D. X, Y and Z were paid
penalty can be imposed if prescribed by the their reward. Bothered by his conscience,
law violated although its execution shall be A surrendered the next day to the police,
suspended when the convict becomes admitting the crimes he committed.
insane before it could be executed and
while he is insane. As the RTC judge, decide what crime or
crimes were committed by A, X, Y and Z,
Likewise, the death penalty can be and what mitigating and aggravating
imposed upon a woman but its execution circumstances will be applied in imposing
shall be suspended during her pregnancy the penalty. Explain. (5%)
and for one year after her delivery.
A, X, Y and Z are liable for two
counts of kidnapping with murder qualified
by means of fire, since C and D were killed
ART.48- Special Complex Crime (2016) in the course of the detention. In a special
complex crime of kidnapping with murder,
A, an OFW, worked in Kuwait for several it is immaterial that other crimes were
years as a chief accountant, religiously committed such as multiple rapes and
sending to his wife, B, 80% of all his arson. Since multiple rapes and arson are
earnings. After his stint abroad, he was committed by reason or on occasion of
shocked to know that B became the kidnapping, they shall be integrated into
paramour of a married man, C, and that all one and indivisible felony of kidnapping
the monies he sent to B were given by her with murder (People v. Larranaga, 138874-
to C. To avenge his honor, A hired X, Y and 75, 31 January 2004).
Z and told them to kidnap C and his wife,
D, so that he can inflict injuries on C to The mitigating circumstances of
make him suffer, and humiliate him in front passion and voluntary surrender can be
107
of his wife. X, Y and Z were paid appreciated in favor of A. The aggravating

P20,000.00 each and were promised a circumstances of unlawful entry, by means
Page
of fire, and treachery can be appreciated however, for rape under Art. 296 since they
against A, X, Y and Z. were not present when the victim was
raped and thus, they had no opportunity to
prevent the same. They are only liable for
robbery by band (People v. Anticamaray,
ART. 48 in rel ART. 296 (2016) GR No. 178771, 8 June 2011).
Pedro, Pablito, Juan and Julio, all armed [b] Suppose, after the robbery, the four took
with bolos, robbed the house where turns in raping the three daughters inside
Antonio, his wife, and three (3) daughters the house, and, to prevent identification,
were residing. While the four were killed the whole family just before they left.
ransacking Antonio's house, Julio noticed What crime or crimes, if any, did the four
that one of Antonio's daughters was trying malefactors commit? (2.5%) ( 2016 BAR)
to escape. He chased and caught up with
her at a thicket somewhat distant from the They are liable for a special complex
house, but before bringing her back, raped crime of robbery with homicide. In this
her. special complex crime, it is immaterial that
several persons are killed. It is also
[a] What crime or crimes, if any, did Pedro, immaterial that aside from the homicides,
Pablito, Juan and Julio commit? Explain. rapes are committed by reason or on the
(2.5%) occasion of the crime. Since homicides are
committed by or on the occasion of the
Julio is liable for special complex crime of robbery, the multiple rapes shall be
robbery with rape since he raped the integrated into one and indivisible felony of
daughter of Antonio on occasion or by robbery with homicide (People v. Diu, GR
reason of robbery. Even if the place of No. 201449, 3 April 2013).
robbery is different from that of rape, the
crime is still robbery with rape since what is Art. 48. Complex Crimes In relation to
important is the direct connection between Art. 294 (1) Robbery with homicide;
the two crimes (People v. Canastre, GR direct assault with multiple attempted
No. L-2055, 24 December 1948). Rape homicide
was not separated by distance and time
from the robbery. While Alfredo, Braulio, Ciriaco, and
'Domingo were robbing a bank, policemen
Pedro, Pablito and Juan are liable for arrived. A firefight ensued between the
robbery by band. There is band in this case bank robbers and the responding
since more than three armed malefactors policemen, and one of the policemen was
took part in the commission of robbery. killed.
Under Art. 296 of the RPC, any member of
a band, who is present at the commission What crime or crimes, if any, had been
of a robbery by the band, shall be punished committed? Explain. (3%) (2009 Bar
as principal of any of the assaults Question)
committed by the band unless it be shown
108
that he attempted to prevent the same. The SUGGESTED ANSWER:

assault mentioned in Art. 296 includes rape
(People v. Hamiana, GR Nos. L-3491094,
Page
30 May 1971). They are not liable,

The crimes committed are Robbery with death. Then he remembered his losses. He
homicide (Art. 294(1], RPC), a single rifled through the pockets of his victims and
indivisible offense, and Direct Assault with got back all the money he lost. He then ran
Multiple Attempted Homicide, a complex away but not before burning the cottage to
crime (Art. 48, Art. 148 and Art. 249, RPC; hide his misdeed. The following day police
People v. Gayrama, 60 Phil. 796 (1934]). investigators found among the debris the
charred bodies of Jason, Manuel, Dave
Robbery with Homicide was committed and the caretaker of the resort.
because one of the responding policemen
was killed by reason or on occasion of the After preliminary investigation, the
robbery being committed. The complex Provincial Prosecutor charged Harry with
crime of Direct Assault with Multiple the complex crime of arson with quadruple
Attempted Homicide was committed in homicide and robbery.
respect of the offender's firing guns at the
responding policemen who are agents of Was Harry properly charged? Discuss fully.
person in authority performing their duty (1995 Bar Question)
when fired at to frustrate such
performance. (People vs. Ladjaalam, G.R. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Nos. 136149-51, Sept 19, 2000)
No, Harry was not properly charged. Harry
should have been charged with three
Art 48 Complex Crimes, Art 294 (3) separate crimes, namely: murder, theft
Robbery, Art 249 Homicide, Art 320 and arson.
Arson
Harry killed Jason, Manuel and Dave with
Criminal law Felonies - Complex crime of evident premeditation, as there was
arson with quadruple homicide and considerable lapse of time before he
robbery; improper charge of offense decided to commit the crime and the actual
commission of the crime. In addition, Harry
Harry, an overseas contract worker, arrived employed means which weakened the
from Saudi Arabia with considerable defense of Jason, Manuel and Dave. Harry
savings. Knowing him to be loaded", his gave them the liquor to drink until they were
friends Jason, Manuel and Dave invited drunk and fell asleep. This gave Harry the
him to poker session at a rented beach opportunity to cany out his plan of murder
cottage. When he was losing almost all his with impunity.
money which to him was his savings of a
lifetime, he discovered that he was being The taking of the money from the victims
cheated by his friends. Angered by the was a mere afterthought of the killings.
betrayal he decided to take revenge on the Hence, Harry committed the separate
three cheats. crime of theft and not the complex crime of
robbery with homicide. Although theft was
Harry ordered several bottles of Tanduay committed against dead persons, it is still
Rhum and gave them to his companions to legally possible as the offended party are
109
drink, as they did, until they all fell asleep. the estates of the victims.
When Harry saw his companions already
Page
sound asleep he hacked all of them to

In burning the cottage to hide his misdeed. 257, RPC. Inasmuch as the single act of
Harry became liable for another separate Aldrich produced two grave or less grave
crime, arson. This act of burning was not felonies, he falls under Art 48, RPC, i.e. a
necessary for the consummation of the two complex crime [People vs. Salufrancia, 159
(2) previous offenses he committed. The SCRA 401).
fact that the caretaker died from the blaze
did not qualify Harrys crime into a complex Art. 48: Complex crime of Murder,
crime of arson with homicide for there is no qualified by explosion, with direct
such crime. assault
Hence, Harry was improperly charged with Two (2) Philippine National Police (PNP)
the complex crime of arson with quadruple officers, X and Y, on board on motorboat
homicide and robbery. Harry should have with Z, a civilian as motorman, arrested A
been charged with three (3) separate and B who were in a banca, for dynamite
crimes, murder, theft and arson. fishing. The latters banca was towed
towards the municipality. On the way, the
Art. 48: Complex crime of parricide with PNP motorboat was intercepted by a third
unintentional abortion banca whose occupants, C, D. and E, tried
to negotiate for the release of A and B and
Aldrich was dismissed from his job by his their banca. The PNP officers refused and
employer. Upon reaching home, his instead shouted at C, D, and E that they are
pregnant wife, Carmi, nagged him about all under arrest. Thereupon, C, D, and E
money for her medicines. Depressed by his simultaneously threw dynamite sticks at the
dismissal and angered by the nagging of PNP motorboats. The first explosion killed
his wife, Aldrich struck Carmi with his fist. X. A and B also reacted by throwing
She fell to the ground. As a result, she and dynamite at the PNP motorboat: its
her unborn baby died. explosion killed Y and Z.
What crime was committed by Aldrich? What crime or crimes did A, B, C, D and E
(1994 Bar Question) commit? (1991 Bar Question)
Aldrich committed the crime of parricide C, D and E are liable for the complex crime
with unintentional abortion. When Aldrich of Murder, qualified by explosion, with
struck his wife, Carmi with his fist, he direct assault for the death of X. A and B
committed the crime of maltreatment under are liable for the complex crime of Murder
Art. 266, par. 3 of the Revised Penal Code. Qualified by explosion as to death of Y, and
Since Carmi died because of the felonious simple Murder qualified by explosion for the
act of Aldrich, he is criminally liable of death of Z.
parricide under Art. 246, RPC in relation to
Art. 4, par. 1 of the same Code. Since the No crime of direct assault can be filed
unborn baby of Carmi died in the process, insofar as the death of Z is concerned, he
110
but Aldrich had no intention to cause the being a civilian.

abortion of his wife, Aldrich committed
Page
unintentional abortion as defined in Art.

This, of course, assumes that there is no the house was unknown to Diego, the
conspiracy among A, B, C, D and E, resulting crime is under PD No. 1613,
otherwise all would have the same criminal because the death resulted from the arson.
liability as the act of one becomes the act If by reason or on the occasion of the arson,
of all. death results, the offense is the special
complex or arson with homicide (Sec. 5,
Art 48: Special Complex Crime In PD 1613, which expressly repealed Art.
relation to Art. 14: Qualifying 320 and consequently the ruling case
Aggravating Circumstance therein, People v. Paterno (L-2665, March
6, 1950).
Diego and Pablo were both farmers
residing in Barangay Damayan. On one If Diego knew that Mario was inside the
occasion, Diego called Pablo to come house when he set it on fire, the crime
down from his house in order to ask him committed, instead of arson, would be
why he got his (Diegos) plow without MURDER, with fire as the qualifying
permission. One word led to another. circumstance.
Diego, in a fit of anger, unsheathed his bolo
and hacked Pablo to death. Pablos 9-year Art. 48 Special Complex crime of
old son, Mario, who was inside the house, Robbery with Rape
saw the killing of his father. Afraid that he
might also be killed by Diego, Mario After raping the complainant in her house,
covered himself with a blanket and hid in a the accused struck a match to smoke a
comer of the house. To conceal the killing cigarette before departing from the scene.
of Pablo, Diego brought Pablos body The brief light from the match allowed him
inside the house and burned it. Mario was to notice a watch in her wrist. He demanded
also burned to death. that she hand over the watch. When she
What crime or crimes did Diego commit? refused, he forcibly grabbed it from her.
(1989 Bar Question) The accused was charged with and
convicted of the special complex crime of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: robbery with rape.
Diego committed two crimes (1) homicide Was the court correct? (1997 Bar
for the death of Pablo and (2) the special Question)
complex crime of arson with homicide as
provided in PD 1613 for the burning of the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
house and the death of Mario.
No, the court erred in convicting the
The hacking of Pablo to death is homicide, accused of the special complex crime of
the killing not being attended by any of the robbery with rape. The accused should
qualifying circumstances of murder. It was instead be held liable for two (2) separate
killing in the course of a quarrel. crimes of robbery and rape, since the
primary intent or objective of the accused
The burning of the house to conceal the was only to rape the complainant, and his
111
killing of Pablo is a separate crime. Were it commission of the robbery was merely an
not for the death of Mario, this separate afterthought. The robbery must precede
Page
offense would have been arson. But inside the rape, in order to give rise to the special
complex crime for which the court Art. 48 Continuing crimes in relation to
convicted the accused. BP 22
Art. 48 Criminal law Complex crimes - Angelo devised a Ponzi Scheme in which
Robbery with Homicide in relation to 500 persons were deceived into investing
Art. 297 their money upon a promise of a capital
return of 25%, computed monthly, and
Jose, Domingo. Manolo, and Fernando, guaranteed by post-dated checks. During
armed with bolos, at about one o'clock in the first two months following the
the morning, robbed a house at a desolate investment, the investors received their
place where Danilo, his wife, and three profits, but thereafter, Angelo vanished.
daughters were living. While the four were
in the process of ransacking Danilos Angelo was charged with 500 counts of
house, Fernando, noticing that one of estafa and 2,000 counts of violation of
Danilos daughters was trying to get away, Batas Pambansa (BP) 22. In his motion to
ran after her and finally caught up with her quash, Angelo contends that he committed
in a thicket somewhat distant from the a continued crime, or delito continuado,
house. Fernando, before bringing back the hence, he committed only one count of
daughter to the house, raped her first. estafa and one count of violation of BP 22.
Thereafter, the four carted away the [a] What is delito continuado? (1%)
belongings of Danilo and his family. (2009 Bar Question)
Suppose, after the robbery, the four took SUGGESTED ANSWER:

turns in raping the three daughters of
Danilo inside the latter's house, but before Delito continuado refers to a crime
they left, they killed the whole family to constituted by several overt acts committed
prevent identification, what crime did the by the offender in one place, at about the
four commit? Explain. (1996 Bar Question) same time, and all such overt acts violate
one and the same provision of penal law,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: thus demonstrating that all such acts are
the product of a single indivisible criminal
The crime would be Robbery with Homicide resolution. Hence, all said acts are
because the killings were by reason (to considered as one crime only.
prevent identification) and on the occasion
of the robbery. The multiple rapes [b] Is Angelo's contention tenable?
committed and the fact that several Explain. (4%) (2009 Bar Question)
persons were killed (homicide), would be
considered as aggravating circumstances. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The rapes are synonymous with ignominy
and the additional killing synonymous with No. His contention is not tenable. He
cruelty. [People vs. Solis, 182 SCRA: committed as many counts of estafa
People vs. Plagcu 202 SCRA 531) against the 500 victims and 2000 counts of
violation of BP 22, since each swindling is
112
achieved through distinct fraudulent

machinations contrived at different times or
Page
dates, and in different amounts. Moreover,

his drawing separate checks payable to latter a check in the said amount. The
each payee is a separate criminal following day, Pedro deposited the check,
resolution, as they must be of different but it was returned dishonored because it
amounts and of different dates. He acted was drawn against a closed account.
with separate fraudulent intent against Notwithstanding written demands, Jose
each swindling victim and had distinct failed to make good said check. Atty.
criminal intent in drawing and issuing each Saavedra, counsel for Pedro, filed two
check. It cannot be maintained that his acts complaints against Jose with the Office of
are the product of one criminal resolution the Provincial Fiscal, one for estafa under
only. Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code and
another for violation of Batas Pambansa
Art 48 - Complex crime; requirement of Big. 22. Atty. San Pascual, counsel for
two or more grave or less grave felonies Jose, claimed that if his client was at all
as a result of single act liable, he could only be liable for violation of
Batas Pambansa Big. 22 and not for estafa
Rodolfo, a policeman, was cleaning his under Article 315 of the Revised Penal
service pistol inside his house when it fell Code because one precludes the other and
from his hand and fired. The bullet hit a because Batas Pambansa Big. 22 is more
neighbor on the stomach and a second favorable to the accused as it carries a
neighbor on the leg. The injuries sustained lighter penalty. The investigating fiscal, on
by the two neighbors required thirty-five his resolution, stated that only one crime
(35) days and nine (9) days of medical was committed, namely, the complex crime
attendance, respectively. The investigating of estafa under Article 315 of the Revised
fiscal later filed an information for frustrated Penal Code and violation of Batas
homicide and slight physical injuries Pambansa Big. 22 because the single act
through reckless imprudence against of issuing the bouncing check constitutes
Rodolfo. Is the charge correct? Explain. two offenses, one under Article 315 of the
(1989 Bar Question) Revised Penal Code and another under
Batas Pambansa Big. 22.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If you were the Provincial Fiscal asked to
The charge is not correct. review the matter, how would you resolve
it? (1987 Bar Question)
One single act of accidental shooting
cannot give rise to two felonies. One of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
which is intentional and the other negligent.
Frustrated homicide presupposes intent to The resolution of the investigating fiscal is
kill. The facts do not show any intent to kill erroneous. There is no complex crime of
on the part of Rodolfo. At most, he was estafa under Article 315 of the Revised
careless, and therefore only negligent. Penal Code and the violation of BP 22. A
complex crime refers only to felonies which
Art 48 Complex crimes; when proper are punished in the Revised Penal Code.
Batas 22 which punishes the offense of
113
Jose purchased roofing materials worth issuing a worthless check is a special law.
P20,000.00 from PY & Sons Construction The contention of Atty. San Pascuai,
Page
Company owned by Pedro, and paid the counsel of Jose that his client should be
liable only for Batas 22 and for estafa under 2. What constitutes a complex crime?
the Revised Penal Code because one How many crimes maybe involved in a
precludes the other and because Batas 22 complex crime? What is the penalty
is more favorable to the accused as it therefor? (4%) (1999 Bar Question)
carries a lighter penalty cannot also be
sustained. Batas 22 specifically provides SUGGESTED ANSWER:
that liability under said act is without
prejudice to any liability for estafa under the 1. The decision of the trial judge is not
Revised Penal Code. The check issued by correct. When the offender made use of an
Jose in payment of roofing materials from automatic firearm, the acts committed are
PY and Sons was worthless. Said bouncing determined by the number of bullets
check having been issued in payment of a discharged inasmuch as the firearm being
simultaneous obligation constitutes estafa automatic, the offender need only press the
under the Revised Penal Code and also the trigger once and it would fire continually.
offense punished under Batas 22. There is For each death caused by a distinct and
no identity of offenses. Damage is not an separate bullet, the accused incurs distinct
element of the offense punished in Batas criminal liability. Hence, it is not the act of
22 whereas in estafa damage is an pressing the trigger which should be
element. Estafa is an act mala in se in considered as producing the several
which requires intent as an element while felonies, but the number of bullets which
the offense punished in Batas 22 is an act actually produced them.
mala prohibita where intent is not an
element. 2. A complex crime is constituted when
a single act caused two or more grave or
Art 48 Complex crimes, what less grave felonies or when an offense is
constitutes, penalty committed as a necessary means to
commit another offense (Art. 48, RPC).
1. A, actuated by malice and with the
use of a fully automatic M-14 submachine At least two (2) crimes are involved in a
gun, shot a group of persons who were complex crime; either two or more grave or
seated in a cockpit with one burst of less grave felonies resulted from a single
successive, continuous, automatic fire. act, or an offense is committed as a
Four (4) persons were killed thereby, each necessary means for committing another.
having hit by different bullets coming from
the submachine gun of A. Four (4) cases of The penalty for the more serious crime
murder were filed against A. The trial court shall be imposed and in its maximum
ruled that there was only one crime period. (Art. 48, RPC)
committed by A for the reason that, since A
performed only one act, he having pressed Art. 48 Complex crime; Special complex
the trigger of his gun only once, the crime crime; complex crime of coup detat
committed was murder. Consequently, the with rebellion; complex crime of coup
trial judge sentenced A to just one penalty d'etat with sedition
of reclusion perpetua. Was the decision of
114
the trial judge correct? Explain. (4%) (1999 A. Distinguish between an ordinary
Bar Question) complex crime and a special complex
Page
crime as to their concepts and as to the

imposition of penalties. (2003 Bar complex crime that shall be applied

Question) according to the rules on imposition of the
B. Can there be a complex crime of penalty.
coup detat with rebellion? (2003 Bar
Question) B. Yes, if there was conspiracy
C. Can there be a complex crime of between the offender/ offenders
coup d'etat with sedition? (2003 Bar committing the coup detat and the
Question) offenders committing the rebellion. By
conspiracy, the crime of one would be the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: crime of the other and vice versa. This is
possible because the offender in coup
(a) In concept- d'etat may be any person or persons
belonging to the military or the national
An ordinary complex crime is made up of police or a public officer, whereas rebellion
two or more crimes being punished in does not so require. Moreover, the crime of
distinct provisions of the Revised Penal coup detat may be committed singly,
Code but alleged in one Information either whereas rebellion requires a public uprising
because they were brought about by a and taking up arms to overthrow the duly
single felonious act or because one offense constituted government. Since the two
is a necessary means for committing the crimes are essentially different and
other offense or offenses. They are alleged punished with distinct penalties, there is no
in one Information so that only one penalty legal impediment to the application of Art.
shall be imposed. 48 of the Revised Penal Code.
A special complex crime, on the other C. Yes, coup detat can be complexed
hand, is made up of two or more crimes with sedition because the two crimes are
which are considered only as components essentially different and distinctly punished
of a single indivisible offense being under the Revised Penal Code. Sedition
punished in one provision of the Revised may not be directed against the
Penal Code. Government or non-political in objective,
whereas coup detat is always political in
As to penalties - objective as it is directed against the
Government and led by persons or public
In ordinary complex crime, the penalty for officer holding public office belonging to the
the most serious crime shall be imposed military or national police. Art. 48 of the
and in its maximum period. Code may apply under the conditions
therein provided.
In special complex crime, only one penalty
is specifically prescribed for all the Art. 48 Compound and complex crimes
component crimes which are regarded as
one indivisible offense. The component Distinguish clearly but briefly: (10%) (2004
crimes are not regarded as distinct crimes Bar Question)
and so the penalty for the most serious Between compound and complex crimes
115
crime is not the penalty to be imposed nor as concepts in the Penal Code.
in its maximum period. It is the penalty
Page
specifically provided for the special SUGGESTED ANSWER:

document. He, therefore, committed the

Compound crimes result when the offender complex crime of estafa thru falsification of
committed only a single felonious act from a commercial document.
which two or more crimes resulted. This is
provided for in modified form in the first part Art. 48 Complex crime; Special
of Article 48, Revised Penal Code, limiting complex crime; Delito continuado
the resulting crimes to only grave and/or
less grave felonies. Hence, light felonies Distinguish the following from each other:
are excluded even though resulting from
the same single act. 1. Complex crime under Article 48 of
the Revised Penal Code;
Complex crimes result when the offender 2. Special complex crime; and
has to commit an offense as a necessary 3. Delito continuado. (3%) (2005 Bar
means for committing another offense. Question)
Only one information shall be filed and if
proven, the penalty for the more serious SUGGESTED ANSWER:
crime shall be imposed
1. a) In a complex crime, the component
Art 48 Complex crime of estafa thru crimes are defined and penalized under
falsification of a commercial document separate and distinct Articles of the
In relation to Art 315 Swindling Revised Penal Code but are allowed to be
alleged in one Information as an exception
(2) DD purchased a television set for to Sec. 13, Rule 110 of the Rules of
P50,000.00 with the use of a counterfeit Criminal Procedure, because they are
credit card. The owner of the establishment committed under the circumstances
had no inkling that the credit card used by provided in Article 48 of same Code, i.e.,
DD was counterfeit. two or more grave or less grave felonies
resulted from a single act, or one offense
What crime or crimes did DD commit? was a necessary means for committing the
Explain. (5%) (2005 Bar Question) other offense.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: In a special complex crime, also known as

composite crime, the component crimes
(2) DD committed a complex crime of constitute a single indivisible offense and
estafa thru falsification of a commercial are thus penalized as one crime under one
document. As a user of a false or fake Article of the Revised Penal Code, such as
credit card, a commercial document, DD is robbery with homicide under Art. 294 of the
presumed to have falsified the same; Code.
Hence he does not only commit the crime
of using a false document but also the Delito continuado, also known as
crime of falsification. Since he used such continued crime, is constituted by a series
false or fake credit card to defraud the of overt acts committed by the offender in
owner of the store from whom he one place a penal law, and therefore
116
purchased the television set, the crime of regarded as impelled by a single, indivisible
swindling or estafa was perpetrated thru criminal resolution; hence, punished as one
Page
the falsification of said commercial crime offense

While under the influence of liquor, Jonas

Art. 48 Complex crimes - Frustrated started throwing lighted super lolos inside
robbery, with homicide and damage to Jepoy's fence to irritate him and the same
property exploded inside the tatter's yard. Upon
knowing that the throwing of the super lolo
While Carlos was approaching his car, he was deliberate, Jepoy became furious and
saw it being driven away by Paolo, a thief. sternly warned Jonas to stop his malicious
Carlos tried to stop Paolo by shouting at act or he would get what he wanted. A
him, but Paolo ignored him. To prevent his heated argument between Jonas and
car from being carnapped, Carlos drew his Jepoy ensued but Jaja tried to calm down
gun, aimed at the rear wheel of the car and his friend. At midnight, Jonas convinced
fired. The shot blew the tire which caused Jaja to lend him his .45 caliber pistol so that
the car to veer out of control and collide he could use it to knock down Jepoy and to
with an oncoming tricycle, killing the tricycle end his arrogance. Jonas thought that after
driver. all, explosions were everywhere and
nobody would know who shot Jepoy. After
b) What is the criminal liability of Paolo, if Jaja lent his firearm to Jonas, the latter
any? Explain. (4%) (2008 Bar Question) again started started throwing lighted super
lolos and pla-plas at Jepoys yard in order
SUGGESTED ANSWER: to provoke him so that he would come out
of his house. When Jepoy came out, Jonas
b) Paolo is liable for the complex crime of immediately shot him with Jajas .45 caliber
frustrated robbery, with homicide and gun but missed his target. Instead, the
damage to property (tricycle) in trying to rob bullet hit Jepoy's five year old son who was
the car. This resulted in the shooting of the following behind him, killing the boy
car by Carlos and the subsequent collision instantaneously.
destroying the tricycle and the death of the
driver. a) What crime or crimes can Jonas and
Jaja be charged with? Explain. (2%) (2000
Art. 48 - Complex crime of attempted Bar Question)
murder with homicide
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Despite the massive advertising campaign
in media against firecrackers and gun-firing a) Jonas and Jaja, can be charged with the
during the New Year's celebrations. Jonas complex crime of attempted murder with
and Jaja bought ten boxes of super lolo and homicide because a single act caused a
pla-pla in Bocaue, Bulacan. Before less grave and a grave felony (Art. 48,
midnight of December 31,1999, Jonas and RPC).
Jaja started their celebration by having a
drinking spree at Jona's place by exploding Attempted murder is a less grave felony,
their high-powered firecrackers in their while consummated homicide is a grave
neighborhood. In the course of their felony: both are punishable by afflictive
conversation, Jonas confided to Jaja that penalties.
117
he has been keeping a long-time grudge

against his neighbor Jepoy in view of the
Page
tatter's refusal to lend him some money.

Art. 48 Complex crimes - Malversation daughter working in the United States. With
through falsification the intention of robbing B of those dollars,
A entered Bs house at midnight, armed
Roger and Jessie, Municipal Mayor and with a knife which he used to gain entry,
Treasurer, respectively, of San Rafael, and began quietly searching the drawers,
Leyte, caused the disbursement of public shelves, and other likely receptacles of the
funds allocated for their local development cash. While doing that, B awoke, rushed
programs for 2008. Records show that the out from the bedroom, and grappled with A
amount of P2-million was purportedly used for the possession of the knife which A was
as financial assistance for a rice production then holding. After stabbing B to death, A
livelihood project. Upon investigation, turned over Bs pillow and found the latters
however, it was found that Roger and wallet underneath the pillow, which was
Jessie falsified the disbursement vouchers bulging with the dollar bills he was looking
and supporting documents in order to make for A took the bills and left the house.' What
it appear that qualified recipients who, in crime or crimes were committed? (2003
fact, are non-existent individuals, received Bar Question)
the money.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Roger and Jessie are charged with
malversation through falsification. Discuss The crime committed is robbery with
the propriety of the charge filed against homicide, a composite crime. This is so
Roger and Jessie. Explain. (4%) (2009 Bar because As primordial criminal intent is to
Question) commit a robbery and in the course of the
robbery, the killing of B took place. Both the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: robbery and the killing were consummated,
thus giving rise to the special complex
The charge of malversation through crime of robbery with homicide. The
falsification is not correct because the primary criminal intent being to commit a
falsifications of several documents were robbery, any killing on the occasion of the
not necessary means to obtain the money robbery, though not by reason thereof, is
that were malversed. The falsifications considered a component of the crime of
were committed to cover up or hide the robbery with homicide as a single
malversation and therefore, should be indivisible offense.
separately treated from malversation. The
given facts state that Roger and Jessie Art. 48: Special complex crime of
falsified disbursement vouchers and Robbery with homicide
supporting documents "in order to make it
appear" that qualified recipients received A, B, C and D all armed, robbed a bank,
the money. Art. 48, RPC on complex and when they were about to get out of the
crimes is not applicable. bank, policemen came and ordered them to
surrender but they fired on the police
Art 48 Special Complex Crimes - officers who fired back and shot it out with
Robbery with homicide them.
118
A learned two days ago that B had received A. Suppose a bank employee was
Page
dollar bills amounting to $10,000 from his killed and the bullet which killed him came
from the firearm of the police officers, with Art. 48: Special complex crimes-
what crime shall you charge A, B, C and D? Robbery with homicide
[3%] (1998 Bar Question)
Christopher, John, Richard, and Luke are
B. Suppose it was robber D who was fraternity brothers. To protect themselves
killed by the policemen and the prosecutor from rival fraternities, they all carry guns
charged A. B and C with Robbery and wherever they go. One night, after
Homicide. They demurred arguing that they attending a party, they boarded a taxicab,
(A, B and C were not the ones who killed held the driver at gunpoint and took the
robber D, hence, the charge should only be latter's earnings.
Robbery. How would you resolve their
argument? (2%) (1998 Bar Question) What crime, if any, did the four commit if
they killed the driver? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (2%) (2010 Bar Question)
A. A, B. C and D should be charged SUGGESTED ANSWER:

with the crime of robbery with homicide
because the death of the bank employee No, the crime becomes robbery with
was brought about by the acts of said homicide and all the fraternity brothers are
offenders on the occasion of the robbery. liable. The existence of a band shall be
They shot it out with the policeman, thereby appreciated only as generic aggravating
causing such death by reason or on the circumstance. Also, if the firearms used
occasion of a robbery; hence, the were unlicensed, the same would only be
composite crime of robbery with homicide. taken as generic aggravating circumstance
as provided by the Rep. Act No. 8294
The argument is valid, considering that a (People v. Bolinget, G.R. Nos. 137949-52,
separate charge for Homicide was filed. It December 11, 2003).
would be different if the charge filed was for
the composite crime of robbery with Art. 48 Special Complex Crime In
homicide, which is a single, indivisible relation to Art 267 Serious illegal
offense. detention with homicide
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Paz Masipag worked as a housemaid and

yaya of the one-week old son of the
B. The argument raised by A. B and C spouses Martin and Pops Kuripot. When
is not correct because their liability is not Paz learned that her 70 year-old mother
only for Robbery but for the special was seriously ill, she asked Martin for a
complex crime of Robbery with homicide. cash advance of PI,000.00 but Martin
But the facts stated impresses that refused. One morning, Paz gagged the
separate crimes of Robbery and" mouth of Martin's son with stockings;
Homicide were charged, which is not placed the child in a box; sealed it with
correct. What was committed was a single masking tape and placed the box in the
indivisible offense of Robbery with attic. Later in the afternoon, she demanded
119
homicide, not two crimes. P5.000.00 as ransom for the release of his
son. Martin did not pay the ransom.
Page
Subsequently, Paz disappeared.

old. If Sherly was less than 12 years old

After a couple of days, Martin discovered then, the crime committed by Matulis is
the box in the attic with his child already rape (through sexual assault) with
dead. According to the autopsy report, the Homicide, a special complex crime under
child died of asphyxiation barely three Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code.
minutes after the box was sealed.
Art 48 Special Crime In relation to Art.
What crime or crimes did Paz commit? 266 - B - of rape with homicide, Penalties
Explain. (5%) (2005 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Dang was a beauty queen in a university.
Job, a rich classmate, was so enamored
Paz committed the crime of serious illegal with her that he persistently wooed and
detention because the victim is a minor and pursued her. Dang, being in love with
because the victim died as a consequence another man, rejected him. This angered
of the detention, the special complex crime Job. Sometime in September 2003, while
of serious illegal detention with homicide Dang and her sister Lyn were on their way
under the last paragraph of Article 267 of home, Job and his minor friend Nonoy
the Revised Penal Code is committed. grabbed them and pushed them inside a
white van. They brought them in an
Art 48Special complex crime In relation abandoned warehouse where they forced
to Art. 266 - B rape through sexual them to dance naked. Thereafter, they
assault with homicide brought them to a hill in a nearby barangay
where they took turns raping them. After
On July 1, 2004, Jet Matulis, a pedophile, satisfying their lust, Job ordered Nonoy to
gave P1,000.00 to Sherly, an orphan and a push Dang down a ravine, resulting in her
prostitute and brought her to a motel. He death. Lyn ran away but Job and Nonoy
inserted a rusty and oversized vibrator into chased her and pushed her inside the van.
her vagina with such force that she bled Then the duo drove away. Lyn was never
profusely. Jet panicked and fled. Sherly seen again.
was brought to the hospital and died a few
days later because of shock caused by What crime or crimes were committed by
hemorrhage. Job and Nonoy? 2.5% (2006 Bar Question)
If Sherly were a minor when she died, PENALTIES: What penalties should be
would your answer be the same? imposed on them? 2.5% (2006 Bar
Explain. (5%) (2005 Bar Question) Question)
If Sherly were a minor when she died, the Job and Nonoy each committed two (2)
crimes of homicide and child abuse in counts of the special complex crime of rape
violation of Rep. Act 7610 (Special with homicide under Art. 266-B for the
Protection of Children against abuse, rapes respectively committed on Dang and
120
exploitation, discrimination and for other on Lyn. Their felonious acts of grabbing
purposes), are committed by Jet Matulis, and pushing the victims inside their van
Page
provided Sherly is not less than 12 years and later forcing them to dance naked may
only be appreciated as part of the violence Luke was entrusted to Emil and Louie, the
and lewd desires attending the rape, and fishpond caretakers, asking them to hide
are therefore absorbed by the rape. Luke in their shack because he was
running from the NBI. The trio then left in
Although, there is no indication that the Marios car for Manila where they called up
same culprits killed Lyn who was never Lukes family and threatened them to kill
seen again, it is reasonable to assume from Luke unless they give a ransom within 24
what the culprits did to Dang, and from the hours. Unknown to them, because of a
acts of violence they employed on Lyn, that leak, the kidnapping was announced over
they are answerable also for the presumed the radio and TV. Emil and Louie heard the
death of Lyn whom the culprits took with broadcast and panicked, especially when
them by force and was never seen again. the announcer stated that there is a shoot-
Hence, the rape committed against her is to-kill order for the kidnappers. Emil and
attended by homicide giving rise to the Louie took Luke to the seashore of Dagat-
special complex crime of rape with dagatan where they smashed his head with
homicide also. It would be different if Lyn a shovel and buried him in the sand.
was not subjected to physical violence. However, they were seen by a barangay
(R.A. 7659) kagawad who arrested them and brought
them to the police station. Upon
Although the penalty for the crime of rape interrogation they confessed and pointed to
with homicide was death at the time the Jaime, Andy, Jimmy and Mario as those
accused committed them, and the law responsible for the kidnapping. Later, the 4
(Rep. Act No. 9346) prohibiting the were arrested and charged.
imposition of the death penalty took effect
only this year (2006), said new law should What crime or crimes did the 6 suspects
be given retroactive effect because it is commit? 5% (2006 Bar Question)
favorable to the culprits who are not
habitual delinquents and there being no SUGGESTED ANSWER:
provision of law to the contrary. Hence,
reclusion perpetua for each count of rape Jaime, Andy and Jimmy committed the
with homicide. The accessory penalty special complex crime of kidnapping for
under Art. 40 of the Revised Penal Code ransom with homicide because their
will not follow because RA 9346 purpose was to kill Luke when they seized
him.
Art. 48 Special Complex Crime In
relation to Art 267. Kidnapping for Mario, the taxi driver, does not incur
ransom with homicide criminal liability for the acts of Jaime, Andy
and Jimmy because he had no participation
Jaime, Andy and Jimmy, laborers in the therein.
noodles in the noodles factory of Luke Tan,
agreed to kill him due to his arrogance and Emil and Louie should be liable only for
miserliness. One afternoon, they seized murder for killing Luke in a defenseless
him and loaded him in a taxi driven by position, but not for keeping Luke since it
121
Mario. They told Mario they will only teach was not their intention to detain him.
Luke a lesson in Christian humility. Mario
Page
drove them to-a fishpond in Navotas where

Art 48 Special Complex Crime in relation No, the answer will be different. In that
to Art. 304 Rape with homicide case, the crimes committed would be four
separate crimes of (1) rape (2) frustrated
Wenceslao and Loretta were staying in the homicide or 'murder (3) theft and (4)
same boarding house, occupying different unlawful possession and use of picklocks
rooms. One late evening, when everyone in under Art. 304, RPC. The special complex
the house was asleep, Wenceslao entered crime of rape with homicide is constituted
Loretta's room with the use of a picklock. only when both the rape and the killing are
Then, with force and violence, Wenceslao consummated; when one or both of them
ravished Loretta. After he had satisfied his are not consummated, they are to be
lust, Wenceslao stabbed Loretta to death charged and punished separately. In any
and, before leaving the room, took her event, the possession of the picklock
jewelry. "without lawful cause", more so its use in
an unlawful entry is punished as a crime by
[a] What crime or crimes, if any, did itself.
Wenceslao commit? Explain. (4%)
(2009 Bar Question) Penalties Disqualified offenders for
parole; heinous crimes
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Because of the barbarity and the
Wenceslao committed the following crimes: hideousness of the acts committed by the
(1) the special complex crime of rape with suspects/ respondents in cutting off their
homicide (2) theft and (3) unlawful victims appendages, stuffing their torsos,
possession of picklocks and similar tools legs, body parts into oil drums and bullet-
under Art. 304, RPC. His act of having riddled vehicles and later on burying these
carnal knowledge of Loretta against her will oil drums, vehicles with the use of
and with the use of force and violence backhoes and other earthmoving
constituted rape, plus the killing of Loretta machinery, the Commission on Human
by reason or on the occasion of the rape, Rights (CHR) investigating team
gave rise to the special complex crime of recommended to the panel of public
rape with homicide. Since the taking of the prosecutors that all respondents be
jewelry was an afterthought as it was done charged with violation of the Heinous
only when he was about to leave the room Crimes Law. The prosecution panel agreed
and when Loretta was already dead, the with the CHR. As the chief prosecutor
same constitutes theft. His possession and tasked with approving the filing of the
use ofthe picklock "without lawful cause" is information, how will you pass upon the
by itself punishable under Art. 304, RPC. recommendation? Explain? (5%) (2010 Bar
Question)
[c] Would your answer to [a] be the same if,
despite the serious stab wounds she SUGGESTED ANSWER:
sustained, Loretta survived? Explain. (3%)
(2009 Bar Question) The CHR is correct in describing the crimes
committed as heinous crimes, as defined
122
SUGGESTED ANSWER: in the preamble of the Heinous Crimes

Law (Rep. Act No. 7659), despite the
Page
passage of Rep. Act No. 9346 prohibiting

the imposition of the death penalty. On the other hand, a continuing offense is
one whose essential Ingredients took place
However, the Heinous Crimes Law does in more than one municipality or city, so
not define crimes; it is only an amendatory much so that the criminal prosecution may
law increasing the penalty for the crimes be instituted and the case tried in the
specified therein as heinous, to a maximum competent court of any one of such
of death. Thus, the heinous crimes municipality or city.
committed shall be prosecuted under the
penal law they are respectively defined and The term continued crime" or delito
penalized, such as the Revised Penal continuado mandates that only one
Code as the case may be. The information should be filed against the
circumstances making the crimes heinous offender although a series of felonious acts
may be alleged as qualifying or generic were performed; the term continuing
aggravating, if proper. The crime shall be crime" is more pertinently used with
designated as defined and punished under reference to the venue where the criminal
the penal law violated and the penalty shall action may be instituted.
be reclusion perpetua without the benefit of
parole or life imprisonment without the ART. 48--Doctrine of aberratio ictus
benefit of parole, as the case maybe in lieu
of the death penalty. At the height of an altercation, Pedrito shot
Paulo but missed, hitting Tiburcio instead,
ART. 48--Delito continuado and resulting in the death of the latter. Pedrito,
continuing offense invoking the doctrine of aberratio ictus,
claims exemption from criminal liability.
Differentiate delito continuado from a
continuing offense. (1994 Bar Question) If you were the judge, how would you
SUGGESTED ANSWER: decide the case? (1996 Bar Question)
Delito continuado or continuous crime, is a SUGGESTED ANSWER:

term used to denote as only one crime a
series of felonious acts arising from a If I were the judge, I will convict Pedrito and
single criminal resolution, not susceptible find him guilty of the complex crime of
of division, which are carried out in the Homicide with Attempted Homicide. The
same place and at about the same time, single act of firing at Paulo resulted in the
and violating one and the same penal commission of two felonies, one grave
provision. The acts done must be impelled (homicide) and the other less grave
by one criminal intent or purpose, such that (attempted homicide) thus falling squarely
each act merely constitutes a partial under Art. 48, RPC; hence, the penalty
execution of a particular crime, violating would be for the more serious crime
one and the same penal provision. It (homicide) in its maximum period (17 years
involves a concurrence of felonious acts 4 months and 1 day to 20 years).
violating a common right, a common penal
123
provision, and impelled by a single criminal Aberratio ictus (mistake in the blow) could
impulse (People vs, Ledesma, 73 SCRA not be used as a defense as it is not an
Page
77). exempting circumstance. Pedrito is liable

under the principle of Art. 4, RPC. which homicide, which is a single, indivisible
makes a person criminally liable for all the offense.
natural and logical consequences of his
felonious act. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Art. 48: Special complex crime of 2. The argument raised by A. B and C is not
Robbery with homicide correct because their liability is not only for
Robbery but for the special complex crime
A, B, C and D all armed, robbed a bank, of Robbery with homicide. But the facts
and when they were about to get out of the stated impresses that separate crimes of
bank, policemen came and ordered them to Robbery and" Homicide were charged,
surrender but they fired on the police which is not correct. What was committed
officers who fired back and shot it out with was a single indivisible offense of Robbery
them. with homicide, not two crimes.
Suppose a bank employee was killed and Art. 48: Special complex crimes- Robbery
the bullet which killed him came from the with homicide
firearm of the police officers, with what
crime shall you charge A, B, C and D? [3%] Christopher, John, Richard, and Luke are
(1998 Bar Question) fraternity brothers. To protect themselves
from rival fraternities, they all carry guns
Suppose it was robber D who was killed by wherever they go. One night, after
the policemen and the prosecutor charged attending a party, they boarded a taxicab,
A. B and C with Robbery and Homicide. held the driver at gunpoint and took the
They demurred arguing that they (A, B and latter's earnings.
C were not the ones who killed robber D,
hence, the charge should only be Robbery. What crime, if any, did the four commit if
How would you resolve their argument? they killed the driver? Explain.
(2%) (1998 Bar Question) (2%) (2010 Bar Question)
A, B. C and D should be charged with the No, the crime becomes robbery with
crime of robbery with homicide because the homicide and all the fraternity brothers are
death of the bank employee was brought liable. The existence of a band shall be
about by the acts of said offenders on the appreciated only as generic aggravating
occasion of the robbery. They shot it out circumstance. Also, if the firearms used
with the policeman, thereby causing such were unlicensed, the same would only be
death by reason or on the occasion of a taken as generic aggravating circumstance
robbery; hence, the composite crime of as provided by the Rep. Act No. 8294
robbery with homicide. (People v. Bolinget, G.R. Nos. 137949-52,
December 11, 2003).
The argument is valid, considering that a
124
separate charge for Homicide was filed. It Art. 6 (consummated carnapping) Art. 249;
would be different if the charge filed was for Art. 263; Homicide, Serious Physical
Page
the composite crime of robbery with

Injuries and Damage to property resulting guilty of vagrancy and imprisoned for ten
from reckless imprudence. (10) days of arresto menor and fined fifty
pesos (P50.00). Is he eligible for
probation? Why? (3%) (2002 Bar Question)
Dodoy, possessing only a student driver's
permit, found a parked car with the key left
in the ignition, he proceeded to drive it
away, intending to sell it. Just then Ting, the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
owner of the car, arrived. Failing to make
Dodoy stop. Ting boarded a taxi and No, he is not eligible. The benefits of the
pursued Dodoy, who in his haste to Probation Law (PD 968, as amended) does
escape, and because of his inexperience, not extend to those sentenced to serve a
violently collided with a jeepney full of maximum term of imprisonment of more
passengers. The jeepney overturned and than six years (Sec. 9a).
was wrecked. One passenger was killed:
the leg of the other passenger was crushed It is of no moment that in his previous
and had to be amputated. The car of Ting conviction A was given a penalty of only ten
was damaged to the tune of P20.000.00. (10) days of arresto mayor and a fine of
P50.00.
What offense or offenses may Dodoy be
charged with? Discuss. (1993 Bar
Question) Special law Probation law Period;
termination
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(1) Maganda was charged with violation of
Consummated carnnaping. Homicide, Bouncing Checks Law (BP 22) punishable
Serious Physical Injuries and Damage to by imprisonment of not less than 30 days
property resulting from reckless but not more than 1 year or a fine of not less
imprudence. than but not more than double the amount
of the check, which fine shall not exceed
Please take note that with respect to P200.000.00, or both. The court convicted
Espiritu Case, taking hold of the object is her of the crime and sentenced her to pay
enough to consummate the crime: although a fine of P50,000.00 with subsidiary
in the Dino case, it is still frustrated imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to
because there is inability to dispose freely pay the private complainant the amount of
the object. the check. Maganda was unable to pay the
Criminal law Execution and service fine but filed a petition for probation. The
Probation Law (PD 968, as amended); court granted the petition subject to the
Disqualified offenders condition, among others, that she should
not change her residence without the
1. A was charged with homicide. After trial, courts prior approval.
he was found guilty and sentenced to six
years and one (1) day in prision mayor, as 1. What is the proper period of
125
minimum, to twelve (12) years and one (1) probation?

day of reclusion temporal, as maximum.
Page
Prior to his conviction, he had been found

2. Supposing before the Order of applied in imposing a sentence? (2012

Discharge was issued by the court but after BAR)
the lapse of the period of probation,
Maganda transferred residence without Answer:
prior approval of the court. May the court
revoke the Order of Probation and order The fundamental principle in interpreting
her to serve the subsidiary imprisonment? and applying penal laws is the principle of
Explain. (5%) (2005 Bar Question) pro reo. The phrase in dubio pro reo
means when in doubt, for the accused.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (Intestate Estate of Gonzales v. People,
G.R. No. 181409, February 11, 2010). In
1. The period of probation shall not be dubio pro reo, is in consonance with the
less than the total number of days of constitutional guarantee that the accused
subsidiary imprisonment or more than ought to be presumed innocent until and
twice the said number of days as computed unless his guilt is established beyond
at the rate established under the Revised reasonable doubt (People v. Temporada,
Penal Code, which is one (1) day G.R. No. 173473, December 17, 2008). If
imprisonment for every P8.00 fine but not crime is punishable under the RPC, the
to exceed six (6) months. (P.D. 968, Sec. court shall sentence the accused to an
14[b] (establishing a Probation System) in indeterminate sentence the maximum term
correlation with Art. 39, RPC) of which shall be that which, in view of the
2. Yes, the court may revoke the Order attending circumstance, could be properly
of Probation and order the convicted imposed under the rules of the said Code,
accused to serve the subsidiary and the minimum of which shall be within
imprisonment, because she violated the the range of the penalty next lower to that
condition of her probation before the Order prescribed by the Code for the offense. If
of Discharge was issued by the court. The the offense is punishable under a special
conditions of probation are not co- law, the court shall sentence the accused
terminous with the period of probation; to an indeterminate sentence, the
such conditions continue even after the maximum term of which shall not exceed
period of probation had ended and thus the maximum fixed by said law, and the
requires faithful compliance or fulfillment, minimum shall not be less than the
for as long as the court which placed the minimum term prescribed in the same (R.A.
convict on probation has not issued the 4103, Sec. 1).
Order of Discharge that would release her
from probation. {Bala v. Martinez, 181 QUESTION:
SCRA 459 [1990D
A. Under what circumstances is the
Indeterminate Sentence Law not
applicable? (2%) (1999 Bar Question)
INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW
B. A was convicted of illegal
What is the fundamental principle in possession of grease guns and two
126
applying and interpreting criminal laws, Thompson sub-machine guns punishable

including the Indeterminate Sentence Law? under the old law (RA No.4) with
Page
How is the Indeterminate Sentence Law imprisonment of from five (5) to ten (10)
years. The trial court sentenced the QUESTION:

accused to suffer imprisonment of five (5)
years and one (1) day. State the application of the Indeterminate
Sentence Law. (1988 Bar Question)
Is the penalty thus imposed correct?
Explain. (3%) (1999 Bar Question) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The Indeterminate Sentence Law applies in

cases where the penalty imposed is more
Indeterminate Sentence Law does not than one year and the ISL shall apply
apply to: where there is a minimum penalty which is
1. Persons convicted of offenses not lower than the penalty next lower in
punished with death penalty or life degree provided by law and the maximum
imprisonment* not higher than the maximum penalty
2. Those convicted of treason, provided by law in cases of felonies but
conspiracy or proposal to commit treason; when it comes to statutory offenses it must
3. Those convicted of misprision of be lower than the minimum penalty
treason, rebellion, sedition or espionage; provided by law and not higher than the
4. Those convicted of piracy; maximum penalty provided by law except
5. Those who are habitual delinquents; in the following cases as provided by
6. Those who shall have escaped from section 2 of Art. 4103:
confinement or evaded sentence; 1. life imprisonment
7. Those who violated the terms of 2. those convicted of treason,
conditional pardon granted to them by the conspiracy or proposal to commit treason
Chief Executive; 3. to those convicted of misprision of
8. Those whose maximum term of treason, rebellion, sedition or espionage
imprisonment does not exceed one year; 4. to those convicted of piracy
9. Those who, upon the approval of the 5. those who are habitual delinquents
law (December 5, 1933), had been 6. to those who shall have escaped
sentenced by final judgment; from confinement or evaded sentence
10. Those sentenced to the penalty of 7. to those who having been granted
destierro or suspension. conditional pardon by the Chief Executive
shall have violated the terms thereof
The penalty imposed, being only a straight 8. to those whose maximum term of
penalty, is not correct because it does not imprisonment does not exceed one year,
comply with the Indeterminate Sentence not to those already sentenced by final
Law which applies to this case. Said law judgment at the time of approval of this Act,
requires that if the offense is punished by except as provided in Section 5 hereof.
any law other than the Revised Penal
Code, the court shall sentence the accused QUESTION:
to an indeterminate sentence, the
maximum term of which shall not exceed Andres is charged with an offense defined
the maximum penalty fixed by the law and by a special law. The penalty prescribed for
127
the minimum shall not be less than the the offense is imprisonment of not less than
minimum prescribed by the same. five (5) years but not more than ten (10)
Page
years. Upon arraignment, he entered the

plea of guilty. In the imposition of the proper Jose is charged with bigamy. The Revised
penalty, should the Indeterminate Penal Code prescribes the penalty of
Sentence Law be applied? If you were the prision mayor for this offense. The
judge trying the case, what penalty would information filed against Jose alleged one
you impose on Andres? (1989 Bar aggravating cir-cumstance. Upon being
Question) arraigned, he entered the plea of guilty and
invoked the additional mitigating
SUGGESTED ANSWER: circumstance of voluntary surrender which
the trial fiscal admitted. If you were the
The Indeterminate Sentence Law should judge trying the case, from what range of
be applied in this case. By express the prescribed penalty would you
provision of said law (section 1) it is determine the proper penalty (to constitute
applicable to offenses punished by special the maximum term of an indeterminate
laws. The indeter-minate sentence in such sentence) to be imposed on Jose? (1989
cases shall consist of a maximum term Bar Question)
which shall not exceed the maximum fixed
by the special law and a minimum term SUGGESTED ANSWER:
which shall not be less than the minimum
term pescribed by the same. I would take the maximum term of the
indeterminate sentence from the range of
If I were the judge trying the case, I would prision mayor in its minimum period. This is
impose a penalty consisting of any duration so because while there are two ordinary
not less than 5 years as minimum term and mitigating circumstances present, one of
any duration not more than 10 years as them is offset by an aggravating
maximum term. It could be five years and 1 circumstance. Consequently, it is as if the
day to 7 years; 7 years, six months and 1 crime is attended by only one ordinary
day to 9 years; or any other sentence circumstance and this will result in the
where the minimum term is not less than 5 imposition of the minimum period of the
years and the maximum term not more penalty prescribed by law.
than 10 years.
The presence of two or more ordinary
The plea of guilty cannot be considered as mitigating circumstances will give rise to a
a mitigating circumstance in this case. The privileged mitigating circumstance only if
imposition of the indeterminate penalty in a there is no aggravating circumstance
special law rests upon the discretion of the present and the penalty prescribed by law
court. Also, the pleas of guilty as a is divisible. In this case, while the penalty of
mitigating circumstance under the Revised prision mayor is divisible, and while there
Penal Code is appre-ciated only in a are two ordinary mitigating circumstances
divisible penalty. It cannot be applied to a present, there is an aggravating
penalty which is not divisible into periods of circumstance. This precludes the reduction
fixed duration, like the penalty provided in of the penalty by one degree lower
special laws. inasmuch as the two ordinary mitigating
circumstances cannot be considered as a
128
QUESTION: privileged mitigating circumstance.

Page
QUESTION:
3. those convicted of misprision of

A was charged with homicide. During the treason, rebellion, sedition or espionage;
trial, uncontradicted evidence consisting of 4. those convicted of piracy;
medical certificates were presented 5. those who are habitual delinquents;
showing that the accused had sustained 6. those who shall have escaped from
injuries in ten (10) previous occasions while confinement or evaded sentence;
engaged in fisticuffs with different persons. 7. those who having been granted
He was also confined at the National conditional pardon by the Chief Executive
Mental Hospital for mental ailment shall have violated the terms thereof;
diagnosed as homicidal and suicidal 8. those whose maximum term of
instincts. During his second confinement imprisonment does not exceed one year;
thereat, he escaped. Upon conviction, the 9. those already sentenced by final
prosecutor objected to the application of judgment at the time of approval of this Act;
the Indeterminate Sentence Law and
contending that the accused is a habitual 10. those whose sentence imposes
delinquent and an escapee from the penalties which do not involve
National Mental Hospital. imprisonment, like distierro.
If you are the Judge, rule on the objection.

(1991 Bar Question) QUESTION:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Carlos was charged and convicted of

murder. He was sentenced to life
Being an escapee from the Mental Hospital imprisonment and to indemnify the
will not disqualify him from the application offended party in the amount of P30.000.
of the ISL as Section 2 thereof He sought a reconsideration of the penalty
contemplates having escaped from on the ground that he should be entitled to
confinement or evaded sentence. the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence
Confinement presupposes imprisonment Law. Decide with reasons. (1990 Bar
by virtue of a final judgment. Question)
QUESTION: SUGGESTED ANSWER:
When would the Indeterminate Sentence Carlos is not entitled to avail of the
Law be inapplicable? (2003 Bar Question) Indeterminate Sentence Law because
Section 2 of said law specifically
SUGGESTED ANSWER: disqualifies and disallows application
thereof to persons sentenced to life
The Indeterminate Sentence Law is not imprisonment.
applicable to:
1. those persons convicted of offenses QUESTION:
punished with death penalty or
lifeimprisonment or reclusion perpetua; Macky, a security guard, arrived home late
129
2. those convicted of treason, one night after rendering overtime. He was

conspiracy or proposal to commit treason; shocked to see Joy, his wife, and Ken, his
Page
best friend, in the act of having sexual

intercourse. Macky pulled out his service If so, how will you apply it? (1994 Bar
gun and shot and killed Ken. Macky was Question)
charged with murder for the death of Ken.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The court found that Ken died under If I were the judge, I will apply the
exceptional circumstances and exonerated provisions of the Indeterminate Sentence
Macky of murder but sentenced him to Law, as the last sentence of Section I Act
destierro, conformably with Article 247 of 4103, specifically provides the application
the Revised Penal Code. The court also thereof for violations of special laws.
ordered Macky to pay indemnity to the
heirs of the victim in the amount of Under the same provision, the minimum
P50,000. must not be less than the minimum
provided therein (six years and one day)
While serving his sentence, Macky entered and the maximum shall not be more than
the prohibited area and had a pot session the maximum provided therein, i.e. twelve
with Ivy, (Joy's sister). Is Macky entitled to years. (People vs. Rosalind Reyes, 186
an indeterminate sentence in case he is SCRA 184)
found guilty of use of prohibited
substances? Explain your answer. (2007 Special law - Indeterminate Sentence Law
Bar Question) Application on the imposed sentence
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Harold was convicted of a crime defined

and penalized by a special penal law where
No, Macky is not entitled to the benefit of the imposable penalty is from 6 months, as
the Indeterminate Sentence Law (Act 4103, minimum, to 3 years, as maximum.
as amended) for having evaded the
sentence which banished or placed him on State with reasons whether the court may
destierrro. Sec. 2 of the said law expressly correctly impose the following penalties:
provides that the law shall not apply to
those who shall have "evaded sentence". a. a straight penalty of 10 months;
b. 6 months, as minimum, to 11
months, as maximum;
Special law - Indeterminate Sentence Law c. a straight penalty of 2 years. (5%)
application on the imposed sentence (2005 Bar Question)
Itos was convicted of an offense penalized SUGGESTED ANSWER:

by a special law. The penalty prescribed is
not less than six years but not more than a) The court may validly impose a
twelve years. No modifying circumstance straight penalty of 10 months imprisonment
attended the commission of the crime. because the penalty prescribed by law is
imprisonment of 6 months to 3 years, and
If you were the judge, will you apply the the Indeterminate Sentence Law does not
Indeterminate Sentence Law? (1994 Bar apply when the penalty imposed is
130
Question) imprisonment which does not exceed one

year.
Page
b) A prison term of 6 months as by law and the minimum shall not be less
minimum, to 11 months, as maximum may than the minimum penalty prescribed by
not be imposed by the court because the the same. I have the discretion to impose
Indeterminate Sentence Law does not the penalty within the said minimum and
apply when the penalty imposed as maximum.
maximum of the sentence is imprisonment
which does not exceed one (1) year. Special law - Indeterminate Sentence Law
Obviously the Indeterminate Sentence Law Application on the imposed sentence
has been applied where the sentence
imposed reflects a minimum and a [a] In a conviction for homicide, the trial
maximum. court appreciated two (2) mitigating
c) The court may not validly impose a circumstances and one (1) aggravating
straight penalty of two years because the circumstance. Homicide under Article 249
Indeterminate Sentence Law requires the of the Revised Penal Code is punishable by
court to set a minimum and a maximum of reclusion temporal, an imprisonment term
the sentence where the imprisonment to be of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to
imposed already exceeds one (1) year, twenty (20) years. Applying the
unless the offender is disqualified from the Indeterminate Sentence Law, determine
benefits of the said Law. the appropriate penalty to be imposed.
Explain. (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
Special law - Indeterminate Sentence Law SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Application on the imposed sentence as
defined by special law Under the Indeterminate Sentence Law,
the minimum of the sentence shall be
Andres is charged with an offense defined anywhere within the range of 6 years and 1
by a special law. The penalty prescribed for day to 12 years imprisonment while the
the offense is imprisonment of not less than maximum of the sentence shall be
five (5) years but not more than ten (10) anywhere within the range of Reclusion
years. Upon arraignment, he entered a Temporal minimum i.e., not lower than 12
plea of guilty. In the imposition of the proper yrs. and 1 day to not more than 14 yrs. and
penalty, should the Indeterminate 8 months.
Sentence Law be applied? If you were the
judge trying the case, what penalty would [b] Will your answer be the same if it is a
you impose on Andres? (4%) (1999 Bar conviction for illegal possession of drugs
Question) under R.A. 9165 (Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002), the prescribed penalty of which is
SUGGESTED ANSWER: also imprisonment for a term of twelve (12)
years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years?
Yes, the Indeterminate Sentence Law Why or why not? (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
should be applied because the minimum
imprisonment is more than one (I) year. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
131
If I were the Judge, I will impose an No. My answer will not be the same
indeterminate sentence, the maximum of because violations of Rep. Act 9165 are
Page
which shall not exceed the maximum fixed mala prohibita in which mitigating and
aggravating circumstances are not An agonizing and protracted trial having

appreciated. Although in People v. Simon come to a close, the judge found A guilty
(234 SCRA 555 [1994]), it was held that Art. beyond reasonable doubt of homicide and
64 can be applied if the special law adopted imposed on him a straight penalty of SIX
the nomenclature of penalties provided (6) YEARS and ONE (1) day of prision
under the RPC, such pronouncement mayor.
cannot be applied in the instant case
because the penalties for illegal The public prosecutor objected to the
possession of drugs under RA 9165 do not sentence on the ground that the proper
follow the technical nomenclature of penalty should have been TWELVE (12)
penalties in the RPC and thus, cannot be YEARS and ONE (1) DAY of reclusion
divided into periods. Hence, the existence temporal.
of mitigating and aggravating
circumstances cannot be appreciated. The defense counsel chimed in,
contending that application of the
Special law Penalties Indeterminate Indeterminate Sentence Law should lead to
Sentence Law (RA 4103); Maximum and the imposition of a straight penalty of SIX
the minimum terms of the indeterminate (6) months and ONE (1) day of prision
sentence correccional only. Who of the three is on
the right track? Explain (3%) (2010 Bar
How are the maximum and the minimum Question)
terms of the indeterminate sentence for
offenses punishable under the Revised SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Penal Code determined? (3%) (2002 Bar
Question) None of the contentions is correct because
the Indeterminate Sentence Law (Act 4103,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: as amended) has not been followed.
For crimes punished under the Revised The imposition of penalty for the crime of
Penal Code, the maximum term of the homicide, which is penalized by
indeterminate sentence shall be the imprisonment exceeding one (1) year and
penalty properly imposable under the same is divisible, is covered by the Indeterminate
Code after considering the attending Sentence Law. The said law requires that
mitigating and/or aggravating the sentence in this case should reflect a
circumstances according to Art. 64 of said minimum term for purposes of parole, and
Code. The minimum term of the same a maximum term fixing the limit of the
sentence shall be fixed within the range of imprisonment. Imposing a straight penalty
the penalty next lower in degree to that is incorrect.
prescribed for the crime under the said
Code.
Roman and Wendy are neighbors. On

Special law- Indeterminate Sentence Law Valentine's Day, without prior notice,
132
(R.A. No. 4103, as amended) Penalty Roman visited Wendy at her condo to invite
imposable for the crime of homicide her to dinner, but Wendy turned him down
Page
and abruptly left, leaving her condo door

unlocked. Roman attempted to follow, but order of probation directed him to pay in
appeared to have second thoughts; he installment, at the rate of P1,000.00 a
simply went back to Wendy's condo, let month, the damages awarded to the
himself in, and waited for her return. On offended party. Jose was able to pay only
Wendy's arrival later that evening, Roman three (3) monthly installments. Because of
grabbed her from behind and, with a knife such failure, the offended party filed a
in hand, forced her to undress. Wendy had motion for the execution of the civil aspect
no choice but to comply. Roman then tied of the decision.
Wendy's hands to her bed and sexually
assaulted her five (5) times that night. Is the order directing the payment of the
Roman was charged with, and was damages in installment valid? Did it not
convicted of, five (5) counts of rape, but the modify the decision after it had become
judge did not impose the penalty of final? (1991 Bar Question)
reclusion perpetua for each count. Instead,
the judge sentenced Roman to 40 years of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
imprisonment on the basis of the three-fold
rule. Was the judge correct? (2013 BAR) Yes, the order directing payment in
installment is proper. It did not modify the
Answer: final decision but only in the manner of its
execution. (Similarly situated in the case of
No, the three-fold rule is applicable only in Agustin vs. Court of Appeals).
connection with the service of the sentence
not in the imposition of the proper Should the motion for execution be
penalties. The court must impose all granted? (1991 Bar Question)
penalties for all the crimes for which the
accused have been found guilty. Thus, the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
court should not make a computation in it
decision and sentence the accused to not Execution should be granted as the
more than the threefold of the most severe decision is final and executory, following
of the penalties imposable. The the dissenting opinion of Justice I. Cruz in
computation under the threefold rule is for said case.
the prison authorities to make.
ART 78-88 EXECUTION OF PENALTIES
Simultaneous service of penalties
Criminal law Penalties - Execution of the
civil aspect of the decision. What are the penalties that may be served
simultaneously? (2007 Bar Question)
Jose Lopez was convicted for the crime of
serious physical injuries and, taking into SUGGESTED ANSWER:
account two (2) mitigating circumstances,
was sentenced to suffer imprisonment of The penalties that may be served
four (4) months and twenty (20) days, and simultaneously are imprisonment/ destierro
to indemnify the victim in the amount of and:
133
P25,000.00 as actual and compensatory 1. Perpetual absolute disqualification;

damages. He applied for probation, which 2. Perpetual special disqualification;
Page
was granted by the court; however, the 3. Temporary absolute disqualification;

4. Temporary special disqualification; offenders convicted of any crime against

5. Suspension from public office, the the national security and the public order.
right to vote and be voted for, and the right
to follow a profession or calling; However, The Probation Law has been
6. Fine; and any principal penalty with recently amended by RA 10707, which was
its accessory penalties. approve last Nov. 26, 2015. Under RA
10707, those offenders convicted of any
(i) Probation Law (P.D. 968, as amended crime against th public order have been
by R.A. No. 10707) excluded from the list of disqualified
(a) Definition of terms offenders to avail of probation.
(b) Purpose
(c) Grant of probation, manner and The period of probation of the offender
conditions sentenced to a term of one (1) year shall
(d) Criteria of placing an offender on not exceed: (2012 BAR)
probation a) two (2) years;
(e) Disqualified offenders b) six (6) years;
(f) Period of probation c) one (1) year;
(g) Arrest of probationer d) three (3) years.
(h) Termination of probation; exception
see also: The Comprehensive Andres was convicted of frustrated
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (R.A. No. homicide and was sentenced to 6 years
9165) and 1 day as minimum, to 8 years of prision
PROBATION LAW OF 1976 mayor as maximum. Andres appealed his
conviction to the Court of Appeals, which
Under which of the following circumstances convicted him of attempted homicide, and
is probation not applicable? (2012 sentenced him to 6 months of arresto
BAR) mayor as minimum, to 4 years of prision
a) Probation is not applicable when the correccional as maximum. Instead of
accused is sentenced to serve a maximum appealing his conviction, Andres filed an
of six (6) years. application for probation with the Regional
b) Probation is not applicable when the Trial Court. Is Andres
accused has been convicted by final qualified to avail of the benefits of the
judgment of an offense punished by probation law? (2013 BAR)
imprisonment of less than one (1) month (A) No, because when he filed a notice
and/or fine of less than P200.00. of appeal with the Court of Appeals, he
c) Probation is not applicable when waived his right under the probation law.
accused is convicted of indirect assault. (B) Yes, because after his appeal, he
d) Probation is not applicable when qualified for probation as the sentence
accused is convicted of indirect bribery. imposed on him was less than 6 years.
(Colinares vs. People, GR 182748,
** No correct answer. In 2012 when this December 13, 2011)
exam was given, the correct answer is c (C) Yes, because the probation law is
because Indirect Assault is a Crime against meant to favor the accused.
134
Public Order. Under Section 9 of the (D) No, because his previous sentence
Probation Law, PD 968 as amended, of more than 6 years disqualified him so
Page
probation shall not extend to those

that he can no longer avail of probation as Special law Probation law - Legal effect
an alternative remedy. of application for probation on the judgment
(E) None of the above. of conviction
Juancho owns a small piggery in Malolos, Johnny Gitara was convicted of the crime
Bulacan. One Saturday afternoon, he of estafa by the Regional Trial Court of
discovered that all his pigs had died. Manila. He was imposed the indeterminate
Suspecting that one of his neighbours had penalty of imprisonment of 3 years, 2
poisoned the pigs, Juancho went home, months and 1 day as minimum and six
took his rifle, went around the years as maximum, both of prision
neighbourhood, and fired his rifle in the air correccional and was ordered to imdemnify
while shouting, "makakatikim sa akin ang the offended party in the amount of
naglason ng mga baboy ko." Barangay P3.000.00. He filed an application for
officials requested police assistance and probation upon the promulgation of the
Juancho was apprehended. Juancho was judgment.
charged with and convicted of the crime of
alarms and scandals. Juancho did not What is the legal effect of his application for
appeal his conviction. probation on the judgment of conviction?
Is Juancho qualified for probation? (2013 Does said application interrupt the running
BAR) of the period of appeal? (1992 Bar
(A) Yes, because the penalty for alarms Question)
and scandals is less than six (6) years.
(B) Yes, because Juancho did not SUGGESTED ANSWER:
appeal his conviction.
(C) No, because the crime of alarms The filing of the application for probation is
and scandals carries with it a fine ofP200. considered as a waiver of the right of the
(D) No, because the crime of alarms accused to appeal; the decision has
and scandals affects public order. (E) become final. In view of the finality of the
None of the above. decision there is no period of appeal to
** In 2013 when this exam was given, the speak of.
correct answer was D because Alarms
and Scandal is a Crime against Public
Order. Under Section 9 of the Probation Special law Probation law Purpose of
Law, PD 968 as amended, probation shall probation law
not extend to those offenders convicted of
any crime against the national security and A was charged with theft and upon
the public order. arraignment, pleaded guilty to the charge.
However, The Probation Law has been He was detained for failure to post bail.
recently amended by RA 10707, which was After two (2) months, a decision was
approved last Nov. 26, 2015. Under RA rendered, sentencing A to an
10707, those offenders convicted of any indeterminate sentence of six (6) months
crime against the public order have been and one (1) day as a minimum, to one (1)
excluded from the list of disqualified year and one (1) month as maximum, and
135
offenders to avail of probation. to pay the offended party the amount of

P700. On January 16, 1985, the very day
the sentence was read to A, the Judge
Page
issued a Commitment Order addressed to prison terms, the totality of the prison terms
the Provincial Jail Warden. On January 28, should not be taken into account for the
1985, A applied for probation but his purposes of determining the eligibility of the
application was denied on the ground that accused for the probation. The law uses
the sentence of conviction became final the word "maximum term", and not total
and executory on term. It is enough that each of the prison
terms does not exceed six years. The
January 16, 1985, when A commence to number of offenses is immaterial for as
serve his sentence, a) Is A eligible for long as the penalties imposed, when taken
probation? b) What is the purpose of the individually and separately, are within the
probation law? (1989 Bar Question) probationable period.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Special law Execution and service
Probation Law (PD 968, as amended);
The purposes of the Probation Law are: grant of probation, manner and conditions
1. to promote the correction and
rehabilitation of an offender by providing May a probationer appeal from the decision
him with individualized treatment; revoking the grant of probation or modifying
2. to provide an opportunity for the the terms and conditions thereof? (2%)
reformation of a penitent offender which (2002 Bar Question)
might be less probable if he were to serve
a prison sentence; and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
3. to prevent the commission of
offenses. No. Under Section 4 of the Probation Law,
as amended, an order granting or denying
Special law - Probation Law of 1976 - Grant probation is not appealable.
of probation
Special law Probation law improper
The accused was found guilty of grave oral denial thereof
defamation in sixteen (16) Informations
which were tried jointly and was sentenced Boyet Mar was charged with consented
in one decision to suffer in each case a abduction by a 17-year old complainant.
prison term of one (1) year and one (1) day The accused made wedding arrangements
to one (1) year and eight (8) months of with the girl, but her parents insisted on the
prision correccional. Within the period to prosecution of the case. To avoid further
appeal, he filed an application for probation embarrassment of a court trial for him and
under the Probation Law of 1976, as the girl, the accused entered a plea of
amended. Could he possibly qualify for guilty. He then filed a petition for probation
probation? (1997 Bar Question) before serving sentence, but the court
denied the petition on the ground that it
SUGGESTED ANSWER: would be better for the accused to serve
sentence so that he would reform himself
136
Yes. In Francisco vs. Court of Appeals, 243 and avoid the scandal in the community
SCRA 384, the Supreme Court held that in that would be caused by the grant of the
Page
case of one decision imposing multiple petition."

Special law Probation law - Eligibility for

The accused served sentence but he probation
brought the matter to the Supreme
Court in a petition for certiorari. A was charged with theft and upon
arraignment, pleaded guilty to the charge.
Did the trial court act correctly in denying He was detained for failure to post bail.
the petition for probation? (1991 After two (2) months, a decision was
Bar Question) rendered, sentencing A to an
indeterminate sentence of six (6) months
SUGGESTED ANSWER: and one (1) day as a minimum, to one (1)
year and one (1) month as maximum, and
The trial court acted incorrectly. In Balleta to pay the offended party the amount of
vs. Leviste, 92 SCRA 719, the Judge P700. On January 16, 1985, the very day
precisely denied the petition for probation the sentence was read to A, the Judge
on the same excuse stated in the problem. issued a Commitment Order addressed to
The Supreme Court held that an accused the Provincial Jail Warden. On January 28,
must fall within any one of the 1985, A applied for probation but his
disqualifications stated in Section 9 of P.D. application was denied on the ground that
960 in order to be denied probation. the sentence of conviction became final
and executory on January 16, 1985, when
Special law Probation law Criteria of A commence to serve his sentence, a) Is
placing an offender on probation A eligible for probation? b) What is the
purpose of the probation law? (1989 Bar
PX was convicted and sentenced to Question)
imprisonment of thirty days and a fine of
one hundred pesos. Previously, PX was
convicted of another crime for which the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
penalty imposed on him was thirty days
only. A is still eligible for probation since he filed
his application for probation within 15 days
Is PX entitled to probation? Explain briefly. from the promulgation of the judgment.
(5%) (2004 Bar Question) Under the Probation Law; the accused may
apply for probation WITHIN THE PERIOD
SUGGESTED ANSWER: FOR PERFECTING AN APPEAL which is
Tes, PX may apply for probation. His 15 days from promulgation or notice
previous conviction for another crime with thereof.
a penalty of thirty days imprisonment or not
exceeding one (1) month does not The judge committed an error in issuing a
disqualify him from applying for probation; Commitment Order on the same day of
the penalty for his present conviction does promulgation. A commitment order for the
not disqualify him either from applying for convict to begin serving his sentence can
probation, since the imprisonment does not be validly issued only if the period for
exceed six (6) years (Sec. 9, Pres. Decree perfecting an appeal has expired with no
137
No. 968). appeal being taken. The fact that in

compliance with such-order, which is void,
Page
the accused commenced to serve his

sentence does not bar him from availing charged in May 2007. Since Republic Act
himself of the benefits of the Probation 9344 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of
Law. 2006) was already in effect, Joe moved to
avail of the process of intervention or
It is true that under the new Rules on diversion.
Criminal Procedure it is provided that a
judgment in a criminal case becomes final [e] Suppose Joe was convicted of
after the lapse of the period for perfecting attempted murder with a special
an appeal, or when the sentence has been aggravating circumstance and was denied
partially or totally satisfied or served, or the suspension of sentence, would he be
accused has applied for probation (Sec. 7, eligible for probation under Presidential
Rule 120). But Section 9 of the same Rule Decree (PD) 968, considering that the
provides that nothing in this Rule shall be death penalty is imposable for the
construed as affecting any existing consummated felony? Explain. (2%) (2009
provision in the law governing suspension Bar Question)
of sentence, probation or parole.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The probation law does not speak of filing
an application for probation BEFORE Yes. He would be eligible for probation
judgment has become final. It only speaks because the penalty imposable on Joe will
of filing the application WITHIN THE not exceed 6 years imprisonment.
PERIOD FOR PERFECTING AN APPEAL. Even if it would be considered that the
There is nothing in the Probation Law that crime committed was punishable by death,
bars an accused who has commenced to the penalty as far as Joe is concerned can
serve his sentence from filing an only be reclusion perpetua because Rep.
application for probation provided he does Act 9344 forbids the imposition of the
so WITHIN THE PERIOD FOR capital punishment upon offenders
PERFECTING AN APPEAL. thereunder.
The murder being attempted only, the
What the Probation Law provides is that no prescribed penalty is two degree lower than
application for probation shall be reclusion perpetua; hence, prision mayor.
entertained or granted if the defendant has Because Joe was 17 years old when he
perfected an appeal from the judgment or committed the crime, the penalty of prision
conviction. It does not say that no mayor should be lowered further by one
application shall be entertained if the degree because his minority is a privileged
judgment has become final because the mitigating circumstance; hence, prision
convict has commenced to serve his correccional or imprisonment within the
sentence. range of six months and 1 day to 6 years is
the imposable.
Special law Probation law Eligibility for
probation Special law Probation Law Disqualified
offenders
Joe was 17 years old when he committed
138
homicide in 2005. The crime is punishable Carlos was charged and convicted of
by reclusion temporal. After two years in murder. He was sentenced to life
Page
hiding, he was arrested and appropriately imprisonment and to indemnify the

offended party in the amount of P30.000. provisions of this decree applicable

And instead of filing a motion for pursuant to Section 33 of P.D. 968.
reconsideration he applies for probation. If
you were the judge, will you grant the Special law Probation law Disqualified
same? Explain your answer. (1990 Bar offenders
Question)
On February 3, 1986, Roberto was
SUGGESTED ANSWER: convicted of arson through reckless
I will not grant the application for probation imprudence and sentenced to pay a fine of
as it is clear in the Probation Law that the P15,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment
benefits thereof shall not apply to those in case of in-solvency By the Regional Trial
sentenced to serve a maximum term of Court of Quezon City. On February 10,
imprisonment of more than six (6) years. 1986, he appealed to the Court of Appeals.
(P.D. 1990). Several months later, he filed a motion to
withdraw the appeal on the ground that he
Criminal law Probation law Disqualified is applying for probation. On May 7, 1987,
offenders the Court of Appeals granted the motion
and considered the appeal withdrawn.
Who are the offenders disqualified from
availing themselves of the benefits of the On June 10, 1987, the records of the case
probation law (P.D. 968, as amended)? were remanded to the trial court. Roberto
(1988 Bar Question) filed a Motion for Probation" praying that
execution of his sentence be suspended,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: and that a probation officer be ordered to
conduct an investigation and to submit a
The following offenders are disqualified report on his probation.
from availing of the benefits of the
Probation Law: The judge denied the motion on the ground
that pursuant to Presidential Decree No.
those sentenced to serve maximum 1990, which took effect on July 16, 1986,
term of imprisonment of more than six no application for probation shall be
years; entertained or granted if the defendant has
those convicted of subversion or any perfected an appeal from the judgment of
crime against the national security of the conviction.
public order;
those who have previously been Is the denial of Robertos motion correct?
convicted by final judgment of an offense (1994 Bar Question)
punished by imprisonment of not less than
one month and one day and or a fine of not SUGGESTED ANSWER:
less than two hundred pesos;
those who have been once on Yes. Even if at the time of his conviction
probation under the provisions of this Roberto was qualified for probation but that
decree; and at the time of his application for probation,
139
those who are already serving he is no longer qualified, he is not entitled

sentence at the time the substantive to probation. The qualification for probation
Page
must be determined as of the time the

application is filed in Court (Ber-nardo vs. 2. He is not entitled to the Probation

Judge. etal, GRNo. L86561, Nov. 10, 1992; Law because Section 9 (c) provides that
Edwtn de la Cruz vs. Judge CaUejo, et al, probation shall not be extended to those
SP-19655, April 18, 1990, citing Llamado "who have previously been convicted by
vs. CA, et al., GR No. 84859, June 28. final judgment of an offense punishable by
1989; Bernardo vs. Judge Balagot, et aL imprisonment of not less than one (1)
GR 86561, Nov. 10.1992 month and one (1) day or a fine of not more
than P200.00."
Special law Probation Law Disqualified
offenders Special law Probation law Disqualified
offenders
Juanito was found guilty of Robbery by the
RTC of Manila and sentenced to four (4) In a case for violation of Sec. 8, RA 6425,
Years, two (2) months and one (1) day of otherwise known as the Dangerous Drugs
prision correctional as minimum to eight (o) Act, accused Vincent was given the benefit
years and twenty (20) days of prision of the mitigating circumstances of voluntary
mayor as maximum. plea of guilt and drunkenness not otherwise
habitual. He was sentenced to suffer a
Juanito appealed to the Court of Appeals penalty of six (6) years and one (1) day and
which found him guilty only of Theft and to pay a fine of P6.000.00 with the
sentenced him to a straight penalty of one accessory penalties provided by law, plus
(1J Year. The decision of the appellate costs. Vincent applied for probation. The
court was promulgated in May, 1993. probation officer favorably recommended
his application.
1. Is Juanito entitled to the benefits of
the Probation Law which became effective If you were the judge, what action will you
on Jan. 3, 1978? Why? take on the application?
2. Suppose the prison term imposed Discuss fully. (1995 Bar Question)
by the RTC in the above example is only
two (2) years as minimum to six (6) years Suppose that Vincent was convicted of a
as maximum and Juanito did not appeal. crime for which he was sentenced to a
When he applied for probation, it was maximum penalty of ten (10) years. Under
discovered that in March, 1960, a Municipal the law, he is not eligible for probation. He
Court has sentenced him to a six-month seasonably appealed his conviction. While
imprisonment for less serious physical affirming the judgment of conviction, the
injuries which he fully served. May his appellate court reduced the penalty to a
application for probation be granted? maximum of four (4) years and four (4)
Reason out.(1993 Bar Question) months taking into consideration certain
modifying circumstances. Vincent now
SUGGESTED ANSWER: applies for probation.
1. Juanito is not entitled to probation How will you rule on his application?
because the law, as amended, requires the Discuss fully. (1995 Bar Question)
140
filing of the application within the period for

perfecting an appeal. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page
If I were the judge, I will deny the

application for probation. The accused is
not entitled to probation as Sec. 9 of the Special law Probation Law Disqualified
Probation Law. PD NO. 968, as amended, offenders
specifically mentions that those who are
sentenced to serve a maximum term of A, a subdivision developer, was convicted
imprisonment of more than six years" are by the RTC of Makati for failure to issue the
not entitled to the benefits of the law. subdivision title to a lot buyer despite full
payment of the lot, and sentenced to suffer
The law and jurisprudence are to the effect one year imprisonment. A appealed the
that appeal by the accused from a decision of the RTC to the Court of Appeals
sentence of conviction forfeits his right to but his appeal was dismissed. May A still
probation.(Sec. 4. PD No. 968, as apply for probation? Explain. (5%) (2001
amended by PD 1990; Bernardo vs. Bar Question)
Balagot; Francisco vs. CA; Llamado vs.
CA; De la Cruz vs. Judge Callejo. CA SUGGESTED ANSWER:
case).
No. A is no longer qualified to apply for
N.B to No. 2 probation after he appealed from the
judgment of conviction by the RTC. The
This Is the second consecutive year that probation law (PD 968. as amended by
this question was asked. It is the sincere PD1990) now provides that no application
belief of the Committee that there is a need for probation shall be entertained or
to re-examine the doctrine. Firstly, much as granted if the accused has perfected an
the accused wanted to apply for probation appeal from the judgment of conviction
he is proscribed from doing so as the (Sec. 4. PD 968).
maximum penalty is NOT
PROBATIONABLE. Secondly, when the
maximum penalty was reduced to one Special law Probation Law Disqualified
which aUows probation it is but fair and j offenders
ust to grant him that right because it is
apparent that the trial judge committed an Juan was convicted of the Regional Trial
error and for which the accused should not Court of a crime and sentenced to suffer
be made to suffer. Judicial tribunals in this the penalty of imprisonment for a minimum
jurisdiction are not only courts of law but of eight years. He appealed both his
also of equity. Thirdly, the judgment of the conviction and the penalty imposed upon
appellate court should be considered a new him to the Court of Appeals. The appellate
decision as the trial courts decision was court ultimately sustained Juan's conviction
vacated: hence, he could take advantage but reduced his sentence to a maximum of
of the law when the decision is remanded four years and eight months imprisonment.
to the trial court for execution (Please see Could Juan forthwith file an application for
Dissenting opinion in Francisco us. CA). probation? Explain. (2003 Bar Question)
141
It is suggested, therefore, that an examinee SUGGESTED ANSWER:

answering in this tenor should be credited
Page
with some points.

No, Juan can no longer avail of the appropriate disposition measures as

probation because he appealed from the prescribed by the Supreme Court in the
judgment of conviction of the trial court, and Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law.
therefore, cannot apply for probation 6. the death sentence shall be
anymore. Section 4 of the Probation Law, suspended upon a woman while she is
as amended, mandates that no application pregnant or within one year after delivery.
for probation shall be entertained or (Art. 83, Revised Penal Code)
granted if the accused has perfected an 7. Section 66 of RA 9165
appeal from the judgment of conviction. (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
ART.7-Execution and service Application 2002)
for suspended sentence
SECTION 66. Suspension of Sentence of a
There are at least 7 instances or situations First-Time Minor Offender. - An accused
in criminal cases wherein the accused, who is over fifteen (15) years of age at the
either as an adult or as a minor, can apply time of the commission of the offense
for and/or be granted a suspended mentioned in Section 11 of this Act, but not
sentence. Enumerate at least 5 of them. more than eighteen (18) years of age at the
5% (2006 Bar Question) time when judgment should have been
promulgated after having been found guilty
SUGGESTED ANSWER: of said offense, may be given the benefits
of a suspended sentence, subject to the
Instances when sentence may be following conditions:
suspended are: (at least 7 instances)
a. He/she has not been previously
1. where the accused became insane convicted of violating any provision of this
before sentence could be promulgated (Art. Act, or of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972,
79, RPC); as amended; or of the
2. where the offender, upon conviction Revised Penal Code; or of any special
by the trial court, filed an application for penal laws;
probation which has been granted b. He/she has not been previously
(Baclayon v. Mutia, 129 SCRA committed to a Center or to the care of a
148119841); DOH-accredited physician; and
3. where the offender needs to be c. The, Board favorably recommends
confined in a rehabilitation center because that his/her sentence be suspended xxx"
of drug-dependency although convicted of
the crime charged; "SECTION 66. Suspension of Sentence of
4. where the offender is a youthful a First-Time Minor Offender. - An accused
offender under Art. 192, PD 603, otherwise
referred to as the Child and Youth Welfare 8. When the sentence is death, its
Code; and execution may be suspended or postponed
5. where the, crime was committed by the Supreme Court, through the
when the offender is under 18 years of age issuance of a RO upon the ground of
and he is found guilty thereof in accordance supervening events (Echegaray v.
142
with Rep. Act 9344, otherwise known as Secretary of Justice, 301 SCRA 96
the "Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of [19991).
Page
2006", but the trial court subjects him to

contending that the accused is a habitual

delinquent and an escapee from the
Explain the application of the Indeterminate National Mental Hospital.
Sentence Law (ISL). (5%)
If you are the Judge, rule on the objection.
Suggested answer
The court shall sentence the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
accused to an indeterminate sentence the
maximum term of which shall be that which, The objection should be overruled. A could
in view of the attending circumstances, not be legally considered a habitual
could be properly imposed under the rules delinquent. Habitual delinquency cannot be
of the Revised Penal Code, and the validly invoked without being alleged in the
minimum of which shall be within the range Information and proven during the trial.
of the penalty next lower to that prescribed Besides there is no indication that A was
by the Code for the offense; and if the convicted within ten (10) years from last
offense Is punished by any other law conviction or release, three times or oftener
(special law), the court shall sentence the of the crimes of robbery, theft, estafa,
accused to an indeterminate sentence, the physical injuries or falsification.
maximum term of which shall not exceed
the maximum fixed by said law and the
minimum shall not be less than the
minimum term prescribed by the same, ART 62 EFFECTS OF THE
(Sec. 1, ISL., Act No. 4103 as amended by ATTENDANCE OF MITIGATING OR
Act No. 4225) AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANES AND
The court must instead of a single OF HABITUAL DELINQUENCY
fixed penalty, except where the imposable
penalty is one (1) year or less, determine Homer was convicted of homicide. The trial
two penalties, referred to in the court appreciated the following modifying
Indeterminate Sentence Law as the circumstances: the aggravating
maximum and minimum terms. circumstance of nocturnity and the
mitigating circumstances of passion and
Art. 62 Habitual delinquency (1991) obfuscation, no intent to commit so grave a
wrong, illiteracy and voluntary surrender.
A was charged with homicide. During the The imposable penalty for homicide is
trial, uncontradicted evidence consisting of reclusion temporal the range of which is
medical certificates were presented twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty
showing that the accused had sustained (20) years.
injuries in ten (10) previous occasions while
engaged in fisticuffs with different persons. Taking into account the attendant
He was also confined at the National aggravating and mitigating circumstances,
Mental Hospital for mental ailment and applying the Indeterminate Sentence
diagnosed as homicidal and suicidal Law, determine the proper penalty to be
instincts. During his second confinement imposed on the accused. (1995 Bar
143
thereat, he escaped. Upon conviction, the Question)

prosecutor objected to the application of
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page
the Indeterminate Sentence Law

It appears that there is one aggravating ART 62 EFFECTS OF THE

circumstance (noctumity), and four ATTENDANCE OF MITIGATING OR
mitigating circumstances (passion and AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANES AND
obfuscation, no intent to commit so grave a OF HABITUAL DELINQUENCY
wrong as that committed and voluntary
surrender). Par. 4, Art. 64 should be Bruno was charged with homicide for killing
applied. Hence there will be off-setting of the 75-year old owner of his rooming
modifying circumstances, which will now house. The prosecution proved that Bruno
result in the excess of three mitigating stabbed the owner causing his death; and
circumstances. This will therefore justify in that the killing happened at 10 in the
reducing the penalty to the minimum evening in the house where the victim and
period. Bruno lived. Bruno, on the other hand,
successfully proved that he voluntarily
The existence of an aggravating surrendered to the authorities; that he
circumstance, albeit there are four pleaded guilty to the crime charged; that it
aggravating, will not justify the lowering of was the victim who first attacked and did so
the penalty to the next lower degree under without any provocation on his (Bruno's)
paragraph 5 of said Article, as this is part, but he prevailed because he managed
applicable only if THERE IS NO to draw his knife with which he stabbed the
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE victim. The penalty for homicide is
present. reclusion temporal.
Since the crime committed is Homicide and Assuming a judgment of conviction and
the penalty therefor is reclusion temporal, after considering the attendant
the MAXIMUM sentence under the circumstances, what penalty should the
Indeterminate Sentence Law should be the judge impose? (2013 BAR)
minimum of the penalty, which is 12 years
and 1 day to 14 years and 8 months. The ANSWER
MINIMUM penalty will thus be the penalty
next lower in degree, which is prision Bruno should be sentenced to an
mayor in its full extent (6 years and 1 day indeterminate sentence penalty of arresto
to 12 years). mayor in any of its period to prision
correccional in its medium period as
Ergo, the proper penalty would be 6 years maximum. Bruno was entitled to two
and 1 day, as minimum, to 12 years and 1 privileged mitigating circumstances of
day, as maximum. I believe that because of incomplete self-defense and the presence
the remaining mitigating circumstances of at least two ordinary mitigating
after the off-setting it would be very logical circumstances (voluntary surrender and
to impose the minimum of the MINIMUM plea of guilt) without any aggravating
sentence under the ISL and the minimum circumstance under Art. 69 and 64(5) of the
of the MAXIMUM sentence. RPC respectively, which lowers the
prescribed penalty for homicide which is
reclusion temporal to prision correccional.
144
Page
EXTINCTION OF b) Assuming that instead of the United

States, Taylor was able to go to another
CRIMINAL LIABILITY country with which the Philippines had no
extradition treaty, will your answer be the
Art. 93 in relation to Art 157 same? Explain.
Taylor was convicted of a violation of the Answer:

Election Code, and was sentenced to suffer Even if Taylor was able to go to another
imprisonment of one year as minimum, to country which the Philippines had no
three years as maximum. The decision of extradition treaty, I will deny the motion to
the trial court was affirmed on appeal and quash. Going to a foreign country with
became final and executory. Taylor failed which this Government has no extradition
to appear when summoned for execution of treaty to interrupt the running of
judgment, prompting the judge to issue an prescription is not applicable nor even
order for his arrest. Taylor was able to use material because the period of prescription
the backdoor and left for the United States. is not applicable nor even material because
Fifteen years later, Taylor returned to the the period of prescription had not
Philippines and filed a Motion to Quash the commenced to run in the first place; hence,
warrant of arrest against him, on the there is nothing to interrupt.
ground that the penalty imposed against
him had already prescribed. (2015 BAR) ART. 89-93 Extinction of criminal
liability- prescription of crimes
a) If you were the judge, would you
grant Taylor's Motion to Quash? Explain. (1993 Bar Question)
B imitated the signature of A, registered
Answer: owner of a lot, in special power of
If I were the judge, I will deny the motion to attorney naming him (B) as the attorney-
quash. Article 93 of the Revised Penal in-fact of A On February 13, 1964, B
Code provides when the prescription of mortgaged the lot to a bank using the
penalties shall commence to run. Under special power of attorney to obtain a
said provision, it shall commence to run loan of P8.500.00. On the same day, both
from the date the felon evades the service the special power of attorney and the
of his sentence. Pursuant to Article 157 of mortgage contract were duly registered
the same Code, evasion of service of in the Registry of Deeds. Because of Bs
sentence can be committed only by those failure to pay. The bank foreclosed the
who have been convicted by final judgment mortgage and the lot was sold to X in
by escaping during the term of his whose name a new title was issued. In
sentence. Taylor never served a single March, 1974, A discovered that the
minute of his sentence, and thus, property was already registered in the
prescription never started to run in his name of X because of an ejectment case
favor. Clearly, one who has not been filed against him by X.
committed to prison cannot be said to have
escaped therefrom (Del Castillo v. If you were the lawyer of A, with what
145
Torrecampo, G.R. No. 139033, December crime or crimes would you charge B?
18, 2002). Explain.
Page
If you were the counsel of B. what would which is in the name of his wife
be your defense? Discuss. and children? Reason out.
The crime committed is estafa thru A. Andy will not be criminally liable
falsification of public document. because Section 6 of RA 7080 provides
that the crime punishable under this Act
My defense will be prescription because shall prescribe in twenty years and the
the crime was committed in 1964 and problem asked whether Andy can still be
almost twenty nine years had already charged with the crime of plunder after 20
elapsed since then. Even if we take years.
Falsification and Estafa individually, they
have already prescribed. It is to be noted B. Yes, because Section 6 provides
that when it comes to discovery, the fact that recovery of properties unlawfully
that the crime was discovered in 1964 will acquired by public officers from them or
be of no moment because the offended their nominees or transferees shall not be
party is considered to have constructive barred by prescription, laches or estoppel.
notice on the forgery after the Deed of Sale
where his signature had been falsified was (1995 Bar Question)
registered in the office of the Register of Joe and Marcy were married in Batanes
Deeds (Cabral vs. Pu.no, 70 SCRA 606) in 1955. After two years, Joe left Marcy
(1993 Bar Question) and settled in Mindanao where he later
Through kickbacks, percentages or met and married Linda on 12 June 1960.
commissions and other fraudulent The second marriage was registered in
schemes/conveyances and taking the civil registry of Davao City three
advantage of his position, Andy, a days after its celebration. On 10 October
former mayor of a suburban town, 1975 Marcy who remained in Batanes
acquired assets amounting to P10 discovered the marriage of Joe to Linda.
billion which is grossly On 1 March 1976 Marcy filed a complaint
disproportionate to his lawful income. for bigamy against Joe.
Due to his influence and connections
and despite knowledge by the The crime of bigamy prescribed in
authorities of his ill-gotten wealth, he fifteen years computed from the day the
was charged with the crime of plunder crime is discovered by the offended
only after twenty (20) years from his party, the authorities or their agents.
defeat in the last elections he Joe raised the defense of prescription of
participated in. the crime, more than fifteen years
having elapsed from the celebration of
A. May Andy still be held criminally the bigamous marriage up to the filing
liable? Why? of Marcys complaint. He contended that
the registration of his second marriage
B. Can the State still recover the in the civil registry of Davao City was
146
properties and assets that he constructive notice to the whole world

illegally acquired, the bulk of of the celebration thereof thus binding
Page
upon Marcy.
Resolve the motion for reconsideration.

Has the crime of bigamy charged
against Joe already prescribed? SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Discuss fully.
The motion for reconsideration should be
SUGGESTED ANSWER: granted. The accused cannot be convicted
of the offense of simple slander although it
No. The prescriptive period for the crime of is necessarily included in the offense of
bigamy is computed from the time the grave slander charged in the information,
crime was discovered by the offended because, the lesser offense had already
party, the authorities or their agents. The prescribed at the time the information was
principle of constructive notice which filed (People vs. Rarang, (CA) 62 O.G.
ordinarily applies to land or property 6468; Francisco vs. CA, 122 SCRA 538;
disputes should not be applied to the crime Magat vs. People, 201SCRA 21) otherwise
of bigamy, as marriage is not property. prosecutors can easily circumvent the rule
Thus when Marcy filed a complaint for of prescription in light offenses by the
bigamy on 7 March 1976, it was well within simple expediment of filing a graver offense
the reglamentary period as it was barely a which includes such light offense.
few months from the time of discovery on
10 October 1975. (Sermonia vs. CA, 233 While the general rule is the failure of an
SCRA 155) accused to file a motion to quash before he
(1997 Bar Question) pleads to the complaint or information, shall
A was charged in an information with be deemed a waiver of the grounds of a
the crime of grave oral defamation but motion to quash, the exceptions to this are:
after trial, the court found him guilty (1) no offense was charged in the
only of the offense of simple slander. He complaint or information; (2) lack of
filed a motion for reconsideration jurisdiction; (3) extinction of the offense or
contending that, under the law, the penalty; and (4) double jeopardy. Since the
crime of simple slander would have ground invoked by the accused in his
prescribed in two months from motion for reconsideration is extinction of
commission, and since the information the offense, then it can be raised even after
against him was filed more than four plea. In fact, it may even be invoked on
months after the alleged commission of appeal (People vs. Balagtas)
the crime, the same had already
prescribed. (2000 Bar Question)
One fateful night in January 1990, while
The Solicitor General opposed the 5-year old Albert was urinating at the
motion on two grounds: first, in back of their house, he heard a strange
determining the prescriptive period, the noise coming from the kitchen of their
nature of the offense charged in the neighbor and playmate, Ara. When he
information should be considered, not peeped inside, he saw Mina, Aras
the crime proved; second, assuming stepmother, very angry and strangling
that the offense had already prescribed, the 5-year old Ara to death. Albert saw
147
the defense was waived by the failure of Mina carry the dead body of Ara, place it
A to raise it in a motion to quash. inside the trunk of her car and drive
Page
away. The dead body of Ara was never

found. Mina spread the news in the Manila. The case was subsequently filed
neighborhood that Ara went to live with with the City Fiscal of Manila but it was
her grandparents in Ormoc City. For dismissed on the ground that the crime
fear of his life, Albert did not tell anyone, had already prescribed. The law
even his parents and relatives, about provides that the crime of concubinage
what he witnessed. Twenty and a half prescribes in ten (10) years.
(20 & 1/2) years after the incident, and
right after his graduation in Was the dismissal by the fiscal correct?
Criminology, Albert reported the crime Explain. (5%)
to NBI authorities. The crime of
homicide prescribes in 20 years. Can SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the state still prosecute Mina for the
death of Ara despite the lapse of 20 & 1/2 No, the Fiscals dismissal of the case on
years? Explain. (5%) alleged prescription is not correct. The filing
of the complaint with the Municipal Trial
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Court, although only for preliminary
investigation, interrupted and suspended
Yes, the State can still prosecute Mina for the period of prescription in as much as the
the death of Ara despite the lapse of 20 & jurisdiction of a court in a criminal case is
1/2 years. Under Article 91. RPC, the determined by the allegations in the
period of prescription commences to run complaint or information, not by the result
from the day on which the crime is of proof. (People vs. Galano, 75 SCRA
discovered by the offended party, the 193)
authorities or their agents. In the case at
bar, the commission of the crime was (2004 Bar Question)
known only to Albert, who was not the OW is a private person engaged in cattle
offended party nor an authority or an agent ranching. One night, he saw AM stabbed
of an authority. It was discovered by the CV treacherously, then throw the dead
NBI authorities only when Albert revealed mans body into a ravine. For 25 years,
to them the commission of the crime. CVs body was never seen nor found;
Hence, the period of prescription of and OW told no one what he had
20years for homicide commenced to run witnessed.
only from the time Albert revealed the same
to the NBI authorities. Yesterday after consulting the parish
priest, OW decided to tell the authorities
(2001 Bar Question) what he witnessed, and revealed that
On June 1, 1988, a complaint for AM had killed CV 25 years ago.
concubinage committed in February
1987 was filed against Roberto in the Can AM be prosecuted for murder
Municipal Trial Court of Tanza, Cavite despite the lapse of 25 years? Reason
for purposes of preliminary briefly. (5%)
investigation. For various reasons, it
was only on July 3, 1998 when the Judge SUGGESTED ANSWER:
148
of said court decided the case by

dismissing it for lack of jurisdiction A. Yes, AM can be prosecuted for murder
Page
since the crime was committed in despite the lapse of 25 years, because the
crime has not yet prescribed and legally, its offended party, the authorities or their
prescriptive period has not even agents: in this case, from January 2, 1970
commenced to run. when it was made known to the police
authorities until January 6, 1980, when
The period of prescription of a crime shall Baldo was arrested and charged. The
commence to run only from the day on killing committed, whether it be homicide or
which the crime has been discovered by murder, is punishable by an afflictive
the offended party, the authorities or their penalty which prescribes in twenty (20)
agents (Art. 91, Revised Penal Code). OW, years, whereas only around ten (10) years
a private person who saw the killing but had lapsed from January 2, 1970 (when the
never disclosed it, is not the offended party authorities discovered the commission of
nor has the crime been discovered by the the crime) to January 6, 1920 (when the
authorities or their agents. accused was charged in court).
(2009 Bar Question) (2010 Bar Question)

Baldo killed Conrad in a dark corner, at A killed his wife and buried her in their
midnight, on January 2, 1960. backyard. He immediately went into hiding
Dominador witnessed the entire in the mountains. Three years later, the
incident, but he was so scared to tell the bones of A's wife were discovered by X, the
authorities about it. gardener. Since X had a standing warrant
of arrest, he hid the bones in an old clay jar
On January 2, 1970, Dominador, and kept quiet about it. After two years, Z,
bothered by his conscience, reported the caretaker, found the bones and
the matter to the police. After reported the matter to the police. After 15
investigation, the police finally arrested years of hiding, A left the country but
Baldo on January 6, 1980. Charged in returned three years later to take care of his
court, Baldo claims that the crime he ailing sibling. Six years thereafter, he was
committed had already prescribed. charged with parricide but raised the
defense of prescription.
Is Baldo's contention correct? Explain.
(3%) A. Under the Revised Penal Code,
when does the period of prescription of a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: crime commence to run? (1%)
B. When is it interrupted? (1%)
No, Baldo's contention is not correct C. Is A's defense tenable? Explain.
because the crime committed has not yet (3%)
prescribed. The prescriptive period of the
crime committed commenced to run only SUGGESTED ANSWER:
after it was reported to the police on
January 2, 1970, not on the date it was A. Generally, the period of prescription
clandestinely committed on January 2, of a crime commences to run from the date
1960. Under the discovery rule, which it was committed; but if the crime was
governs when a crime is not publicly committed clandestinely, the period of
149
committed, the prescriptive period of a prescription of the crimes under the

crime commences to run only from the day Revised Penal Code commence to run
Page
on which the crime is discovered by the from the day on which the crime was
discovered by the offended party, the prescriptive period had lapsed. Hence the
authorities or their agents (Art 91, RPC). crime has not yet prescribed
B. The running of the prescriptive ART.89/ART. 94 Total and partial

period of the crime is interrupted when "any extinguishment Acquittal in relation to
kind of investigative proceeding is instituted civil liability
against the guilty person which may (1988 Bar Question)
ultimately lead to his prosecution" a) How is criminal liability totally
(Panaguiton, Jr. v. Dept. of Justice, G.R. extinguished?
No. 167571, Nov. 25, 2008). b) How is criminal liability extinguished
partially?
c) If an accused is acquitted, does it
C. No, the defense of prescription of necessarily follows that no civil liability
the crime is not tenable. The crime arising from the acts complained of may be
committed is parricide which prescribes in awarded in the same judgment?
twenty (20) years (Art 90, RPC). It was only
when the care-taker, Z, found the victim's Explain briefly.
bones and reported the matter to the police
that the crime is deemed legally discovered SUGGESTED ANSWER
by the authorities or their agents and thus
the prescriptive period of the crime a) Article 89 of the Revised Penal
commenced to run. Code provides for the following causes of
total extinction of criminal liability:
When A left the country and returned only 1. Death of the convict as to personal
after three (3) years, the running of the penalties, as to the pecuniary liabilities,
prescriptive period of the crime is liability therefore is extinguished only when
interrupted and suspended because death occurs before final judgment.
prescription shall not run when the offender 2. Service of Sentence
is absent from the Philippine Archipelago 3. Amnesty
(Art. 91, RPC). 4. Absolute pardon
5. Prescription of the crime
Since A had been in hiding for 15 years 6. Prescription of the penalty
after the commission of the crime and the 7. Marriage of the offended woman as
prescriptive period started running only provided in Article 344.
after 5 years from such commission when
the crime was discovered, only 10 years b) Article 94 of the Revised Penal
lapsed and 3 years thereof should be Code provides for the following causes of
deducted when the prescriptive period was partial extinction of criminal liability:
interrupted and suspended. Hence, the 3
years when A was out of the Philippines 1. Condition pardon
should be deducted from the 10 years after 2. Communication of sentence
the prescription starts running. Adding the 3. Good conduct allowances during
7 years of prescription and the 6 years that confinement
150
lapsed before the case was filed, only a 4. Parole

total of thirteen (13) years of the 5. Probation
Page
If an accused acquitted, it does not On the other hand, if it were Alma who died
necessarily follow that no civil liability pending appeal of her conviction, her
arising from the acts complained of may be criminal liability shall be extinguished and
awarded in the same judgment except: If therewith the civil liability under the
there is an express waiver of the liability; Revised Penal Code (Art. 89, par. 1, RPC).
and if there is a reservation of file a However, the claim for civil indemnity may
separate civil action (Rule 107; Padilla vs. be instituted under the Civil Code (Art.
CA People vs. Jalandoni). 1157) if predicated on a source of
obligation other than delict, such as law,
contracts, quasi-contracts and quasidelicts
ART. 89--Extinguishment of criminal (People vs. Bayotas 236 SCRA 239, G.R.
liability; civil liability 152007, September 2, 1994).
For defrauding Loma, Alma was charged b. Exceptions to the rule that acquittal from
before the Municipal Trial Court of Malolos, a criminal case extinguishes civil liability,
Bulacan. After a protracted trial, Alma was are:
convicted. While the case was pending
appeal in the Regional Trial Court of the 1. When the civil action is based on
same province, Loma who was then obligations not arising from the act
suffering from breast cancer, died. Alma complained of as a felony;
manifested to the court that with Loma's 2. When acquittal is based on
death, her (Alma's) criminal and civil reasonable doubt or acquittal is on the
liabilities are now extinguished. Is Almas ground that guilt has not been proven
contention correct? What if it were Alma beyond reasonable doubt (Art. 29, New
who died, would it affect her criminal and Civil Code);
civil liabilities? Explain. (3%) (2000 Bar 3. Acquittal due to an exempting
Question) circumstance, like insanity;
4. Where the court states in its
a. Name at least two exceptions to the judgment that the case merely involves a
general rule that in case of acquittal of the civil obligation;
accused in a criminal case, his civil liability 5. Where there was a proper
is likewise extinguished. (2%) (2000 Bar reservation forthe filing of a separate civil
Question) action;
6. In cases of independent civil actions
SUGGESTED ANSWER: provided for in Arts. 31,32,33 and 34 of the
New Civil Code;
No. Alma's contention is not correct. The 7. When the judgment of acquittal
death of the offended party does not includes a declaration that the fact from
extinguish the criminal liability of the which the civil liability might arise did not
offender, because the offense is committed exist (Saplera vs. CA. 314 SCRA370);
against the State (People vs. Misola, 87 8. Where the civil liability is not derived
Phil. 830, 833). Hence, it follows that the or based on the criminal act of which the
civil liability of Alma based on the offense accused is acquitted (Saplera vs. CA, 314
151
committed by her is not extinguished. The SCRA 370).

estate of Loma can continue the case.
Page
Note : Only two (2) exceptions are asked.

civil obligation. (Tonijos vs. Court of

ART. 89--Effect of death of the accused Appeals 67 SCRA 394).
on civil liability
ART. 89/ART. 112--Effect of death of
PM, a rich businessman, was convicted of accused on criminal and civil liability
murder and sentenced to life imprisonment
by the Regional Trial Court, and to pay the Rico was convicted of raping Letty, his
heirs of the victim the total amount of former sweetheart by the Regional Trial
P250,000.00. While his appeal was Court of Manila and he was ordered to
pending before the Supreme serve the penalty of life imprisonment, to in-
demnify Letty in the amount of P30.000.00
Court, PM died. The defense counsel and to support their offspring. Pending
manifested that PMs death extinguished appeal in the Supreme Court. Rico died.
not only the criminal liability but also the His widow, Bemie, moved for a dismissal of
pecuniary liability because the death the case
occurred before the final judgment, since
the case was pending appeal. He invoked A. What is the legal effect of Ricos
death on his criminal liability? Explain your
Art. 89 of the Revised Penal Code which answer. (1990 Bar Question)
provides that criminal liability is totally
extinguished: 1. By the death of the convict, B. How about on his civil liability? State
as to the personal penalties; and as to your reasons. (1990 Bar Question)
pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is
extinguished only when the death of the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
offender occurs before the final judgment*
A. The criminal liability of Rico is
As a Solicitor in the Office of the Solicitor extinguished on the basis of Article 89 of
General, do you agree with the defense the Revised Penal Code which provides
counsels argument? (1987 Bar Question) that: How criminal liability is extinguished
- Criminal liability is totally extiguished: 1.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: By the death of the convict, as to the
personal penalties; and as to pecuniary
As Solicitor General, I will not agree to the penalties, liability therefor is extinguished
argument of the defense counsel that the only when the death of the offender occurs
death of PM while his appeal was pending before final judgement.
extinguished not only his criminal liability
but also his pecuniary liability Article 89 of B. The civil liability of Rico survives.
the Revised Penal Code which provides (People v. Sen- davdiego, January 20,
that the pecuniary liability of the accused 1978, 74 O.G. 4371; People v. Tirol G.R.
is extinguished only when the death of the No. L-30588, January 31, 1981; People v.
offender occurred before the final Naboa, et, al.,132 SCRA 410).
judgment, refers to his liability to pay the
fine. (People vs. Sendaydiego, 81 SCRA
152
120). The civil liability, however, survives

the death of the offender because death is
Page
not a valid cause of the extinguishment of

ART. 89--effect death of the accused

pending appeal on his criminal and The death of AX while his appeal from the
pecuniary liabilities judgment of the trial court is pending,
extinguishes his criminal liability. The civil
Librado was convicted of malversation for liability insofar as it arises from the crime
which he has imposed the indeterminate and recoverable under the Revised Penal
penalty of imprisonment with the following Code is also extinguished; but indemnity
accessory penalties provided by law - a fine and damages may be recovered in a civil
of P6.000.00 without subsidiary action if predicated on a source of
imprisonment in case of in-solvency; obligation under Art. 1157, Civil Code, such
perpetual special disqualification; as law, contracts, quasi-contracts and
indemnification to the government in the quasi-delicts, but not on the basis of delicts.
amount of P6.000.00 and to pay the costs. (People v. Bayotas, 236SCRA 239
11994B.
If he dies pending appeal, what is the legal
effect of his death on his criminal and Civil indemnity and damages under the
pecuniary liabilities? (1992 Bar Question) Revised Penal Code are recoverable only
if the accused had been convicted with
SUGGESTED ANSWER: finality before he died.
Under Art. 89. RPC and jurisprudence ART. 89 Criminal law Modification and
(People vs. Jose. 71 SCRA 273, People vs. extinction of criminal liability Pardon
Alison. 44 SCRA 523; etc.) death of the and Amnesty
accused pending appeal extinguishes his
criminal and civil liabilities. Civil liability TRY was sentenced to death by final
includes pecuniary liabilities, such as fine. judgment. But subsequently he was
Hence, the same, together with the granted pardon by the President. The
disqualification and the costs are pardon was silent on the perpetual
extinguished. disqualification of TRY to hold any public
office.
ART.89--Criminal and civil liability;
when extinguished After his pardon, TRY ran for office as
Mayor of APP, his hometown. His
AX was convicted of reckless imprudence opponent sought to disqualify him. TRY
resulting in homicide. The trial court contended he is not disqualified because
sentenced him to a prison term as well as he was already pardoned by the President
to pay P150.000 as civil indemnity and unconditionally.
damages. While his appeal was pending,
AX met a fatal accident. He left a young Is TRYS contention correct? Reason
widow, 2 children, and a million-peso briefly. (5%) (2004 Bar Question)
estate. What is the effect, if any, of his
death on his criminal as well as civil SUGGESTED ANSWER:
liability? Explain briefly. (5%) (2004 Bar
153
Question) No, TRY's contention is not correct. Article

40 of the Revised Penal Code expressly
Page
SUGGESTED ANSWER: provides that when the death penalty is not

executed by reason of commutation or pardon; hence, for pardon to be valid there

pardon, the accessory penalties of must be a sentence already final and
perpetual absolute disqualification and civil executory at the time the same is granted.
interdiction during thirty (30) years from the Moreover, the grant is in favor of individual
date of the sentence shall remain as effects convicted offenders, not to a class of
thereof, unless such accessory penalties convicted offenders; and the crimes subject
have been expressly remitted in the of the grant may be common crimes or
pardon. This is because pardon only political crimes. Finally, the grant is a
excuses the convict from serving the private act of the Chief Executive which
sentence but does not relieve him of the does not require the concurrence of any
effects of the conviction unless expressly other public officer or office.
remitted in the pardon.
In amnesty;
Pardon vs Amnesty The criminal complexion of the act
A. Enumerate the differences between constituting the crime is erased, as though
pardon and amnesty. 2.5% (2006 Bar such act was innocent when committed;
Question) hence, the effects of the conviction are
B. Under Presidential Proclamation obliterated. Amnesty is granted is in favor
No. 724, amending Presidential of a class of convicted offenders, not to
Proclamation No. 347, certain crimes are individual convicted offenders; and the
covered by the grant of amnesty. Name at crimes involved are generally political
least 5 of these crimes. 2.5% offenses, not common crimes. Amnesty is
C. Can former DSWD Secretary Dinky a public act that requires the conformity or
Soliman apply for amnesty? How about concurrence of the Philippine Senate.
columnist Randy David? (You are
supposed to know the crimes or offenses B. Crimes covered by the grant of
ascribed to them as published in almost all amnesty, under Presidential
newspapers for the past several months.) Proclamation No. 724:
2.5% (2006 Bar Question) (at least 5)
D. General Lim and General Querubin
of the Scout Rangers and Philippine
Marines, respectively, were charged with a. Rebellion or insurrection
conduct unbecoming an officer and a b. Coup d'etat
gentleman under the Articles of War. Can c. Conspiracy and proposal to commit
they apply for amnesty? rebellion, insurrection or coup d'etat
2.5% (2006 Bar Question) d. Disloyalty' of public officers or
employs
SUGGESTED ANSWER: e. Inciting to rebellion or insurrection
f. Sedition
A. The differences between pardon and g. Conspiracy to commit sedition
amnesty: h. Inciting to sedition
i. Illegal assembly
In pardon: j. Illegal association
154
The convict is excused from serving the k. Direct Assault

sentence but the effects of conviction l. Indirect Assault
Page
remain unless expressly remitted by the

m. Resistance and disobedience to a extended an absolute pardon by the

person in authority or agents of such President. Thus, she applied for
persons reinstatement, payment of backwages, and
n. Tumults and other disturbances of absolution from payment of the One and
public order indemnify.
o. Unlawful use of means of
publication and unlawful utterances Decide the issue with reasons. (1990 Bar
p. Alarms and scandals Question)
q. Illegal poSsession of firearms,
ammunitions, and explosives, committed in SUGGESTED ANSWER:
furtherance of, incident to, or in connection
with the crimes of rebellion and insurrection Rina cannot apply for reinstatement, etc. as
r. Violations of Articles of War: there was no effective pardon by the
r.1. Art. 59 (Desertion) President. It is basic that pardon can only
r.2. Art. 62 (Absence without Leave) be granted after final conviction
r.3. Art. 67 (Mutiny or Sedition) (Barrioquinto v. Fernandez, 85 Phil. 642
r.4. Art. 68 (Failure to Suppress Mutiny or
Sedition) Modification and extinction of criminal
r.5. Art. 94 (Various Crimes) liability Pardon by the Chief Executive
r.6. Art. 96 (Conduct unbecoming an officer
and gentleman) Linda was convicted by the Sandiganbayan
r.7. Art. 97 (General Article) of estafa through falsification of public
document. She was sentenced accordingly
C. Both Dinky Soliman and Randy David and ordered to pay, among others,
may apply for amnesty because the crime P5,000.00 representing the balance of the
respectively imputed to them are crimes amount defrauded.
against public order which are among the
crimes covered by amnesty. The case reached the Supreme Court
which affirmed the judgment of conviction.
D. Yes. General Lim and General During the pendency of Lindas motion for
Querubin of the Scout Rangers and reconsideration in the said Court, the
Philippine Marines can apply for amnesty. President extended to her an absolute
Violation of conduct unbecoming an officer pardon which she accepted.
and a gentleman under Article 96 of the
Articles of War is explicitly enumerated in By reason of such pardon, she wrote the
Section 1 of Presidential Proclamation No Department of Finance requesting that she
724 as one of the crimes that are covered be restored to her former post as assistant
by the grant of amnesty. treasurer, which is still vacant.
Pardon: Reinstatement The Department ruled that Linda may be

Rina, who was a suspended Clerk of Court, reinstated to her former position without the
was convicted of malversation and was necessity of a new appointment and
sentenced to imprisonment, to pay a fine of directed the City Treasurer to see to it that
155
P5.000.00 and to indemnify the the sum of P5.000.00 be satisfied.

government in the same amount. Pending
Page
appeal in the Court of Appeals, she was

Claiming that she should not be made to from confinement. He claims that the
pay P5,000.00, Linda appealed to the amnesty extends to the offense of evasion
Office of the President. of Service of Sentence. As judge, will you
grant the petition? Discuss fully. (4%)
The Office of the President dismissed the (2009 Bar Question)
appeal and held that acquittal, not absolute
pardon, is the only ground for SUGGESTED ANSWER:
reinstatement to one's former position and
that the absolute pardon does not exempt Yes, I will grant the petition because the
the culprit from payment of civil liability. sentence that was evaded proceeded from
the crime of Rebellion which has been
IS Linda entitled to reinstatement? (1994 obliterated by the grant of amnesty to the
Bar Question) offender (Art. 89 [3], RPC).
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Since the amnesty erased the criminal

complexion of the act committed by the
No, Linda is not entitled to reinstatement to offender as a crime of rebellion and
her former position inasmuch as her right rendered such act as though innocent, the
thereto had been relinquished or forfeited sentence lost its legal basis. The purported
by reason of her conviction. The absolute evasion thereof therefore cannot subsist
pardon merely extinguished her criminal (People v. Patriarca, 341 SCRA
liability, removed her disqualification, and 464[2000]).
restored her eligibility for appointment to
that office. She has to reapply for such Amnesty obliterates, not only the basis of
position and under the usual procedure conviction, but also all the legal effects
required for a new appointment. Moreover, thereof.
the pardon does not extinguish the civil
liability arising from the crime. (Monsanto Modification and extinction of criminal
vs. Factoran, Jr., 170 SCRA 191); see Art. liability Amnesty
36. RPC)
Senator Adamos was convicted of plunder.
Amnesty About one year after beginning to serve his
sentence, the President of the Philippines
Antero Makabayan was convicted of the granted him absolute pardon. The signed
crime of Rebellion. While serving sentence, pardon states: "In view hereof, and in
he escaped from jail. Captured, he was pursuance of the authority vested upon me
charged with, and convicted of, Evasion of by the Constitution, I hereby grant absolute
Service of Sentence. Thereafter, the pardon unto Adamos, who was convicted
President of the Philippines issued an of plunder in Criminal Case No. XV32 and
amnesty proclamation for the offense of upon whom the penalty of reclusion
Rebellion. Antero applied for and was perpetua was imposed." He now comes to
granted the benefit of the amnesty you for advice. He wants to know if he could
proclamation. run for senator in the next election. (2015
156
BAR)
Antero then filed a petition for habeas
Page
corpus, praying for his immediate release

a) What advice will you give Adamos? and abolishes and puts into oblivion the
Explain. offense itself, it so overlooks and
obliterates the offense with which he is
Answer: charged, so that the person released by
amnesty stands before the law precisely as
If I were the counsel of Senator Adamos, I though he had committed no offense
will give him the advice that he cannot run (Barrioquinto v. Fernandez, G.R. No. L-
in the Senatorial race since the terms of the 1278, January 21, 1949).
pardon has not expressly restored his right
to hold public office or remitted the CIVIL LIABILITY
accessory penalty of perpetual absolute
ART. 103--Execution of the employers
disqualification. Under Article 36 of the
subsidiary liability
Revised Penal Code, a pardon shall not
work the restoration of the right to hold
Juan Cruz, driver of a cargo truck owned
public office unless such right be expressly
and operated by VICMICO a sugar central,
restored by terms of the pardon. Under
while driving recklessly caused Jorge Abad
Article 41, the penalty of reclusion perpetua
to fall from the truck resulting in injuries
shall carry with it perpetual absolute
which caused his death. Juan Cruz was
disqualification which the offender shall
convicted of homicide thru reckless
suffer even though pardoned as to the
imprudence and was ordered to pay the
principal penalty, unless the same shall
heirs of the deceased Ahad P12,000.00.
have been expressly remitted in the pardon
The respondent judge issued an order
(Risos-Vidal v. Lim, G.R. No. 206666,
granting a motion for execution of the civil
January 21, 2015).
service liability of the accused Juan Cruz,
but the return of the Sheriff showed that the
b) Assuming that what Adamos
accused was insolvent. Petitioners, heirs of
committed was heading a rebellion for
the deceased Abad, now filed a motion for
which he was imposed the same penalty of
execution of the employers subsidiary
reclusion perpetua, and what he received
liability under Art. 103 of the Revised Penal
was amnesty from the government, will
Code. Respondent judge denied the
your answer be the same? Explain.
motion, stating that the employer
VICMICO, not having been notified that his
Answer:
driver was facmg a criminal charge, a
separate action had to be filed. Hence, a
If Senator Adamos was convicted of
petition for mandamus was filed.
rebellion and he received amnesty, I will
give him the advice that he can run in the
Decide the case. (1988 Bar Question)
Senatorial race. Under Article 89 of the
Revised Penal Code, criminal liability is
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
totally extinguished by amnesty, which
completely extinguishes the penalty and all
Mandamus will lie. There is no need for a
its effects. Thus, the amnesty extinguishes
separate civil action because the driver
not only the principal penalty of reclusion
was convicted (Martinez vs. Barredo). All
157
perpetua but also its effects such as the

you need is a motion for execution with a
accessory penalty of perpetual absolute
notice to the employer that states
Page
disqualification. Amnesty looks backward

compliance with the requisites imposed by
Article 103 of the Revised Penal Code (that since his liability is not primary but only
there is employer-employee relationship, subsidiary in case his
that the employer is engaged in an industry employee cannot pay, he need not be
and that the driver is insolvent). impleaded in the in the criminal case. It
suffices that he was duly notified of the
Art. 103--Civil liability Subsidiary motion for issuance of a subsidiary writ of
liability of the employer execution and thus given the opportunity to
be heard.
Guy, while driving a passenger jeepney
owned and operated by Max, bumped Art. 104-Civil liability -Restitution;
Demy, a pedestrian crossing the street. reparation
Demy sustained injuries, which required
medical attendance for three months. Guy Allan, the Municipal Treasurer of the
was charged with reckless imprudence Municipality of Gerona, was in a hurry to
resulting to physical injuries. Convicted by return to his office after a day-long official
the Metropolitan Trial Court, Guy was conference. He alighted from the
sentenced to suffer a straight penalty of government car which was officially
three months of arresto mayor and ordered assigned to him, leaving the ignition key
to indemnify Demy in the sum of P5.000 and the car unlocked, and rushed to his
and to pay PI,000 as attorney's fees. office. Jules, a bystander, drove off with the
car and later sold the same to his brother,
Upon finality of the decision, a writ of Danny for P20.000.00, although the car
execution was served upon Guy, but was was worth P800,000.00. What, if any, are
returned unsatisfied due to his insolvency. their respective civil liabilities? Explain.
Demy moved for a subsidiary writ of (5%) (2005 Bar Question)
execution against Max. The latter opposed
the motion on the ground that the decision SUGGESTED ANSWER:
made no mention of his subsidiary liability
and that he was not impleaded in the case. Allan, Jules and Danny are all civilly liable
for restitution of the car to the government,
How will you resolve the motion? [5%] or if no longer possible, reparation of the
(1998 Bar Question) damages caused by payment of the
replacement cost of the car minus
SUGGESTED ANSWER: allowance for depreciation, and to
indemnify consequential damages.
The motion is to be granted. Max as an Criminal law Civil liability - Indemnity
employer of Guy and engaged in an
industry (transportation business) where Macky, a security guard, arrived home late
said employee is utilized, is subsidiarily one night after rendering overtime. He was
civilly liable under Article 103 of the shocked to see Joy, his wife, and Ken, his
Revised Penal Code. Even though the best friend, in the act of having sexual
decision made no mention of his subsidiary intercourse. Macky pulled out his service
liability, the law violated (Revised Penal gun and shot and killed Ken. Macky was
158
Code) itself mandates for such liability and charged with murder for the death of Ken.
Max is deemed to know it because
Page
ignorance of the law is never excused. And

The court found that Ken died under SUGGESTED ANSWER:

exceptional circumstances and exonerated The damages that the trial court may award
Macky of murder but sentenced him to are:
destierro, conformably with Article 247 of
the Revised Penal Code. The court also a. civil indemnity for the loss of life of
ordered Macky to pay indemnity to the the victim which jurisprudence has set at
heirs of the victim in the amount of P50,000.00;
P50,000. b. Moderate/temperate damages for
the expenses incurred for the wake and
Did the court correctly order Macky to pay burial of the victim as the trial court may
indemnity even though he was exonerated consider reasonable; and
of murder? Explain your answer. (2007 Bar c. Moral damages for the sufferings of
Question) the family of the victim emotionally and
mentally.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ART. 104--Acquittal in a criminal
No, the court did not act correctly in prosecution; Institution of civil action
ordering the accused to indemnify the
victim. Since the killing of Ken was A was a 17-year old working student who
committed under the exceptional was earning his keep as a cigarette vendor.
circumstances in Article 247, Revised B was driving a car along busy Espana
Penal Code, it is the consensus that no Street at about 7:00 p.m. Beside B was C.
crime was committed in the light of the The car stopped at an intersection because
pronouncement in People v. Cosicor (79 of the red signal of the traffic light While
Phil. 672 [1947]) that banishment waiting for the green signal, C beckoned A
(destierro) is intended more for the to buy some cigarettes. A approached the
protection of the offender rather than as a car and handed two sticks of cigarettes to
penalty. Since the civil liability under the C. While the transaction was taking place,
Revised Penal Code is the consequence of the traffic light changed to green and the
criminal liability, there would be no legal car immediately sped off. As the car
basis for the award of indemnity when there continued to speed towards Qulapo, A
is no criminal liability. clung to the window of the car but lost his
grip and fell down on the pavement. The
car did not stop. A suffered serious injuries
ART. 104--Civil liability - Damages which eventually caused his death. C was
charged with ROBBERY with HOMICIDE.
In a crime of homicide, the prosecution In the end, the Court was not convinced
failed to present any receipt to substantiate with moral certainty that the guilt of C has
the heirs claim for an award of actual been established beyond reasonable doubt
damages, such as expenses for the wake and, thus, acquitted him on the ground of
and burial. reasonable doubt.
What kind of damages may the trial court Can the family of the victim still recover civil
159
award to them and how much? 5% damages in view of the acquittal of C?

(2006 Bar Question) Explain. (5%) (2000 Bar Question)
Page
SUGGESTED ANSWER: bank lawyer filed a motion for modification

of the judgment and prayed that the money
Yes, as against C, A's family can still be ordered returned to the bank. Two
recover civil damages despite C's acquittal. months later, Armando, the owner of the
When the accused in a criminal stolen car, learned of the judgment even
prosecution is acquitted on the ground that much later. He comes to you seeking your
his guilt has not been proved beyond well considered opinion on whether it is still
reasonable doubt, a civil action for possible to recover his car.
damages for the same act or omission may
be instituted. Such action requires only a A. As legal counsel, what will you tell
preponderance of evidence (Art. 29, CC). him? Explain briefly. (1987 Bar Question)
If As family can prove the negligence of B B. Under the facts given, would the
by preponderance of evidence, the civil bank be entitled to the return of the money?
action for damages against B will prosper Why? (1987 Bar Question)
based on quasi-delict. Whoever by act or
omission causes damage to another, there SUGGESTED ANSWER:
being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay
for the damage done. Such fault or A. As legal counsel, I would advise
negligence, about pre-existing contractual Armando to file a civil action for the
relation between the parties, is called a recovery of his car against its legal
quasi-delict (Art. 2176, CC). This is entirely custodian. The car was stolen and
separate and distinct from civil liability therefore it belonged to Armando, an
arising from negligence under the Penal innocent party, who has not participated in
Code (Arts. 31, 2176. 2177, CC). the commission of the robbery by Jose,
Pedro and Juan. The car, is therefore, not
Civil action for recovery of property not subject to confiscation.
subject to confiscation; jurisdiction
B. The motion of the bank lawyer for
Jose. Pedro and Juan, robbed ABC Bank the modification of the judgment with the
of P200,000.00 and using a stolen car, prayer that the money be ordered returned
immediately proceeded to Quezon City. to the bank must be denied. The judgment
The police recovered the money and the is already final and so the court has no
car. After the trial, during which the bank more jurisdiction over the case (People
lawyer intervened as private prosecutor, vs. Velez 15 SCRA 26).
the court convicted Jose, Pedro and Juan
of robbery and ordered the forfeiture of the (2015 BAR)
money (P200,000.00) and the car in favor The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found
of the government as proceeds and Tiburcio guilty of frustrated homicide and
instrument of the crime, respectively. The sentenced him to an indeterminate penalty
bank lawyer received copy of the judgment, of four years and one day of prision
but did not do anything. Jose, Pedro and correccional as minimum, to eight years of
Juan did not appeal the judgment, and prision mayor as maximum, and ordered
160
began service of sentence. Two months him to pay actual damages in the amount
later, realizing that the court did not order of P25,000.00. Tiburcio appealed to the
Page
the return of the money to the bank, the Court of Appeals which sustained his
conviction as well as the penalty imposed CRIMES AGAINST

by the court a quo. After sixty days, the
Court of Appeals issued an Entry of NATIONAL SECURITY AND
Judgment and remanded the records of the THE LAW OF NATIONS
case to the RTC. Three days thereafter, ART. 116 Crimes against National
Tiburcio died of heart attack. Atty. Abdul, Security Misprision of treason
Tiburcio's counsel, filed before the RTC a
Manifestation with Motion to Dismiss, Because peace negotiations on the
informing the court that Tiburcio died Spratlys situation had failed, the People's
already, and claiming that his criminal Republic of China declared war against the
liability had been extinguished by his Philippines. Myra, a Filipina who lives with
demise. her Italian expatriate boyfriend, discovered
e-mail correspondence between him and a
a) Should the RTC grant the Motion to certain General Tung Kat Su of China.
Dismiss the case? Explain.
On March 12, 2010, Myra discovered that
Answer: on even date her boyfriend had sent an e-
The RTC may not grant the motion to mail to General Tung Kat Su, in which he
dismiss because the Court of Appeals, agreed to provide vital information on the
having issued an Entry of Judgment, the military defense of the Philippines to the
decision has become final and executory. Chinese government in exchange for P1
However, the pecuniary penalty, such as million and his safe return to Italy. Two
the civil liability arising from the crime weeks later, Myra decided to report the
consisting of actual damages of P25,000 matter to the proper authorities. Did Myra
survives the death of Tiburcio. commit a crime? Explain. (3%) (2010 Bar
Question)
b) Assuming that Tiburcio's death
occurred before the Court of Appeals SUGGESTED ANSWER:
rendered its decision, will you give a
different answer? Yes, Myra committed the crime of
Misprision of Treason under Art. 116 of the
Answer: Revised Penal Code, for failing to report or
Yes. The RTC decision must be set aside make known "as soon as possible" to the
and the case against Tiburcio must governor or provincial fiscal or to the mayor
consequently be dismissed. The demise of or fiscal of the City where she resides, the
Tiburcio which occurred before the Court of conspiracy between her Italian boyfriend
Appeals rendered its decision causes his and the Chinese General to commit
criminal liability, as well as his civil liability treason against the Philippine Government
ex delicto, to be totally extinguished in time of war. She decided to report the
inasmuch as there is no longer a defendant matter to the proper authorities only after
to stand as the accused, the civil action is two (2) weeks.
instituted therein for recovery of civil liability
ex delicto is ipso facto extinguished, ART. 123-Qualified Piracy
161
grounded as it is on criminal case.

The Royal S.S. Maru, a vessel registered
Page
in Panama, was 300 nautical miles from

Aparri, Cagayan when its engines

malfunctioned. The Captain ordered his ART. 123 Crimes against national
men to drop anchor and repair the ship. security Qualified piracy
While the officers and crew were asleep,
armed men boarded the vessel and took The inter-island vessel M/ V Viva Lines I,
away several crates containing valuable while cruising off Batanes, was forced to
items and loaded them in their own seek shelter at the harbor of Kaoshiung,
motorboat. Before the band left, they Taiwan because of a strong typhoon. While
planted an explosive which they detonated anchored in said harbor, Max, Baldo and
from a safe distance. The explosion Bogart arrived in a speedboat, fired a
damaged the hull of the ship, killed ten (10) bazooka at the bow of the vessel, boarded
crewmen, and injured fifteen (15) others. it and divested the passengers of their
money and jewelry. A passenger of M/ V
What crime or crimes, if any, were Viva Lines I, Dodong, took advantage of
committed? Explain. (5%) (2016 BAR) the confusion to settle an old grudge with
SUGGESTED ANSWER another passenger, and killed him. After
The crime of Qualified Piracy under their apprehension, all four were charged
Art. 123 of the Revised Penal Code has with qualified piracy before a Philippine
been committed, the elements of piracy court.
being present, namely;
(1) that the vessel is on the high a) Was the charge of qualified piracy
seas; (2) that the offenders are not against the three persons (Max, Baldo and
members of its complement or passenger Bogart) who boarded the inter-island
of the vessel; and (3) that the offenders (a) vessel correct? Explain. (4%) (2008 Bar
attack or seize that vessel or (b) seize the Question)
whole or part of the cargo of said vessel, its
equipment or personal belongings of its SUGGESTED ANSWER:
complement or passengers. The latter act
is committed when the offenders took away a) The charge is correct. Qualified Piracy
several crates containing valuable items was committed when the offenders seized
and loaded them in their own motorboat. the vessel by firing on or boarding the
The crime of piracy is qualified same. In the problem, they even went
because: (1) the offenders have seized the further by divesting the passengers of their
vessel by boarding; and (2) the crime of money and jewelry. The vessel was
piracy was accompanied by murder and anchored in the harbor of Kaoshiung,
physical injuries. The facts show that the Taiwan and it is submitted that the crime
offenders planted an explosive in the was committed within the territorial
vessel which they detonated from a safe jurisdiction of another country. The
distance and the explosion killed ten (10) Supreme Court has ruled that the high seas
crewmen and injured fifteen (15) others. contemplated under Art. 122 of the Revised
The number of persons killed on the Penal Code includes the three-mile limit of
occasion of piracy is not material. The law any state (People v. Lol-lo, et al., 43 Phil.
considers qualified piracy as a special 1911922]). Moreover, piracy is an offense
162
complex crime regardless of the number of that can be tried anywhere because it is a
victims (People v. Siyoh, GR No. L-57292, crime against the Law of Nations.
Page
18 February 1986).
a) Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway was not stated in the facts given that the 10
Robbery (P.D. 532) (i) Definition men previously attempted similar robberies
of terms (ii) Punishable acts by them to establish indiscriminate
commission thereof (Filoteo Jr. v.
A postal van containing mail matters, Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 79543, October
including checks and treasury warrants, 16, 1993).
was hijacked along a national highway by
ten (10) men, two (2) of whom were armed. b. If you were the defense counsel,
They used force, violence and intimidation what are the elements of the crime of
against three (3) postal employees who highway robbery that the prosecution
were occupants of the van, resulting in the should prove to sustain a conviction?
unlawful taking and transportation of the
entire van and its contents. (2012 BAR) Answer:
a. If you were the public prosecutor, Under Section 2 of P.D. 532, highway
would you charge the ten (10) men who robbery is defined as the seizure of any
hijacked the postal van with violation of person for ransom, extortion or other
Presidential Decree No. 532, otherwise unlawful purposes, or the taking away of
known as the Anti-Piracy and Anti - the property of another by means of
Highway Robbery Law of 1974? Explain violence against or intimidation of person or
your answer. force upon things or other unlawful means,
committed by any person on any Philippine
Answer: highway. Hence, the elements of highway
robbery are:
No, I would not charge the 10 men with the 1. intent to gain;
crime of highway robbery. The mere fact 2. unlawful taking of the property of
that the offense charged was committed on another;
a highway would not be the determinant for 3. violence against or intimidation of
the application of P.D. 532. If a motor any person;
vehicle, either stationary or moving on a 4. committed on a Philippine highway
highway, is forcibly taken at gun point by 5. indiscrimate victim;
the accused who happened to take a fancy
thereto, the location of the vehicle at the To obtain a conviction for highway robbery,
time of the unlawful taking would not the prosecution must prove that the
necessarily put the offense within the ambit accused were organized for the purpose of
of P.D. 532. In this case, the crime committing robbery indiscriminately. If the
committed is violation of the Anti- purpose is only particular robbery, the
Carnapping Act of 1972 (People v. Puno, crime is only robbery, or robbery in band if
G.R. No. 97471, February 17, 1993). there are at least four armed participants.
Moreover, there is no showing that the 10 (See People v. Mendoza, G.R. No. 104461,
men were a band of outlaws organized for February 23, 1996)
the purpose of depredation upon the
persons and properties of innocent and ART.122, 123--Crimes against National
163
defenseless inhabitants who travel from Security and Law of Nations Piracy;
one place to another. What was shown is Qualified piracy
Page
one isolated hijacking of a postal van. It

1. While SS Nagoya Mani was committed by the same culprits against a

negotiating the sea route from Hongkong member of the crew of the vessel.
towards Manila, and while still 300 miles
from Aparri, Cagayan, its engine
malfunctioned. The Captain ordered the CRIMES AGAINST THE
ship to stop for emergency repairs lasting
for almost 15 hours. Due to exhaustion, the FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF
officers and crew fell asleep. While the ship THE STATE
was anchored, a motorboat manned by ART. 128Criminal law Crimes against
renegade Ybanags from Claveria, the fundamental law of the State - Violation
Cagayan, passed by and took advantage of of domicile
the situation. They cut the ship's engines
and took away several heavy crates of Alberto, Bernado and Carlos were looking
electrical equipment and loaded them in for a person named Virgilio whom Carlos
their motorboat. Then they left hurriedly suspected of stealing his fighting cock.
towards Aparri. At daybreak, the crew Alberto and Bernardo were policemen,
found that a robbery took place. They while Carlos was a caretaker of fighting
radioed the Aparri Port Authorities resulting cocks. Carlos requested Alberto and
in the apprehension of the culprits. Bernardo, then in uniform, to accompany
him to Virgilios house to look for the
What crime was committed? Explain. 2.5% fighting cock. Alberto, Bernardo and Carlos
(2006 Bar Question) went to Virgilios house.
When the policemen knocked on the door,
2. Supposing that while the robbery Virgilios wife, Maria, opened it. The
was taking place, the culprits stabbed a policemen told Maria that they came to
member of the crew while sleeping. inquire about a lost fighting cock. Before
Maria could utter a word, the trio barged
What crime was committed? Explain. 2.5% inside, the house. Once inside, the
(2006 Bar Question) policemen told Maria that Carlos was
suspecting her husband, Virgilio, to have
SUGGESTED ANSWER: stolen his fighting cock. Maria protested
and immediately required the three to
1. The crime committed was piracy leave. The policemen refused. Instead,
under Art. 122, Revised Penal Code, the they started searching the house for the
essence of which is robbery directed fighting cock over the objections of Maria
against a vessel and/or its cargoes. The who said that she would file a complaint
taking of the several heavy crates of against them after her husband comes
electrical equipment from a vessel at sea, from work. As they did not see any fighting
was effected by force and undoubtedly with cock, the three left. What crimes, if any, did
intent to gain. It is of no moment that the Alberto, Bernardo and Carlos commit?
vessel was anchored when depredated so (1989 Bar Question)
long as it was at sea.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
164
2. The crime was qualified piracy

under Art. 123 of the Revised Penal Code Alberto and Bernardo, being policemen,
Page
because it was attended by a killing committed the crime of VIOLATION OF

DOMICILE (Art. 128, RPC). There are The differences between violation of
three ways by which a public officer or domicile and trespass to dwelling are:
employee may commit this crime, namely:
The offender in violation of domicile is a
a. By entering any dwelling against the public officer acting under color of
will of the owner. The door having been authority; in trespass to dwelling, the
opened by Maria, although Alberto, offender is a private person or public officer
Bernardo and Carlos barged inside the acting in a private capacity.
house before Maria could utter a word, they
did not enter against Marias will, there Violation of domicile is committed in 3
being no opposition or prohibition against different ways: (1) by entering the dwelling
entrance whether express or implied. of another against the will of the latter; (2)
Without the consent is not against the will searching papers and other effects inside
(People vs. Sane, CA 40 OG Supp 5, 113). the dwelling without the previous consent
b. By searching papers or other effects of the owner; or (3) refusing to leave the
found therein without the previous consent premises which he entered surreptitiously,
of such owner. Maria had objected to the after being required to leave the premises.
search for the fighting cock inside her
dwelling, but despite said objection, the Trespass to dwelling is committed only in
policemen searched the house. This one way; that is, by entering the dwelling of
makes them criminally liable for the second another against the express or implied will
way of committing the crime of VIOLATING of the latter.
OF DOMICILE.
c. By refusing to leave the premises, TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
after having surreptitiously entered said statement is true, or FALSE if the
dwelling and after having been required to statement is false. Explain your answer in
leave the same. Although the policemen not more than two (2) sentences. (5%)
were ordered to leave the house, they did (2009 Bar Question)
not enter it surreptitiously, meaning
clandestinely or secretly. [e] A policeman who, without a judicial
order, enters a private house over the
Insofar as Carlos is concerned, not being a owner's opposition is guilty of trespass to
public officer or employee, he cannot dwelling.
commit the crime of VIOLATION OF
DOMICILE. He is not guilty of trespass to SUGGESTED ANSWER:
dwelling, either because he did not enter
the dwelling AGAINST THE WILL of the False. The crime committed by the
owner, which is the essential element of policeman in this case is violation of
Trespass. domicile because the official duties of a
policeman carry with it an authority to make
What is the difference between violation of searches and seizure upon judicial order.
domicile and trespass to dwelling? He is therefore acting under color of his
(2%) (2002 Bar Question) official authority (Art. 128, RPC).
165
SUGGESTED ANSWER: ART. 125 Criminal law Crimes against

Page
fundamental law of the State - Delay on the

Delivery of Detained Persons to the Proper When is an arrest by a peace officer or by

Judicial Authorities; in relation with Slight a private person considered lawful?
disobedience which is a crime against Explain. 5% (2006 Bar Question)
public order
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Amy was apprehended and arrested by
Patrolman Bart for illegal parking. She was 1. Three (3) ways of committing arbitrary
detained at the police precint, underwent detention are:
investigation, and released only after
hours. a. by detaining or locking up a person
without any legal cause or ground
1. Patrolman Bart liable for any therefor purposely to restrain his liberty
offense? Explain your answer. (1990 Bar (RPC, Art. 124);
Question) b. by delaying delivery to the proper
judicial authority of a person lawfully
2. Suppose Amy resisted the arrest arrested without a warrant (RPC, Art. 125);
and grappled with patrolman Bart, is she and
criminally liable thereby? State your c. by delaying release of a prisoner
reasons. (1990 Bar Question) whose release has been ordered by
competent authority (RPC, Art. 126).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In all the above-stated ways, the principal
1. Patrolman Bart is liable for violation offender should be a public officer acting
of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code - under color of his authority.
Delay on the Delivery of Detained Persons
to the Proper Judicial Authorities. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2. She is criminally liable for slight
disobedience under Article 151 of the The legal grounds for detention are;
Revised Penal Code - Resistance and 1. commission of a crime;
disobedience to a person in authority or the 2. violent insanity or other ailment
agents of such person. requiring compulsory confinement in an
institution established for such purpose.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ART. 124 Criminal law Crimes against Arrest by a peace officer or by a private
the Fundamental Law of the State person is lawful
Arbitrary detention
a. when in his presence, the person to
What are the 3 ways of committing be arrested has committed, is
arbitrary detention? Explain each. 2.5% actually committing, or is attempting to
(2006 Bar Question) commit an offense;
b. when an offense has just been
166
What are the legal grounds for detention? committed and he has probable, cause to
2.5% (2006 Bar Question) believe based on personal knowledge of
Page
facts or circumstances that the person to

be arrested has committed it; and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c. when the person to be arrested is a The complex crime of direct assault with
prisoner who has escaped from penal murder was committed. A, as a Barangay
establishment or place where he is serving Captain, is a person in authority and was
sentence or is temporarily confined while acting in an official capacity when he tried
his case is pending, or has escaped while to maintain peace and order during the
being transferred from one confinement to public dance in the Barangay, by
another (Rules on Criminal Procedure, admonishing B to keep quiet and not to
Rule 113, Sec. 5). disturb the dance and peace of the
occasion. When B, instead of heeding A's
a) Human Security Act of 2007 (R.A. advice, attacked the latter, B acted in
No. 9372) contempt and lawless defiance of authority
(i) Period of detention constituting the crime of direct assault,
which characterized the stabbing of A And
b) Anti-Torture Act of 2009 (R.A. No. since A was stabbed at the back when he
9745) (i) Punishable acts (ii) Who are liable was not in a position to defend himself nor
retaliate, there was treachery in the
stabbing. Hence, the death caused by such
stabbing was murder and having been
committed with direct assault a complex
crime of direct assault with murder was
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC committed by B.
ORDER
ART 148: DIRECT ASSAULTS ART. 148: DIRECT ASSAULTS
QUESTION QUESTION
Because of the approaching town fiesta in Rigoberto gate-crashed the 71st birthday
San Miguel, Bulacan, a dance was held in party of Judge Lorenzo. Armed with a piece
Barangay Camias. A, the Barangay of wood commonly known as dos por dos,
Captain, was invited to deliver a speech to Rigoberto hit Judge Lorenzo on the back,
start the dance. While A was delivering his causing the latter's hospitalization for 30
speech, B, one of the guests, went to the days. Upon investigation, it appeared that
middle of the dance floor making obscene Rigoberto had a grudge against Judge
dance movements, brandishing a knife and Lorenzo who, two years earlier, had cited
challenging everyone present to a fight. A Rigoberto in contempt and ordered his
approached B and admonished him to imprisonment for three (3) days.
keep quiet and not to disturb the dance and
peace of the occasion. B, instead of [a] Is Rigoberto guilty of Direct Assault?
heeding the advice of A, stabbed the latter Why or why not? (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
at his back twice when A turned his back to
proceed to the microphone to continue his SUGGESTED ANSWER:
167
speech. A fell to the ground and died. At the

time of the incident A was not armed. What No, Rigoberto is not guilty of Direct Assault
crime was committed? Explain. (2%) (2000
Page
because Judge Lorenzo has ceased to be

Bar Question)
a judge when he was attacked. He has chairmen are also deemed persons in
retired (71 yrs. old) from his position as a authority. (Article 152, RPC)
person in authority when he was attacked.
Hence, the attack on him cannot be Agents of persons in authority are persons
regarded as against a person in authority who by direct provision of law or by election
anymore. or by appointment by competent authority,
are charged with maintenance of public
Would your answer be the same if the order, the protection and security of life and
reason for the attack was that when Judge property, such as barrio councilman, barrio
Lorenzo was still a practicing lawyer ten policeman, barangay leader and any
years ago, he prosecuted Rigoberto and person who comes to the aid of persons in
succeeded in sending him to jail for one authority (Art.. 152, RPC).
year? Explain your answer. (3%) (2009 Bar In applying the provisions of Articles 148
Question) and 151 of the Rev Penal Code, teachers,
professors and persons charged with the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: supervision of public or duly recognized
private schools, colleges and universities,
Yes. Rigoberto is guilty of Direct Assault and lawyers in the actual performance of
because the employment of violence was their professional duties or on the occasion
by reason of an actual performance of a on such performance, shall be deemed
duty by the offended party acting as a persons in authority. (P.D. No. 299, and
practicing lawyer. Lawyers are considered Batas Pambansa Big. 873).
persons in authority by virtue of Batas
Pambansa Big. 873, which states that Service of Sentence; Delivery of Prisoners
lawyers in the actual performance of their from Jail; Falsification of Public Document
professional duties or on the occasion of
such performance shall be deemed Art 156: Delivering Prisoners from Jail; Art
persons in authority. But the crime having 157: Evasion of Service of Sentence; 171:
been committed 10 years ago, may have Falsification by public officer, employee, or
already prescribed because it is punishable notary or ecclesiastical officer; 210: Direct
by a correctional penalty. Bribery; 223: Coniving with or consenting to
ART 152. PERSONS IN AUTHORITY AND evasion
AGENTS OF PERSONS IN AUTHORITY
Who are deemed to be persons in authority

and agents of persons in authority? (3%) Art 156: Delivering Prisoners from Jail; 171:
(2000 Bar Question) Falsification by public officer, employee, or
notary or ecclesiastical officer; 172:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Falsification by private individuals and use
of falsified documents; 210: Direct Bribery;
B. Persons in authority are persons 212: Corrution of Public officials
directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as
an individual or as a member of some court
168
or government corporation, board, or Filthy, a very rich businessman, convinced

commission. Barrio captains and barangay Loko, a clerk of court, to issue an order of
release for Takas, Filthys cousin, who was
Page
in jail for a drug charge. After receiving signature of the judge in the in the falsified
P500,000.00, Loko forged the signature of order of release.
the judge on the order of release and
accompanied Filthy to the detention center. The guard is liable of:
At the jail, Loko gave the guard (1) Direct Bribery, Article 210, RPC,
P10,000.00 to open the gate and let Takas because he agreed to open the gate and let
out. Takas out in consideration of P10,000.00.
What crime or crimes did Filthy, Loko, and (2) Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners,
the guard commit? (2014 BAR) Article 223, RPC, because he, as the
custodian of Takas, connived or consented
ANSWER: to his escape by opening the gate.
Filthy is liable of: ART. 147 Criminal law Crimes against

(2) Delivery of prisoners from Jail, public order Illegal association
Article 156, RPC, because he assisted in
the removal of Takas, a detention prisoner, What would have been the legal effect of
from jail. the repeal of P.D. No. 1835 (Codifying The
(3) Corruption of Public Officials, Article Various Laws on Anti- Subversion and
212, RPC, because he gave P500,000.00 Increasing the Penalties For Membership
to the clerk of court, under circumstances in Subversive Organizations) as amended
in which said public officer would be liable by P.D. No. 1975, if RA. No. 1700 (An Act
of direct bribery. to Outlaw The Communist Party of the
(4) Falsification of Public Document, Philippines and Similar Associations.
Article 172(1), RPC, as a principal by Penalizing Membership Therein and For
inducement because he gave the clerk of Other Purposes) were not revived? (1991
court P500,000.00 to induce him to forge Bar Question)
the signature of the judge in the order of
release. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Loko is liable of: If the repeal of P.D. 1835 as amended by

(1) Direct Bribery, Article 210, RPC, RA 1735, is absolute, without reviving RA.
because he accepted P500,000.00 in 1700, the original provision on illegal
consideration of the execution of an act associations under Art. 147 of the Revised
which constitutes a crime, i.e., forging the Penal Code would be the pertinent
signature of the judge in the order of provision to be taken into account. Hence,
release that would enable Takas to get out it must be proved that the purpose of the
of jail, in connection with the performance organization is to commit any crime
of his duty as a clerk of court. punishable by the code or for some
(2) Falsification of Public Document, purpose contrary to public morals.
Article 171, RPC, because he took ART. 157 Criminal law Crimes against
advantage of his position as a clerk of court public order Evasion of sentence
in forging the signature of the judge in the
order of relase. Manny killed his wife under exceptional
169
(3) Delivery of Prisoners from Jail, circumstances and was sentenced by the
Article 156, RPC, because he assisted in Regional Trial Court of Dagupan City to
Page
the removal of Takas from jail by forging the

suffer the penalty of destierro during which other patients, decided to allow the
he was not to enter the city. prisoner to be taken by his followers. What
crime, if any, was committed by As
While serving sentence, Manny went to followers? Why? (3%) (2002 Bar Question)
Dagupan City to visit his mother. Later, he
was arrested in Manila. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1. Did Manny commit any crime? [3%]
(1998 Bar Question) As followers shall be liable as principals in
2. If so, where should he be the crime of delivery of prisoner from jail
prosecuted? [2%] (1998 Bar Question) (Art 156, Revised Penal Code).
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The felony is committed not only by

removing from any jail or penal
1. Yes, Manny committed the crime of establishment any person confined therein
evasion of service of sentence when he but also by helping in the escape of such
went to Dagupan City, which he was person outside of said establishments by
prohibited from entering under his means of violence, intimidation, bribery, or
sentence of destierro. any other means.
A sentence imposing the penalty of ART. 148-152 Criminal law Crimes

destierro is evaded when the convict enters against public order - Direct assault upon a
any of the place/places he is prohibited person in authority; direct assault with
from entering under the sentence or come serious physical injuries
within the prohibited radius. Although
destierro does not involve imprisonment, it Pablo, disobeying a judicial order, was
is nonetheless a deprivation of liberty. punished by an RTC Judge of Manila for
(People vs. Abilong, 82 Phil. 172). contempt. He waited for the judge to go out
into the street. Upon seeing the judge,
2. Manny maybe prosecuted in Pablo hurriedly approached him, and
Dagupan City or in Manila where he was without saying a word struck him with his
arrested. This is so because evasion of fist causing a slight contusion on the face
service of sentence is a continuing offense, of the Judge. Rex came to the rescue of the
as the convict is a fugitive from justice in Judge but because he was taller and bigger
such case. (Parulan vs. Dir. of Prisons, L- than Pablo, the latter used a knife in
28519, 17 Feb. 668) attacking Rex. Pablo limited his assault to
the arms of Rex inflicting lesions graves
ART. 156 Criminal law Crimes against which incapacitated Rex from labor for forty
public order - Delivery of prisoner from jail five (45) days.
A. A, a detention prisoner, was taken to a If you were the prosecutor called to institute
hospital for emergency medical treatment. a criminal action against Pablo, with what
His followers, all of whom were armed, crime or crimes would you charge him?
went to the hospital to take him away or Explain. (1993 Bar
170
help him escape. The prison guards, Question)

seeing that they were outnumbered and
Page
that resistance would endanger the lives of SUGGESTED ANSWER:

which Dancio belonged, he is also guilty of

The crime of direct assault upon a person indirect bribery under Article 211.
in authority with respect to the slight
contusion on the face of the Judge. Brusco committed delivery of prisoner from
jail under Article 156, qualified by his
Direct assault with serious physical injuries bribery of Edri. Helping a person confined
with respect to the assault on Rex. in jail to escape constitutes this crime.
Helping means furnishing the prisoner
Dancio, a member of a drug syndicate, was with the material means or tools which
a detention prisoner in the provincial jail of greatly facilitate his escape; hence,
X Province. Brusco, another member of the providing a pistol which helped Dencio to
syndicate, regularly visited Dancio. Edri, escape is delivery of prisoner from jail.
the guard in charge who had been
receiving gifts from Brusco everytime he Miss Reyes, a lady professor, caught
visited Dancio, became friendly with him Mariano, one of her students, cheating
and became relaxed in the inspection of his during an examination. Aside from calling
belongings during his jail visits. In one of Mariano's attention, she confiscated his
Brusco's visits, he was able to smuggle in examination booklet and sent him out of the
a pistol which Dancio used to disarm the room, causing Mariano extreme
guards and destroy the padlock of the main embarrassment.
gate of the jail, enabling Dancio to escape.
What crime(s) did Dancio, Brusco and Edri In class the following day, Mariano
commit? Explain. (2015 BAR) approached Miss Reyes and without any
warning, slapped her on the face. Mariano
Answer: would have inflicted grave injuries on Miss
Reyes had not Dencio, another student,
Dancio committed the crime of direct intervened. Mariano then turned his ire on
assault under Article 148 for disarming the Dencio and punched him repeatedly,
guards with the use of pistol while they are causing him injuries. What crime or crimes,
engaged in the performance of their duties. if any, did Mariano commit? (2013, 2002,
Using a pistol to disarm the guards 1993)
manifests criminal intention to defy the law
and its representative at all hazard. [Note: Answer:
Illegal possession of firearms may also be
considered] Mariano is liable for two counts of direct
assault. First, when he slapped Miss
Edri committed infidelity in the custody of Reyes, who is a person in authority
prisoner or evasion through negligence expressly mentioned in Art. 152 of the
under Article 224. As the guard in charge, RPC, who was in the performance of her
Edri was negligent in relaxing the duties on the day of the commission of the
inspection of the Bruscos belongings assault. Second, when he repeatedly
during jail visits allowing him to smuggle a punched Dencio, who became an agent of
pistol to Dencio, which he subsequently the person in authority when he came to the
171
used to escape. By accepting gifts from aid of a person in authority, Miss Reyes
Brusco, who was part of the syndicate to (Celig v. People, G.R. No. 173150, July 28,
Page
2010).
Edgardo, a policeman, accompanied by

A, a lady professor, was giving an Florencio went ' to serve a warrant of arrest
examination. She noticed B, one of the on Emilio, a professional boxer, at the
students, cheating. She called the latters apartment. Upon seeing Edgardo,
students attention and confiscated his Emilio immediately boxed him. Edgardo fell
examination booklet, causing flat on the floor. As Florencio tried to help
embarrassment to him. The following day, Edgardo on his feet, Emilio also boxed
while the class was going on, the student, Florencio. The injuries inflicted upon
B, approached A and, without any warning, Edgardo and Florencio required medical
slapped her. B would have inflicted further attendance for nine (9) days. What crime or
injuries on A had not C, another student, crimes were committed by Emilio? Give
come to As rescue and prevented B from your reasons. (1989 Bar Question)
continuing his attack. B turned his ire on C
and ounched the latter. What crime or SUGGESTED ANSWER:
crimes, if any, did B commit? Why? (5%)
(2002 Bar Question) If Emilio was not aware that Edgardo was a
police officer who was going serve a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: warrant of arrest on him, Emilio would be
guilty only of slight physical injuries on two
B committed two (2) counts of direct counts, one against Edgardo and the
assault: one for slapping the professor, A, second against Florencio.
who was then conducting classes and thus
exercising authority; and another one for If Emilio knew Edgardo as a policeman and
the violence on the student C, who came to of the latters purpose to serve a warrant of
the aid of the said professor. arrest on him, and that is why he boxed
Edgardo, then he will be guilty of either
By express provision of Article 152, in DIRECT ASSAULT UPON A PERSON IN
relation to Article 148 of the Revised Penal AUTHORITY or RESISTANCE OR
Code, teachers and professors of public or DISOBEDIENCE TO AN AGENT OF A
duly recognized private schools, colleges PERSON in authority, depending on the
and universities in the actual performance degree of force employed by him. A person
of their professional duties or on the who attacks, employs force makes a
occasion of such performance are deemed serious intimidation or makes a serious
persons in authority for purposes of the resistance against a person in authority or
crimes of direct assault and of resistance his agent, if at the time of the assault the
and disobedience in Articles 148 and 151 latter is engaged in the actual performance
of said Code. And any person who comes of his official duties, the offended party
to the aid of persons in authority shall be knowing that the person he is assaulting is
deemed an agent of a person in authority. a person in authority or his agent, it liable
Accordingly, the attack on C is, in the eyes for the crime of DIRECT ASSAULT. A
of the law, an attack on an agent of a policeman is an agent of a person in
person in authority, not just an attack on a authority.
student.
172
As for Florencio, the crime committed by

Emilio against him would be indirect
Page
Assault provided that Emilio has committed

DIRECT ASSAULT against Edgardo. This A. What, if any, are the respective
is so because any person who shall make criminal liability of X, Y and Z? (6%) (2001
use of force or intimidation upon any Bar Question)
person coming to the aid of the authorities
or their agents on occasion of the B. Would your answer be the same if B
commission of the crime of DIRECT were a barangay tanod only? (4%) (2001
ASSAULT, is criminally liable for the crime Bar Question)
of INDIRECT ASSAULT. However, if Emilio
is guilty only of RESISTANCE or SUGGESTED ANSWER:
disobedience as against Edgardo; then his
crime against Florencio would only be A. X is liable for Direct Assault only,
slight physical injuries. assuming the physical injuries inflicted on
B, the Barangay Chairman, to be only slight
A, a teacher at Mapa High School, having and hence, would be absorbed in the direct
gotten mad at X, one of his pupils, because assault. A Barangay Chairman is a person
of the latters throwing paper clips at his in authority (Art. 152, RPC) and in this
classmates, twisted his right ear. X went case, was performing his duty of
out of the classroom crying and proceeded maintaining peace and order when
home located at the back of the school. He attacked.
reported to his parents Y and Z what A had T is liable for the complex crimes of Direct
done to him. Y and Z immediately Assault with Less Serious Physical Injuries
proceeded to the school building and for the fistblow on A, the teacher, which
because they were running and talking in caused the latter to fall down. For purposes
loud voices, they were seen by the of the crimes in Arts. 148 and 151 of the
barangay chairman, B, who followed them Revised Penal Code, a.teacher is
as he suspected that an untoward incident considered a person in authority, and
might happen. Upon seeing A inside the having been attacked by Y by reason of his
classroom, X pointed him out to his father, performance of official duty, direct assault
Y, who administered a fist blow' on A, is committed with the resulting less serious
causing him to fail down. When Y was physical injuries completed.
about to kick A, B rushed towards Y and Z, the mother of X and wife of Y may only
pinned both of the latters arms. Seeing his be liable as an accomplice to the complex
father being held by B, X went near and crimes of direct assault with less serious
punched B on the face, which caused him physical injuries committed by Y. Her
to lose his grip on Y. Throughout this participation should not be considered as
incident, Z shouted words of that of a coprincipal, since her reactions
encouragement at Y, her husband, and were only incited by her relationship to X
also threatened to slap A. Some security and Y, as the mother of X and the wife of
guards of the school arrived, intervened Y.
and surrounded X,
B. If B were a Barangay Tanod only,
Y and Z so that they could be investigated the act of X of laying hand on him, being an
in the principals office. Before leaving, Z agent of a person in authority only, would
173
passed near A and threw a small flower pot constitute the crime of Resistance and
at him but it was deflected by B. Disobedience under Article 151, since X, a
Page
high school pupil, could not be considered

as having acted out of contempt for Captain, was invited to deliver a speech to
authority but more of helping his father get start the dance. While A was delivering his
free from the grip of B. Laying hand on an speech, B, one of the guests, went to the
agent of a person in authority is not ipso middle of the dance floor making obscene
facto direct assault, while it would always dance movements, brandishing a knife and
be direct assault if done to a person in challenging everyone present to a fight. A
authority in defiance to the latter is exercise approached B and admonished him to
of authority. keep quiet and not to disturb the dance and
peace of the occasion. B, instead of
Jose was charged with slight physical heeding the advice of A, stabbed the latter
injuries before a Municipal Trial Judge. He at his back twice when A turned his back to
listened attentively as the Judge read the proceed to the microphone to continue his
sentence. When the Judge reached the speech. A fell to the ground and died. At the
dispositive portion and pronounced Jose time of the incident A was not armed. What
guilty, the latter was enraged, got hold of an crime was committed? Explain. (2%) (2000
ashtray, and threw it at the Judge hitting Bar Question)
him in the eye. As his defense lawyer Pedro
attempted to restrain him, Jose boxed him
and knocked him down. The judge became SUGGESTED ANSWER:
blind in one eye as a consequence.
C. Persons in authority are persons
What crime or crimes did Jose commit? directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as
(1987 Bar Question) an individual or as a member of some court
or government corporation, board, or
SUGGESTED ANSWER: commission. Barrio captains and barangay
chairmen are also deemed persons in
Jose is liable for Qualified Direct Assault authority. (Article 152, RPC)
with Serious Physical Injuries. The
throwing of the ashtray at the Judge hitting Agents of persons in authority are persons
him in the eye is laying of hands on the who by direct provision of law or by election
Judge who is a person in authority while in or by appointment by competent authority,
the performance of duties. Jose is also are charged with maintenance of public
liable for qualified direct assault when he order, the protection and security of life and
boxed his defense lawyer, knocking him property, such as barrio councilman, barrio
down while in the act of restraining him. policeman, barangay leader and any
Under Batas 873 a lawyer is considered a person who comes to the aid of persons in
person in authority if assaulted while in the authority (Art.. 152, RPC).
performance of duties. In applying the provisions of Articles 148
and 151 of the Rev Penal Code, teachers,
professors and persons charged with the
A. Who are deemed to be persons in supervision of public or duly recognized
authority and agents of persons in private schools, colleges and universities,
authority? (3%) (2000 Bar Question) and lawyers in the actual performance of
174
B. Because of the approaching town their professional duties or on the occasion

fiesta in San Miguel, Bulacan, a dance was on such performance, shall be deemed
Page
held in Barangay Camias. A, the Barangay

persons in authority. (P.D. No. 299, and and all other acts committed in the further
Batas Pambansa Big. 873). of this purpose are absorbed by rebellion.
The complex crime of direct assault with The armed group committed the crime of
murder was committed. A, as a Barangay kidnapping and serious illegal detention in
Captain, is a person in authority and was violation of Aticle 267 of the Revised Penal
acting in an official capacity when he tried Code which provides that kidnapping and
to maintain peace and order during the serious illegal detention. Any private
public dance in the Barangay, by individual who shall kidnap another, or in
admonishing B to keep quiet and not to any other manner deprive him of his liberty,
disturb the dance and peace of the shall suffer the penalty of reclusion
occasion. When B, instead of heeding A's perpetua to death...
advice, attacked the latter, B acted in
contempt and lawless defiance of authority ART.134-Rebellion- Jacinto, who is an
constituting the crime of direct assault, NPA commander, was apprehended with
which characterized the stabbing of A And unlicensed firearms and explosives. He
since A was stabbed at the back when he was accordingly charged with illegal
was not in a position to defend himself nor possession of said firearms and
retaliate, there was treachery in the explosives. He now questions the filing of
stabbing. Hence, the death caused by such the charges on the ground that they are
stabbing was murder and having been deemed absorbed in a separate charge of
committed with direct assault a complex rebellion filed against him. Decide the
crime of direct assault with murder was issue. (1990 Bar Question)
committed by B.
Suppose Ka Jacinto, using one of the
unlicensed firearms, shot and killed his
ART. 134 Criminal law Crimes against neighbor in an altercation. May the charge
public order - Rebellion of murder and illegal possession of
firearms be deemed absorbed in the
An armed group, avowed to overthrow the separate charge of rebellion filed against
duly constituted authorities, captured five him? Resolve the matter with reasons.
officers and five members of the armed (1990 Bar Question)
forces and held them in their mountain lair
for seventy-five days and then voluntarily SUGGESTED ANSWER:
released them in consideration of the
promise of medical treatment to be given to The charge of illegal possession of
some of their comrades who were under firearms and explosives is deemed
detention by the authorities. absorbed in the crime of rebellion, such
possession being a necessary means for
What crime or crimes had been the perpetration of the latter crime. [EUas
committed? Reasons. (1988 Bar Question) v. Rodriguez, 107 Phil. 659).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The charges here could not be absorbed
175
Rebellion was committed because their in the separate charge of rebellion as it is

purpose was to overthrow the government clear that the act of murder, coupled with
Page
the possession of an unlicensed firearm, Peoples Army. The killing is murder

was not in furtherance of the rebellion. because it was committed with treachery.
ART. 134-A Criminal law Crimes against

On May 5, 1992, at about 6:00 a.m., while public order - Coup detat
Governor Alegre of Laguna was on board
his car traveling along the National Distinguish clearly but briefly: (10%) (2004
Highway of Laguna, Joselito and Vicente Bar Question)
shot him on the head resulting in his instant
death. At that time, Joselito and Vicente Between rebellion and coup detat based
were members of the liquidation squad of on their constitutive elements as criminal
the New People's Army and they killed the offenses.
governor upon orders of their senior officer.
Commander Tiago. According to Joselito SUGGESTED ANSWER:
and Vicente, they were ordered to kill
Governor Alegre because of his corrupt Rebellion is committed when a multitude of
practices. persons rise publicly in arms for the
If you were the prosecutor, what crime will purpose of overthrowing the duly
you charge Joselito and Vicente? [5%] constituted government, to be replaced by
(1998 Bar Question) a government of the rebels. It is carried out
by force and violence, but need not be
SUGGESTED ANSWER: participated in by any member of the
military, national police or any public
If I were the prosecutor, I would charge officer.
Joselito and Vicente with the crime of
rebellion, considering that the killers were Coup detat is committed when members of
members of the liquidation squad of the the military, Philippine National Police, or
New People's Army and the killing was public officer, acting as principal offenders,
upon orders of their commander; hence, launched a swift attack thru strategy,
politicallymotivated. This was the ruling in stealth, threat, violence or intimidation
People vs. Avila, 207 SCRA 1568, against duly constituted authorities of the
involving identical facts which is a Republic of the Philippines, military camp
movement taken judicial notice of as or installation, communication networks,
engaged in rebellion against the public facilities or utilities needed for the
Government. exercise and continued possession of
governmental powers, for the purpose of
Alternative Answer: seizing or diminishing state powers.
If I were the prosecutor, I would charge Unlike rebellion which requires a public
Joselito and Vicente for the crime of murder uprising, coup detat may be carried out
as the purpose of the killing was because singly or simultaneously and the principal
of his corrupt practices, which does not offenders must be members of the military,
appear to be politically motivated. There is national police or public officer, with or
176
no indication as to how the killing would without civilian support. The criminal
promote or further the objective of the New objective need not be to overthrow the
Page
existing government but only to destabilize are they guilty of? (3%) (2002 Bar
the existing government Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
How is the crime of coup detat committed?
[3%] (1998 Bar Question) The perpetrators, being persons belonging
to the Armed Forces, would be guilty of the
Supposing a public school teacher crime of coup detat, under Article 134-A of
participated in a coup detat using an the Revised Penal Code, as amended,
unlicensed firearm. What crime or crimes because their attack was against vital
did he commit? [2%] (1998 Bar Question) military installations which are essential to
the continued possession and exercise of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: governmental powers, and their purpose is
to seize power by taking over such
The crime of coup d'etat is committed by a installations.
swift attack, accompanied by violence,
intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth If the attack is quelled but the leader is
against the duly constituted authorities of unknown, who shall be deemed the leader
the Republic of the Philippines, military thereof? (2%) (2002 Bar Question)
camps and installations, communication
networks, public utilities and facilities SUGGESTED ANSWER:
needed for the exercise and continued
possession of power, carried out singly or The leader being unknown, any person
simultaneously anywhere in the Philippines who in fact directed the others, spoke for
by persons belonging to the military or them, signed receipts and other documents
police or holding public office, with or issued in their name, or performed similar
without civilian support or participation, for acts, on behalf of the group shall be
the purpose of seizing or diminishing state deemed the leader of said coup d'etat (Art
power. (Art. 134-A, RPC). 135, R.P.C.)
The public school teacher committed only

coup d'etat for his participation therein. His
use of an unlicensed firearm is absorbed in In the early morning of 25 October 1990,
the coup d'etat under the hew firearms law the troops of the Logistics Command (LOG
(Rep. Act No. 8294). A prosecution for COM) of the AFP at Camp General Emilio
illegal possession of firearm under the new Aguinaldo headed by their Operations
law is allowed only if the unlicensed firearm Officer, Col.Rito Amparo, withdrew
was not used in the commission of another firearms and bullets and, per prior
crime. agreement, attacked, in separate teams,
the offices of the Chief of Staff, the
A. If a group of persons belonging to the Secretary of National Defense, the Deputy
armed forces makes a swift attack, Chief of Staff for Operations, the Deputy
accompanied by violence, intimidation and Chief of Staff for Intelligence and other
177
threat against a vital military installation for offices, held hostage the Chief of Staff of
the purpose of seizing power and taking LOGCOM and other officers, killed three
Page
over such installation, what crime or crimes (3) pro-Govemment soldiers, inverted the
Philippine flag, barricaded all entrances coup d'etat public uprising is not necessary.
and exits to the camp, and announced The essence of the crime is a swift attack,
complete control of the camp. Because of accompanied by violence, intimidation,
the superiority of the proGovemment threat, strategy or stealth, directed against
forces, Col. Amparo and his troops duly constituted authorities of the
surrendered at 7:00 oclock in the morning Government, or any military camp or
of that day. installation, communication networks,
public utilities or facilities needed for the
a) Did Col. Amparo and his troops commit exercise and continued possession of
the crime of coup d'etat (Article 134-A, government power;
Revised Penal Code or of rebellion? (1991
Bar Question) OBJECTIVE OR PURPOSE:
In rebellion, the purpose is to remove from
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the allegiance of the Philippines, the whole
or any part or the Philippines or any military
a) Under the facts stated, the crime or naval camps, deprive the Chief
committed would be coup detat (Republic Executive or Congress from performing
Act No. 6988 incorporating Art. 134-A). their functions. In coup d'etat the objective
is to seize or diminish state powers.
However, since the law was not yet PARTICIPATION
effective as of October 25, 1990, as the
effectivity thereof (Section 8) is upon its In rebellion, any person. In coup d'etat any
approval (which is October 24, 1990) and person belonging to the
publication in at least two (2) newspapers military or police or holding public office,
of general circulation, the felony committed with or without civilian participation.
would be rebellion.
Comment:
ART. 142 Criminal law Crimes against
If the answer given is coup detat public order Inciting to sedition
substantial credit should be given as the
tenor of the question seems to indicate that What are the different acts of inciting to
coup detat as a felony was already sedition? (2007 Bar Question)
existing.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b) Distinguish rebellion from coup
d'etat (1991 Bar Question) The different acts which constitute the
crime of inciting to sedition are:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1. Inciting others through speeches,
b) Rebellion distinguished from coup writings, banners and other media of
detat: representation to commit acts which
constitute sedition;
178
AS TO OVERT ACTS: 2. Uttering seditious words, speeches

In rebellion, there is public uprising and or circulating scurrilous libels against the
Page
taking up arms against the Government. In Government of the Philippines or any of its
duly constituted authorities, which tend to testimony was filed against Andrew. As his
disturb or obstruct the performance of lawyer, what legal step will you take? (1994
official functions, or which tend to incite Bar Question)
others to cabal and meet for unlawful
purposes; SUGGESTED ANSWER:
3. Inciting through the same media of
representation rebellious conspiracies Yes. For one to be criminally liable under
or riots; Art. 181. RPC, it is not necessary that the
4. Stirring people to go against lawful criminal case where Andrew testified is
authorities, or disturb the peace and public terminated first. It is not even required of
order of the community or of the the prosecution to prove which of the two
Government; or statements of the witness is false and to
5. Knowingly concealing any of the prove the statement to be false by evidence
aforestated evil practices (Art. 142, Rev. other than the contradictory statements
Penal Code). (People vs. Arazola, 13 Court of
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC Art. 169 and Art 315.
Art 169: How forgery is committed; Art 315:
INTERESTCRIMES AGAINST Swindling(estafa)
PUBLIC INTEREST Upon opening a letter containing 17 money
orders, the mail carrier forged the
ART.181-Crimes against public interest signatures of the payees on the money
False testimony; when incurred; when orders and encashed them. What crime or
prescribed crimes did the mail carrier commit? Explain
briefly. (6%) (2008 Bar Question)
Paolo was charged with homicide before
the Regional Trial Court of Manila. Andrew,
a prosecution witness, testified that he saw SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Paolo shoot Abby during their heated
argument. While the case is still pending, The mail carrier's act of forging the
the City Hall of Manila burned down and the signatures of the payees of said money
entire records of the case were destroyed. orders constitutes falsification of
Later, the records were reconstituted. commercial documents. It was made to
Andrew was again called to the witness appear that the payees signed them when
stand. This time he testified that his first in fact they did not. When the mail carrier
testimony was false and the truth was he encashed the money orders, he defrauded
was abroad when the crime took place. and caused damage to the remitters who
gave the cash. The mail carrier further
The judge immediately ordered the incurred the crime of estafa through
prosecution of Andrew for giving a false falsification of commercial documents.
testimony favorable to the defendant in a
criminal case.
Criminal law Crimes against public
A. Will the case against Andrew interest Falsification of private document
179
prosper? (1994 Bar Question)

B. Paolo was acquitted. The decision
became final on January 10. 1987. On
Page
June 18. 1994 a case of giving false

Art 172: Falsification by private individuals The mail carrier's act of forging the
and use of falsified documents; Art 308: signatures of the payees of said money
Who are liable for theft orders constitutes falsification of
commercial documents. It was made to
Fe is the manager of a rice mill in Bulacan. appear that the payees signed them when
In order to support a gambling debt, Fe in fact they did not. When the mail carrier
made it appear that the rice mill was encashed the money orders, he defrauded
earning less than it actually was by writing and caused damage to the remitters who
in a "talaan" or ledger a figure lower than gave the cash. The mail carrier further
what was collected and paid by their incurred the crime of estafa through
customers. Fe then pocketed the falsification of commercial documents.
difference. What crime/s did Fe commit, if
any? Explain your answer. (2007 Bar Art. 171. Falsification by public officer,
Question) employee ; or notary or ecclesiastical
officer
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Erwin and Bea approached Mayor Abral
The crimes committed by Fe are theft and and requested him to solemnize their
falsification of private document because marriage. Mayor Abral agreed. Erwin and
Fes possession of the proceeds of the rice Bea went to Mayor Abral's office on the day
mill was only physical, not juridical, of the ceremony, but Mayor Abral was not
possession, and having committed the there. When Erwin and Bea inquired where
crimes with grave abuse of confidence, it is Mayor Abral was, his chief of staff Donato
qualified theft. The falsification is a informed them that the Mayor was
separate crime from the theft because it campaigning for the coming elections.
was not committed as a necessary means Donato told them that the Mayor authorized
to commit the theft but resorted to only to him to solemnize the marriage and that
hide or conceal the unlawful taking. Mayor Abral would just sign the documents
when he arrived. Donato thereafter
Criminal law Crimes against public solemnized the marriage and later turned
interest - Falsification of commercial over the documents to Mayor Abral for his
documents signature. In the marriage contract, it was
stated that the marriage was solemnized by
Art. 169: How forgery is committed; Art Mayor Abral. What crime(s) did Mayor
315: swindling Abral and Donato commit? Explain. (2015
Upon opening a letter containing 17 money BAR)
orders, the mail carrier forged the
signatures of the payees on the money Answer:
orders and encashed them. What crime or
crimes did the mail carrier commit? Explain Mayor Abral is liable for falsification of
briefly. (6%) (2008 Bar Question) public document by a public officer under
Article 171. Making an untruthful statement
by stating in a marriage contract, a public
180
SUGGESTED ANSWER: document, that the marriage was

solemnized by him, is an act of falsification.
Page
The crime of illegal marriage is not

committed because element that the be considered because she is presumed to

offender has performed an illegal marriage know that her husband is dead. The
ceremony is lacking (Ronulo v. People, element of damage required in falsification
G.R. No. 182438, July 2, 2014). does not refer to pecuniary damage but
damage to public interest.
Donato committed the crime of usurpation
of function under Article 177 of the Revised Executive clemency can however be
Penal Code because he performed the act sought for by Andrea.
of solemnizing marriage, which pertained
to the mayor, a person in authority, without
being lawfully entitled to do so. The crime Criminal law Crimes against public
of illegal marriage is not committed, interest Falsification of a private
because the element that the offender is document
authorized to solemnize marriage is
lacking (Ronulo v. People, G.R. No. Art 172. Falsification by private individuals
182438, July 2, 2014). and use of falsified documents
Art. 171. Falsification by public officer, Dennis leased his apartment to Myla for
employee ; or notary or ecclesiastical P10,000 a month. Myla failed to pay the
officer rent for 3 months. Gabriel, the son of
Dennis, prepared a demand letter falsely
alleging that his father had authorized him
Andrea signed her deceased husbands to collect the unpaid rentals. Myla paid the
name in endorsing his three treasury unpaid rentals to Gabriel who kept the
warrants which were delivered to her payment.
directly by the district supervisor who knew
that her husband had already died, and she a) Did Gabriel commit a crime? Explain.
used the proceeds to pay for the expenses (4%) (2008 Bar Question)
of her husbands last illness and his burial.
She knew that her husband had SUGGESTED ANSWER:
accumulated vacation and sick leaves the
money value of which exceeded that value Yes. Gabriel committed a crime; it was
of the three treasury warrants, so that the either the crime of falsification of a private
government suffered no damage. Andreas document (if damage or at least intent to
appeal is based on her claim of absence of cause damage could be proved) or the
criminal intent and of good faith. crime of swindling only. It could not be both
falsification and swindling or a complex
Should she be found guilty of falsification? crime of estafa through falsification since
Discuss briefly. the document falsified is a private
document. The two crimes cannot go
SUGGESTED ANSWER: together.
ART. 172 Criminal law Crimes against
181
Andrea should be held guilty of falsification public interest - forgery of a private

of public documents. Her claim of absence document; falsification of a private
Page
of criminal intent and of good faith cannot document

document and done with intent to cause

In a civil case for recovery of a sum of damage. Although there was an attempt on
money filed against him by A. B interposed the part of B to defraud A thru the use of
the defense of payment. In support thereof, the false document, such deceit cannot
he identified and offered in evidence a give rise to estafa because this crime
receipt which appears to be signed by A On cannot co-exist or be complexed with the
rebuttal. A denied having been paid by B crime of falsification when the docu-ment
and having signed the receipt. He falsified is a private document.
presented a handwriting expert who
testified that the alleged signature of A on Additional Answer:
the receipt is a forgery and that a
comparison thereof with the specimen If he testified on the genuineness of the
signatures of B clearly shows that B himself document, he should also be held liable
forged the signature of A. under Art. 182, which is false testimony in
civil cases.
a) Is B liable for the crime of using a
falsified document in a judicial proceeding ART. 166-176 Criminal law Crimes
(last paragraph of Article 172 of the against public interest - Forgery and
Revised Penal Code)? (1991 Bar falsification
Question)
A. How are forging and falsification
SUGGESTED ANSWER: committed? (3%) (1999 Bar Question)
B. Is mere possession of false money
No, B should not be liable for the crime of bills punishable under Article 168 of the
using a falsified document, under the last Revised Penal Code? Explain. (3%) (1999
paragraph of Art. 172, Revised Penal Bar Question)
Code. He would be liable for forgery of a C. The accused was caught in
private document under the second mode possession of 100 counterfeit P20 bills. He
of falsification under Art. 172, Revised could not explain how and why he
Penal Code. Being the possessor and user possessed the said bills. Neither could he
of the falsified document he is presumed to explain what he intended to do with the fake
be the forger or falsifier and the offense of bills. Can he be held criminally liable for
introducing falsified document is already such possession? Decide. (3%) (1999 Bar
absorbed in the main offense of forgery or Question)
falsification. D. A falsified official or public document
was found in the possession of the
If he is not, what offense or offenses may accused. No evidence was introduced to
he be charged with? (1991 Bar show that the accused was the author of
Question) the falsification. As a matter of fact, the trial
court convicted the accused of falsification
of official or public document mainly on the
proposition that the only person who could
SUGGESTED ANSWER: have made the erasures and the
182
b) B should be charged for the crime of superimposition mentioned is the one who
falsification of a private document, since will be benefited by the alterations thus
Page
the document falsified is a private

made and that he alone could have the B. No. Possession of false treasury or
motive for making such alterations. bank note alone without an intent to use it,
is not punishable. But the circumstances of
Was the conviction of the accused proper such possession may indicate intent to
although the conviction was premised utter, sufficient to consummate the crime of
merely on the aforesaid ratiocination? illegal possession of false notes.
Explain your answer. (3%) (1999 Bar
Question) C. Yes. Knowledge that the note is
counterfeit and intent to use it may be
SUGGESTED ANSWER: shown by the conduct of the accused. So,
possession of 100 false bills reveal: (a)
A. Forging or forgery is committed by knowledge that the bills are fake; and (b)
giving to a treasury or bank note or any intent to utter the same.
instrument payable to bearer or to order the
appearance of a true and genuine D. Yes, the conviction is proper
document; or by erasing, substituting, because there is a presumption in law that
counterfeiting, or altering by any means the the possessor and user of a falsified
figures, letters, words or signs contained document is the one who falsified the
therein. same.
Falsification, on the other hand, is
committed by: Mr. Gray opened a savings account with
1. Counterfeiting or imitating any Bank A with an initial deposit of
handwriting, signature or rubric; P50,000.00. A few days later, he deposited
2. Causing it to appear that persons a check for P200,000.00 drawn from Bank
have participated in any act or proceeding B and endorsed by Mr. White. Ten days
when they did not in fact so participate; later, Mr. Gray withdrew the P200,000.00
3. Attributing to persons who have from his account. Mr. White later
participated in an act or proceeding complained to Bank B when the amount of
statements other than those in fact made P200,000.00 was later debited to his
by them account, as he did not issue the check and
4. Making untruthful statements in a his signature thereon was forged. Mr. Gray
narration of facts; subsequently deposited another check
5. Altering true dates; signed by Mr. White for P200,000.00,
6. Making any alteration or which amount he later withdrew. Upon
intercalation in a genuine document which receiving the amount, Mr. Gray was
changes its meaning; arrested by agents of the National Bureau
7. Issuing in an authenticated form a of Investigation (NBI). Mr. Gray was
document purporting to be a copy of an convicted of estafa and attempted estafa,
original document when no such original both through the use of commercial
exists, or including in such copy a documents. (2014 BAR)
statement contrary to, or different from, that
of the genuine original; or (A) Mr. Gray claims as defense that,
8. Intercalating any instrument or note except for Mr. Whites claim of forgery,
183
relative to the issuance thereof in a there was no evidence showing that he was
protocol, registry, or official book. the author of the forgery and Mr. White did
Page
not suffer any injuries as to the second

check (attempted estafa). Rule on the against Oscar? Explain. (1989 Bar
defense of Mr. Gray. Question)
(B) Mr. Gray claims that he was
entrapped illegally because there was no SUGGESTED ANSWER:
showing that the second check was a
forgery and, therefore, his withdrawal The proper charge against Oscar is
based on the second check was a legal act. Falsification of a Private Document. This is
Is Mr. Gray correct? so for the following reasons:
ANSWER: By forging the signature of Arturo on the

(B) The first defense of Mr. Gray that typewritten purchase order for two cans of
there was no evidence showing that he was car paint, Oscar committed the crime of
the author of the forgery has no merit. The falsification. The document falsified by him,
law presumes that the possessor and user how-ever, is a private document. A
of a falsified document is the falsifier or typewritten purchase order is neither a
forger thereof. Likewise, his second public, official or commercial document. It
defense that Mr. White did not suffer any is a private document. Falsification of a
injuries as to the second check (attempted private document, however, is not a crime
estafa) has no merit. Damage or intent to unless there is' damage or intent to cause
cause damage is not considered in damage. When Oscar used the falsified
attempted estafa. It is considered only in private document to obtain the two cans of
consummated estafa. paint from the hardware store, the element
(C) Mr. Gray is not correct. The fact that of damage arose, thus consummating the
the first check is forged justifies the crime of FALSIFICATION OF A PRIVATE
entrapment of Mr. Gray since there is DOCUMENT.
already probable cause that the second
check is also a forgery. Further, granting for Precisely because damage is an essential
the sake of argument that the entrapment element of the crime of falsification of a
was illegal, such will not validate the private document, Oscar cannot be
withdrawal based on the second check convicted of the complex.crime of ESTAFA
which is also forged. His criminal liability in THRU FALSIFICATION OF PRIVATE
forging the second check is not affected by DOCUMENT. Only one single crime of
the alleged illegality of the entrapment FALSIFICATION OF PRIVTE DOCUMENT
procedure. is committed here. The damage to another
is caused by the commission of said crime.
Oscar, a former welder and painter at the The intent to defraud in using falsified
Caloocan Motor Works owned by Arturo, private document is part and parcel of said
went to the Downtown Hardware Store crime and cannot give rise to the crime of
where Arturo gets materials on credit, and estafa, because damage, which is also an
presented to its manager a typewritten essential element of estafa, is caused by,
order for two (2) cans of Dietsler car paint. and becomes the element of, the crime of
The signature of Arturo on the order was falsification of private document. The crime
falsified. After receiving the paint, Oscar of estafa is not committed, as it cannot exist
184
sold them and kept the proceeds without its own element of damage.
therefrom. If you were the investigating
Page
fiscal, what charge or charges will you file

If the private document in the case was three minutes and provide them with an
falsified, not to induce the offended party to opportunity to escape. Thus, Willy and
part with something of value but to cover up Vincent were able to escape.
or conceal a defraudation previously made,
then the crime committed would be What crime or crimes, if any, had been
ESTAFA. The falsification would be committed by the Branch Clerk of court,
absorbed in said offense, the element of Edwin, and the jail warden? Explain your
damage in one being the same as that answer. (5%) (2009 Bar Question)
required in the other.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The crimes committed in this case are as

CRIMES COMITTED BY follows:
The Branch Clerk of Court
PUBLIC OFFICERS committed the crimes of:
1. Direct Bribery (Art. 210, RPC) for
[a] Define malfeasance, misfeasance and accepting the P50,000.00 - in consideration
nonfeasance. (2.5%) (2016) of the order she issued to enable the
Suggested answer prisoners to get out of jail;
a) Malfeasance is the doing of an act 2. Falsification of Public Document for
which a person ought not to do at all. forging the judge's signature on said Order
Misfeasance is the improper doing (Art. 171, RPC);
of an act which a person may/might lawfully 3. Delivery of Prisoners from Jail (Art.
do. 156, RPC), as a co-principal of Chito by
Nonfeasance is the omission of an indispensable cooperation for making the
act which a person ought to do. false Order and forging the judge's
signature thereon, to enable the prisoners
Arts. 156, 157, 171, 210,223: to get out of jail;
To secure a release of his brother Willy, a 4. Evasion of Service of Sentence (Art.
detention prisoner, and his cousin Vincent, 157, RPC); as a co-principal of Vincent by
who is serving sentence for homicide, Chito indispensable cooperation for making the
asked the RTC Branch Clerk of Court to false Order that enabled Vincent to evade
issue an Order which would allow the two service of his sentence;
prisoners to be brought out of jail. At first,
the Clerk refused, but when Chita gave her Edwin, the jail guard who escorted the
P50,000.00, she consented. prisoners in getting out of jail, committed
the crimes of
She then prepared an Order requiring the 1. Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners,
appearance in court of Willy and Vincent, specifically conniving with or consenting to
ostensibly as witnesses in a pending case. Evasion for leaving unguarded the
She forged the judge's signature, and prisoners escorted by him and provide
delivered the Order to the jail warden who, them an opportunity to escape (Art. 223,
in turn, allowed Willy and Vincent to go out RPC);
185
of jail in the company of an armed escort, 2. Direct Bribery for receiving the
Edwin. Chito also gave Edwin P50,000.00 P50,000.00 as consideration for leaving the
Page
to leave the two inmates unguarded for

prisoners unguarded and allowing them the Direct bribery was committed by Patrick
opportunity to escape (Art. 210, RPC); when, for a consideration of P500.000.00,
he committed a violation ofPD 1829 by
The jail warden did not commit nor incur a destroying the drugs which were evidence
crime there being no showing that he was entrusted to him in his official capacity.
aware of what his subordinates had done
nor of any negligence on his part that would Indirect bribery is not committed, because
amount to infidelity in the custody of he received the P500,000.00 as a
prisoners. consideration for destroying the evidence
Art. 210: Direct Bribery; Anti-Graft and against the offender, which was under his
Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. 3019), and official custody as a public officer. The
Obstruction of Justice under Section 1(b) of money was not delivered to him simply as
PD 1829. a gift or present by reason of his public
office.
During a PNP buy-bust operation, Cao Patrick also violated Section 3(e), R.A.
Shih was arrested for selling 20 grams of 3019 causing undue injury to the
methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) government through evident bad faith,
to a poseur-buyer. Cao Shih, through an giving unwarranted benefit to the offender
intermediary, paid Patrick, the Evidence by destroying evidence of a crime.
Custodian of the PNP Forensic Chemistry
Section, the Evidence Custodian of the Obstruction of justice under Section 1 (b) of
PNP Forensic Chemistry Section, the P.D. 1829 is committed by destroying
amount of P500.000.00 in consideration for evidence intended to be used in official
the destruction by Patrick of the drug. proceedings in criminal case.
Patrick managed to destroy the drug. a) The Comprehensive Dangerous
Drugs Act of 2002 (R.A. No. 9165) (i)
State with reasons whether Patrick Punishable acts
committed the following crimes: (ii) Who are liable (iii) Attempt or
conspiracy, effect on liability (iv) Immunity
Direct bribery; from prosecution and punishment (v)
Indirect bribery; Custody and disposition of confiscated,
Section 3(e) of RA 3019 (Anti-Graft seized and/or surrendered dangerous
and Corrupt Practices Act); drugs (Section 21, R.A. No. 9165)
Obstruction of Justice under PD
1829; (7%) (2005 Bar Question) Criminal law - Crimes committed by public
officers Direct bribery; indirect bribery;
SUGGESTED ANSWER: corruption of Public Officials
Patrick committed the crimes of direct Arts. 210: Direct Bribery

bribery under Article 210 of the Revised
Penal Code, Violation of Section 3(e) of the Deputy Sheriff Ben Rivas received from the
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. RTC Clerk of Court a Writ of Execution in
186
3019), and Obstruction of Justice under the case of Ejectment filed by Mrs. Maria
Section 1(b) of PD 1829. Estrada vs. Luis Ablan. The judgment
Page
being in favor of Estrada, Rivas went to her

lawyers office where he was given the charged simultaneously or successively for
necessary amounts constituting the sheriffs the crime of direct bribery under Art. 210 of
fees and expenses for execution in the total the Revised Penal Code, because two
amount of P550.00, aside from P2.000.00 crimes are essentially different and are
in consideration of prompt enforcement of penalized under distinct legal philosophies.
the writ from Estrada and her lawyer. The Whereas violation of Sec. (b) of R.A. 3019
writ was successfully enforced. is a malum prohibitum, the crime under Art.
210 of the Code is a malum in se.
a) Art. 210 What crime, if any, did the
sheriff commit? (3%) (2001 Bar Question)
Art 211-A: Qualified Bribery
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Charina, Clerk of Court of an RTC Branch,
a) The sheriff committed the crime of promised the plaintiff in a case pending
Direct Bribery under the second paragraph before the court that she would convince
of Article 210, Revised Penal Code, since the Presiding Judge to decide the case in
the P2,000.00 was received by him "in plaintiff's favor. In consideration therefor,
consideration" of the prompt enforcement the plaintiff gave Charina P20,000.00.
of the writ of execution which is an official
duty of the sheriff to do. Charina was charged with violation of
Section 3 (b) of Republic Act No. 3019,
Criminal law Crimes committed by public prohibiting any public officer from directly or
officers - direct bribery; Special penal law - indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,
Republic Act No. 3019 present, percentage, or benefit in
connection with any contract or transaction
Art 210: Direct Bribery x x x wherein the public officer, in his official
capacity, has to intervene under the law.
May a public officer charged under Section
3(b) of Republic Act No. 3019 [directly or While the case was being tried, the
indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, Ombudsman filed another information
present, share, percentage or benefit, for against Charina for Indirect Bribery under
himself of for any other person, in the Revised Penal Code. Charina
connection with any contract or transaction demurred to the second information,
between the government and any other claiming that she can no longer be charged
party, wherein the public officer in his under the Revised Penal Code having
official capacity has to intervene under the been charged for the same act under R.A.
law] also be simultaneously or 3019.
successively charged with direct bribery
under Article 210 of the Revised Penal Is Charina correct? Explain. (3%) (2009
Code? Explain. (4%) (2010 Bar Question) Bar Question)

187
Yes, a public officer charges under Sec. 3 No, Charina is not correct. Although the
(b) of Rep. Act 3019 (Anti-Graft and charge for violation of Rep. Act No. 3019
Page
Corrupt Practices Act) may also be and the charge for Indirect Bribery (Art.
211, RPC) arose from the same act, the dereliction of duty committed in violation of
elements of the violation charged under Art. 208 of the Revised Penal Code, should
Rep. Act No. 3019 are not the same as the be refrain from prosecuting an offender
felony charged for Indirect Bribery under who has committed a crime punishable by
the Rev. Penal Code (Mejia v. Pamaran, reclusion perpetua and / or death in
160 SCRA 457 [1988]). Hence, the crimes consideration of any offer, promise, gift or
charged are separate and distinct from present.
each other, with different penalties. The
two charges do not constitute a ground for Meanwhile, a police officer who refrains
a motion to dismiss or motion to quash, as from arresting such offender for the same
there is no jeopardy against the accused. consideration above stated, may be
prosecuted for this felony since he is a
Art 211-A. Qualified Bribery public officer entrusted with law
enforcement.
What is the crime of qualified bribery?
(2%) (2010 Bar Question) a) Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
(R.A. No. 3019, as amended) (i) Coverage
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (ii) Punishable acts (iii) Exceptions
Qualified bribery is a crime committed by a Art 211-A: Qualified Bribery

public officer who is entrusted with law
enforcement and who, in consideration of Malo, a clerk of court of a trial court,
any offer, promise, gift of offer, refrains promised the accused in a drug case
from arresting or prosecuting an offender pending before the court, that he would
who has committed a crime punishable by convince the judge to acquit him for a
reclusion perpetua and/ or death (art. 211- consideration of P5 million. The accused
A, RPC) agreed and delivered the money, through
his lawyer, to the clerk of court. The judge,
Art 211-A. Qualified Bribery not knowing of the deal, proceeded to rule
on the evidence and convicted the
May a judge be charged and prosecuted for accused. (2014 BAR)
such felony? How about a public
prosecutor? A police officer? Explain (5%) a. Art 211-A: Malo was charged with
(2010 Bar Question) violation of Section 3(b), Republic Act
(R.A.) No. 3019, which prohibits a public
SUGGESTED ANSWER: officer from directly or indirectly requesting
or receiving any gift, present, share
No, a judge may not be charged of this percentage or benefit wherein the public
felony because his official duty as a public officer, in his official capacity, has to
officer is not law enforcement but the intervene under the law. He was later
determination of cases already filed in charged also with indirect bribery under the
court. Revised Penal Code. Malo claims he can
no longer be charged under the Revised
188
On the other hand, a public prosecutor may Penal Code for the same act under R.A.
be prosecuted for this crime in respect of 3019. Is he correct?
Page
the bribery committed, aside from

Answer: crime is Corruption of Public Officials under

Article 212, Revised Penal Code.
No. One may be charged with violation of Criminal law Crimes committed by public
R.A. 3019 in addition to a felony under the officers Malversation by abandonment or
RPC for the same delictual act, either negligence
concurrently or subsequent to being
charged with a felony under the RPC. This Don Gabito, a philanthropist, offered to
is very clear from Sec. 3 of R.A. 3019. Also, fund several projects of the Mayor. He
R.A. 3019 is a special law, the elements of opened an account in the Mayors name
the crime is not the same as those and regularly deposited various amounts
punished under the RPC. ranging from P500,000.00 to PI Million.
From this account, the Mayor withdrew and
used the money for constructing feeder
roads, barangay clinics, repairing schools
Art 212: Corruption of Public officials and for all other municipal projects. It was
subsequently discovered that Don Gabito
Deputy Sheriff Ben Rivas received from was actually a jueteng operator and the
the RTC Clerk of Court a Writ of Execution amounts he deposited were proceeds from
in the case of Ejectment filed by Mrs. Maria his jueteng operations.
Estrada vs. Luis Ablan. The judgment
being in favor of Estrada, Rivas went to her What crime/s were committed? Who are
lawyers office where he was given the criminally liable? Explain. (6%)(2005 Bar
necessary amounts constituting the sheriffs Question)
fees and expenses for execution in the total
amount of P550.00, aside from P2.000.00 SUGGESTED ANSWER:
in consideration of prompt enforcement of
the writ from Estrada and her lawyer. The 1. Corruption of public officials under
writ was successfully enforced. Article 212 of the Revised Penal Code for
having given the amounts that were
b) Art 212 Was there any crime deposited in an account which he opened
committed by Estrada and her lawyer and in the Mayors name for no reason but the
If so, what crime? (2%) (2001 Bar public position or office held by the Mayor;
Question) (crime committed by Don Gabito)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 2. Indirect Bribery for accepting such

moneys deposited in his account by using
b) The sheriff committed the crime of them when they were given to him for no
Direct Bribery under the second paragraph other reason except for his public position
of Article 210, Revised Penal Code, since as a Mayor. (crime committed by the
the P2,000.00 was received by him "in Mayor)
consideration" of the prompt enforcement
of the writ of execution which is an official 3. Violation of Rep. Act 6713 (Code of
duty of the sheriff to do. Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public
189
Officials and Employees) for receiving such

c) On the part of the plaintiff and her gift from someone who may be affected by
Page
lawyer as giver of the bribe-money, the

the functions of his office. (crime committed Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation
by the Mayor) (FDIC), another government-owned and
controlled corporation. In 1995, after the
PNB management unearthed many
irregularities and violations of the bank's
Art. 217: Malversation of Public Funds and rules and regulations, dela Renta was
Property found to have manipulated certain
accounts involving trust funds and time
Allan, the Municipal Treasurer of the deposits of depositors. After investigation.
Municipality of Gerona, was in a hurry to he was charged with malversation of public
return to his office after a day-long official funds before the Sandiganbayan. He filed
conference. He alighted from the a motion to dismiss contending he was no
government car which was officially longer an employee of the PNB but of the
assigned to him, leaving the ignition key PDIC.
and the car unlocked, and rushed to his
office. Jules, a bystander, drove off with the Is dela Renta's contention tenable? 2.5%
car and later sold the same to his brother, (2006 Bar Question)
Danny for P20.000.00, although the car
was worth P800,000.00. 1. After his arraignment, the
prosecution filed a motion for his
A. What is the crime committed by Allan? suspension pendente lite, to which he filed
Explain. (2005 Bar Question) an opposition claiming that he can no
longer be suspended as he is no longer an
SUGGESTED ANSWER: employee of the PNB but that of the PDIC.
Allan committed the crime of malversation 2. Explain whether he may or may not be
by abandonment or negligence in leaving suspended. 2.5% (2006 Bar
the government car assigned to him for his Question)
official use and for which he was
accountable, with the ignition key in the car SUGGESTED ANSWER:
unlocked.
1. No, dela Renta's contention is not
tenable for these reasons:
Criminal law Crimes committed by public 1. His contention that he is no longer

officers Malversation; defenses; an employee of PNB but of PDIC has no
prescription; suspension from office merit since both PNB and FDIC are
government institutions and the funds
Art 217: Malversation of Public Funds and thereof belong to the same Government
Property who suffers from the malversation; (Sec. 4,
PD 1606, as amended).
In 1982, the Philippine National Bank
(PNB), then a government banking 2. Resignation or separation from
190
institution, hired Henry dela Renta, a CPA, office is not a ground for extinguishing
as Regional Bank Auditor. In 1992, he criminal liability under Art. 89 of the
Page
resigned and was employed by the Revised Penal Code, for any crime
committed while the offender was satisfy the judgment against him in favor of
connected with the office; and ABC Corporation, a government-owned or
controlled corporation with an original
3. The crime of malversation was charter. However, the representative of the
discovered only in 1995 and so, the corporation failed to attend the auction
prescriptive period of the crime only sale. Gonzalo, the winning bidder,
commenced to run from then. Obviously, purchased the property for P100,000 which
the amount misappropriated exceeds he paid to Eliseo. Instead of remitting the
P200.00 and so the prescribed penalty is amount to the Clerk of Court as ex-officio
within the range of prision mayor already. Provincial Sheriff, Eliseo lent the amount to
Crimes punishable by prision mayor Myrna, his officemate, who promised to
prescribes in 15 years. From 1995 to the repay the amount within two months, with
present is only around 11 years. Hence the interest thereon. However, Myrna reneged
crime can still be prosecuted. on her promise. Despite demands of ABC
Corporation, Eliseo failed to remit the said
amount.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
State with reasons, the crime or crimes, if
2. The accused may be validly any, committed by Eliseo. (4%) (2008 Bar
suspended from office in PDIC because Question)
PDIC is a government-owned and
controlled corporation; hence a public SUGGESTED ANSWER:
office. When the Information charges the
accused with acts of fraud involving The crime committed by Eliseo is
Government funds, the suspension of the malversation since he is a public officer
accused pendente lite assumes a who received the amount in his official
mandatory character and the court may capacity; thus he is accountable for it.
order the suspension of the accused
regardless of whether the prosecution files Art 217: Malversation of Public Funds and
a motion for the preventive suspension of Property
the accused, or the motion is filed by the
counsel of the government agency Would your answer to the first question be
concerned, with or without the conformity of the same if ABC Corporation were a private
the public prosecutor (Robles et al., v. corporation? Explain. (3%) (2008 Bar
Layosa et al., 436 SCRA 337 12 Aug 04). Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Criminal law Crimes committed by public The crime would still be malversation even
officers - Malversation if ABC Corporation, in whose favor the
judgment was rendered, were a private
Art 217: Malversation of Public Funds and corporation. This is because the
Property P100,000.00 came from the sale of
191
property levied upon or seized upon

Eliseo, the deputy sheriff, conducted the execution ordered by the court. The
Page
execution sale of the property of Andres to property was in custodia legis. Although not
strictly public property, it has become public officer; b) that he applies public
impressed with the character of public funds or property under his administration
property when Eliseo, in his official to some public use; and c) that the public
capacity, conducted the execution sale and use for which such funds or property were
received it proceeds. As long as Eliseo has applied is different from the purpose for
not accounted for and turned over the which they were originally appropriated by
proceeds officially, he is not relieved of his law or ordinance. The funds for the feeding
official accountability. program are not specifically appropriated
for the beneficiaries of the shelter
assistance program in X Municipalitys
Art 220. Illegal Use of Public Funds or annual budget. Mayor Maawain ought to
Property use the boxes of food earmarked
particularly for the feeding program, which
A typhoon destroyed the houses of many of would cater only to the malnourished
the inhabitants of X Municipality. among his constituents who needed the
Thereafter, X Municipality operated a resources for proper nourishment.
shelter assistance program whereby
construction materials were provided to the b) Art 220. May Mayor Maawain invoke
calamity victims, and the beneficiaries the defense of good faith and that he had
provided the labor. The construction was no evil intent when he approved the
partially done when the beneficiaries transfer of the boxes of food from the
stopped helping with the construction for feeding program to the shelter assistance
the reason that they needed to earn income program? Explain.
to provide food for their families. When
informed of the situation, Mayor Maawain Answer:
approved the withdrawal of ten boxes of
food from X Municipality's feeding program, No. Mayor Maawain cannot invoke good
which were given to the families of the faith when he approved the transfer of the
beneficiaries of the shelter assistance boxes of food from the feeding program to
program. The appropriations for the funds the Shelter Assistance program. Criminal
pertaining to the shelter assistance intent is not an element of technical
program and those for the feeding program malversation. The law punishes the act of
were separate items on X Municipality's diverting public property earmarked by law
annual budget. (2015 BAR) or ordinance for a particular purpose to
another public purpose. The offense is
a) Art 220. What crime did Mayor mala prohibita, meaning that the prohibited
Maawain commit? Explain. act is not inherently immoral but becomes
a criminal offense because positive law
Answer: forbids its commission based on
considerations of public policy, order and
Mayor Maawain committed the crime of convenience. It is the commission of an act
Illegal use of public funds or property as defined by the law, and not the character
punishable under Article 220 of the RPC. or effect thereof that determines whether or
192
This offense is also known as Technical not the provision has been violated. Hence,
Malversation. The crime has 3 elements: malice or criminal intent is completely
Page
a.) that the offender is an accountable

irrelevant. (Ysidoro v. People, G.R. No. properties being under levy, are in custodia
192330, 14 November 2012). legis and thus impressed with the character
of public property, misappropriation of
which constitutes the crime of malversation
although said properties belonged to a
private individual (Art. 222, RPC).
Criminal law - Crimes committed by public
officers - Malversation of public property Juan Santos misappropriated such
properties when, in breach of trust, he
Art. 222: Officers included in malversion of applied them to his own private use and
public funds or property benefit. His allegation that he only
borrowed such properties is a lame excuse,
Accused Juan Santos, a deputy sheriff in a devoid of merit as there is no one from
Regional Trial Court, levied on the personal whom he borrowed the same. The fact that
properties of a defendant in a civil case it was only "after due and diligent sleuthing
before said court, pursuant to a writ of by the police detectives assigned to the
execution duly issued by the court. Among case", that the missing items were found in
the properties levied upon and deposited the house of Santos, negates his
inside the "evidence room" of the Clerk of pretension.
Court for Multiple KIC Salas were a
refrigerator, a stock of cassette tapes, a
dining table set of chairs and several Art. 222: Officers included in malversion of
lampshades. Upon the defendants paying public funds or property
off the judgment creditor, he tried to claim
his properties but found out that several
items were missing, such as the cassette Alex Reyes, together with Jose Santos,
tapes, chairs and lampshades. After due were former warehousemen of the Rustan
and diligent sleuthing by the police Department Store. In 1986, the PCGG
detectives assigned to the case, these sequestered the assets, fund and
missing items were found in the house of properties of the owners-incorporators of
accused Santos, who reasoned out that he the store, alleging that they constitute ill-
only borrowed them temporarily. gotten wealth" of the Marcos family. Upon
their application, Reyes and Santos were
If you were the fiscal/prosecutor, what appointed as fiscal agents of the
would be the nature of the information to be sequestered firm and they were given
filed against the accused? Why? (5%) custody and possession of the sequestered
(2001 Bar Question) building and its contents, including various
vehicles used in the firm's operations. After
SUGGESTED ANSWER: a few months, an inventory was conducted
and it was discovered that two (2) delivery
If I were the fiscal/prosecutor, I would file vans were missing. After demand was
an Information for Malversation against made upon them, Reyes and Santos failed
Juan Santos for the cassette tapes, chairs to give any satisfactory explanation why the
193
and lampshades which he, as deputy vans were missing or to turn them over to
sheriff, levied upon and thus under his the PCGG; hence, they were charged with
Page
accountability as a public officer. Said Malversation of Public Property. During the

trial, the two accused claimed that they are B started hitting A with his fists, A suddenly
not public accountable officers and, if any complained of severe chest pains. B,
crime was committed, it should only be realizing that A was indeed in serious
Estafa under Art. 315, par. 1(b) of the trouble, immediately brought her to the
Revised Penal Code. hospital. Despite efforts to alleviate As
pains, she died of heart attack. It turned out
What is the proper offense committed? that she had been suffering from a lingering
State the reason(s) for your answer. (5%) heart ailment. What crime, if any, could B
(2001 Bar Question) be held guilty of? (2003 Bar Question)
The proper offense committed was B could be held liable for parricide because
Malversation of public property, not estafa, his act of hitting his wife with fist blows and
considering that Reyes and Santos, upon therewith inflicting physical injuries on her,
their application, were constituted as fiscal is felonious. A person committing a
agents" of the sequestered firm and were felonious act incurs criminal liability
"given custody and possession" of the although the wrongful consequence is
sequestered properties, including the different from what he intended (Art. 4, par.
delivery vans which later they could not 1, Revised Penal Code).
account for. They were thus made the
depositary and administrator of properties Although A died of heart attack, the said
deposited by public authority and hence, by attack was generated by Bs felonious act
the duties of their office/position, they are of hitting her with his fists. Such felonious
accountable for such properties. Such act was the immediate cause of the heart
properties, having been sequestered by the attack, having materially contributed to and
Government through the PCGG, are in hastened As death. Even though B may
custodia Iegis and therefore impressed have acted without intent to kill his wife,
with the character of public property, even lack of such intent is of no moment when
though the properties belong to a private the victim dies. However, B may be given
individual (Art. 222, RPC). the mitigating circumstance of having acted
without intention to commit so grave a
The failure of Reyes and Santos to give any wrong as that committed (Art. 13, par. 3,
satisfactory explanation why the vans were Revised Penal Code).
missing, is prima facie evidence that they
had put the same to their personal use. Art. 246: Parricide
Procopio, a call center agent assigned at a

CRIMES AGAINST graveyard shift, went home earlier than
usual. He proceeded immediately to their
PERSONS bedroom to change his clothes. To his
surprise, he found his wife Bionci in bed
Art. 246: Parricide making love to another woman Magna.
194
The conduct of wife A aroused the ire of her Enraged, Procopio grabbed a knife nearby
husband B. Incensed with anger almost and stabbed Bionci, who died.
beyond his control, B could not help but
Page
(2015 BAR)
inflict physical injuries on A. Moments after
Cebu City, Marco surprised his wife,

What crime did Procopio commit, and what Rosette, and her former boyfriend, Raul,
circumstance attended the case? Explain. both naked and in the act of illicit
copulation. Raul got his revolver and, upon
seing the revolver, Marco ran toward the
Answer: street, took a pedicab and proceeded to the
house of his brother, a policeman, from
The crime committed by Procopio is whom he borrowed a revolver. With the
parricide qualified by the circumstance of weapon, he returned to his residence.
relationship. Killing a spouse after having Unable to find Raul and Rosette, Marco
been surprised in the act of committing proceeded to a disco jointly owned and
sexual intercourse with another woman is operated by Raul. It was already 11:00
death under exceptional circumstance oclock that evening when he arrived at the
under Article 247 of the Revised Penal joint. Upon seeing Raul with two (2) male
Code. However, in this case this is not companions, A and B, drinking beer at one
death under exceptional circumstance of the tables, Marco fired two (2) shots at
because Bionci was having homosexual Raul, who was hit on his forehead with one
intercourse with another woman and not of the bullets; the other bullet hit A, injuring
sexual intercourse with a man. him on his stomach. As a consequence of
Homosexual intercourse is not within the the gunshot wound, Raul died
contemplation of the term sexual instantaneously. Due to the timely medical
intercourse in Article 247. However, the attention given to him, A survived; he was,
crime of parricide is attended by the however, hospitalized for 45 days. Marco
circumstance of passion arising from a was prosecuted for Murder for the death of
lawful sentiment as a result of having Raul and for frustrated murder in the case
caught his wife in the act of infidelity with of A. The informations in both cases allege
another woman (People v. Belarmino, G.R. the qualifying circumstances of evident
No. L-4429, April 18, 1952, En Banc). premeditation and treachery and the
generic aggravating circumstance of
Assuming that Procopio and Bionci were nighttime.
common-law spouses, will your answer be
the same? Explain. You are Marcos lawyer. What would be
your defense(s)? (1991 Bar Question)
Answer:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the answer is not the same. The crime The defense with respect to the death of
committed is Homicide if Procopio and Raul is death under exceptional
Bionci were common law spouses. circumstances (Art. 247, People vs.
Parricide contemplates killing by spouse Abarca, 153 SCRA 735). Although the
who are legally married. killing happened one hour after having
surprised the spouse, that would still be
Art 247: Death under exceptional within the context of immediately
circumstances thereafter.
195
At 10:00 oclock in the evening of 10 With respect to the wounding of the

Page
November 1990, upon his arrival from stranger, the defense of lawful exercise of
a right is a justifying circumstance. Under bystanders were seriously injured but

Article 11, par. 5 could be invoked. At the survived.
time accused shot Raul, he was not
committing a felonious act and therefore Can Juan Santos be held guilty for
could not have been criminality liable under homicide for the death of Pedro Orsal?
Art. 4. RPC. Explain. (1988 Bar Question)
What offense did Juan Santos commit with
Criminal law Crimes against persons - regard to the two bystanders? Explain.
Death inflicted under exceptional (1988 Bar Question)
circumstances; serious physical injuries
inflicted under exceptional circumstances SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Pedro Orsal and the wife of accused Juan Juan Santos cannot be held guilty' of
Santos started having illicit relations while homicide for the death of Pedro Orsal.
the accused was in Manila reviewing for Instead, Juan is liable for violation of Article
the 1983 Bar Examinations and his wife 247 Death inflicted under exceptional
was left behind in Davao City. In the circumstances because there was one
morning of July 15, 1984, the accused went continuous act. (People vs. Abarca).
to the bus station in Davao City to go to
Cagayan de Oro City to fetch his daughter, With regards to the two bystanders, Juan
but after he failed to catch the first trip in Santos committed the crime of serious
the morning, and because the 2:00 oclock physical injuries inflicted under exceptional
bus had engine trouble and could not circumstances. (Art. 247 Revised Penal
leave, the accused, afer passing the Code; People vs. Abarca).
residence of his father, went home and
arrive at his residence at around six oclock Art 247: Exceptional circumstances
in the afternoon. Upon reaching his home,
the accused found his wife Laura, and A and B are husband and wife. A is
Pedro Orsal in the act of sexual employed as a security guard at Landmark,
intercourse. When the wife and Pedro his shift being from 11 :00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
Orsal noticed the accused, the wife pushed One night, he felt sick and cold, hence, he
her paramour who got his revolver. The decided to go home around midnight after
accused, who has then peeping above the getting permission from his duty officer.
built in cabinet in their room, jumped down Upon reaching the front yard of his home,
and ran away. He went to the house of his he noticed that the light in the master
PC soldier-friend, and neighbor, got his bedroom was on and that the bedroom
(soldiers) M-16 rifle and immediately, it window was open. Approaching the front
was almost 6:30 p.m. then, went back to his door, he was surprised to hear sighs and
house. Not finding his wife there, he went giggles inside the bedroom. He opened the
to the hangout of Pedro Orsal and found door very carefully and peeped inside
the latter playing mahjong there. The where he saw his wife B having sexual
accused fired at Pedro three times with his intercourse with their neighbor C. A rushed
rifle, hit him and two bystanders. Pedro inside and grabbed C but the latter
196
died instantaneously of wounds in the managed to wrest himself free and jumped
head, trunk, and abdomen. The two out of the window. A followed suit and
Page
managed to catch C again and after a

furious struggle, managed also to strangle death of Benjie. Pete contended that he
him to death. A then rushed back to his acted in defense of his honor and that,
bedroom where his wife B was cowering therefore, he should be acquitted of the
under the bed covers. Still enraged, A hit B crime.
with fist blows and rendered her
unconscious. The police arrived after being The court found that Benjie died under
summoned by their neighbors and arrested exceptional circumstances and exonerated
A who was detained, inquested and Pete of the crime, but sentenced him to
charged for the death of C and serious destierro, conformably with Article 247 of
physical injuries of B. the Revised Penal Code. The court also
ordered Pete to pay indemnity to the heirs
Is A liable for Cs death? Why? (5%) (2001 of the victim in the amount of P50,000.00.
Bar Question)
Is A liable for B's injuries? Why? (5%) Is the defense of Pete meritorious?
(2001 Bar Question) Explain.
Under Article 247 of the Revised Penal
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Code, is destierro a penalty? Explain.
Did the court correctly order Pete to pay
Yes, A is liable for C's death but under the indemnity despite his exoneration under
exceptional circumstances in Article 247 of Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code?
the Revised Penal Code, where only Explain. (5%) (2005 Bar Question)
destierro is prescribed. Article 247 governs
since A surprised his wife B in the act of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
having sexual intercourse with C, and the
killing of C was "immediately thereafter" as The defense of Pete lacks merit. He could
the discovery, escape, pursuit arid killing of not have acted in defense of honor,
C form one continuous act. (U.S. vs. because there was no unlawful aggression
Vargas, 2 Phil. 194) against him. At most, what Benjie did could
Likewise, A is liable for the serious physical be regarded only as sufficient provocation
injuries he inflicted on his wife B but under to Pete. The Court correctly ruled that
the same exceptional circumstances in Benjies killing was done under the
Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code, for exceptional circumstances provided for in
the same reasons. Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code.
Destierro is one of the principal penalties
under Article 25 of the Revised Penal
Criminal law Crimes against persons Code, but under the exceptional
Death inflicted under exceptional circumstances provided for in Article 247 of
circumstances the Code, destierro is not intended as a
penalty but a means to remove the
Pete, a security guard, arrived home late accused from the vicinity, for his protection
one night after rendering overtime. He was against possible reprisal from the family or
shocked to see Flor, his wife, and Benjie, relatives of the other spouse or those of the
his best friend, completely naked having paramour or mistress. (People v. Coricort
197
sexual intercourse. Pete pulled out his 79 Phil 672 [1947]).

service gun and shot and killed Benjie. Yes, the court correctly ordered Pete to pay
Page
Pete was charged with murder for the indemnity, because the legal consequence
of the exceptional circumstance in Article the qualifying circumstance of treachery.

247 of the Code The mode of attack deprived Pedro of any
is that of an exempting circumstance where chance to defend himself or to retaliate.
generally there is civil liability although Rodolfo is also liable for homicide
there may be no criminal liability. regarding the killing of Calling, Pedros son
as that is the result of a right, both of them
Art 248:Murder being aimed with bolos.
Juan had a land dispute with Pedro for a Although Pedro died five days later, since
number of years. As Juan was earning the blood purchased which would have
down his house, he saw his brother, saved him did not arrive on time, Rodolfo is
Rodolfo attack Pedro with a bolo from still liable for the death of Pedro as that is
behind. Rodolfo was about to hit Pedro a the direct, natural and logical result of the
second time while the latter was prostrate wound inflicted by him.
on the ground, when Carling, Pedros son,
shouted, Ill kill you. This distracted Juan, the brother of Rodolfo, has no
Rodolfo who then turned ter Carling. criminal liability. What he shouted to
Rodolfo and Carling fought with their bolos. Rodolfo Kill them both, they are our
While the two were fighting, Juan shouted enemies, when Rodolfo and Carling were
to his brother Rodolfo: Kill them both, they fighting, was not the only reason why
are our enemies. Calling suffered a Carling was killed; and hence, he cannot
number of wounds and died on the spot, be a principal by inducement. The doctrine
Pedro who was in serious condition was is to be a principal by inducement, the
rushed to the hospital. inducement must be the only reason why
He died five days later for loss of blood the crime is committed. (People vs. Kiichi
because the blood purchased from Manila et. al. 61 Phil. 609)
which could have saved him, according to
the doctor, did not arrive on time, Jose, Art. 248: Murder
father of Juan and Rodolfo, told his sons to
hide in Manila and he gave them money for Boy Bala was a notorious gang leader who
the purpose. When the police investigators had previously killed a policeman. The
saw Jose, he told the police investigators Chief of Police ordered his vice squad
that Juan and Rodolfo went to Mindanao. headed by Captain Aniceto, to arrest Boy
Bala and shoud he resist arrest, to shoot
What crimes, if any, did (a) Rodolfo, (b) and kill him. Acting upon an informer's tip,
Juan and Jose commit? Explain your Aniceto and two (2) of his trusted men went
answer and state whether the acts to the Corinthian nightclub where they saw
committed are accompanied by Boy Bala dancing with a hostess. Without
circumstances affecting criminal liability. any warning, Aniceto shot Boy Bala who
(1987 Bar Question) slumped on the dance floor. As Aniceto
aimed another shot at Boy Bala, the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: brother of the latter, Pedro, who was
seated at a table nearby, got hold of a table
198
Rodolfo committed murder regarding the knife and stabbed Aniceto killing him
killing of Pedro since Pedro was attacked instantly. The Chief of Police filed a
Page
from behind. The killing was attended by homicide case against Pedro for the death
of Aniceto. On the other hand, Pedro filed Aniceto is a police officer and Boy Bala is
a complaint for murder against the Chief of notorious gangster. By shooting Boy Bala
Police for the death of Boy Bala alleging without warning instead of attempting to
that the issuance of the shoot-to-kill order arrest him first, Aniceto became an
was illegal and the Chief of Police was unlawful agressor.
liable as a principal by inducement. How
tenable are the respective claims of the There was reasonable necessity of the
Chief of Police and Pedro? Explain. (1989 means employed by Pedro to prevent or
Bar Question) repel unlawful aggression. The use of a
knife against a gun for defense is
reasonable.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Assuming that Boy Bala had provoked that
The charge for murder against the Chief of attack on his person by Aniceto because of
Police for the death of Boy Bala is not his having earlier killed a policeman, it does
tenable. Although, the Chief of Police is the not appear that Pedro, the one making the
superior on Captain Aniceto who shot Boy defense had taken any part in said
Bala in cold blood, he cannot be held provocation.
accountable for the act of Aniceto. His
order was specific; to arrest Boy Bala and
should he resist arrest, to shoot and kill
him. Aniceto did not act in compliance with Art.248: Murder; Art 263: Serious Physical
this order. He shot Boy Bala without Injuries
warning, without even attempting to make
an arrest. Consequently, it could not be Mang Jose, a septuagenarian, was walking
said that the killing of Bala by Aniceto was with his ten- year old grandson along
induced by the Chief of Police so as to Paseo de Roxas and decided to cross at
make the latter criminally liable as a co- the intersection of Makati Avenue but both
principal by inducement. The liability for the were hit by a speeding CKV Honda van and
death of Bala is individual and not were sent sprawling on the pavement, a
collective. meter apart. The driver, a Chinese mestizo
stopped his car after hitting the two victims
On the other hand, the charge of homicide but then reversed his gears and ran over
against Pedro for the stabbing of Aniceto is Mang Joses prostrate body anew and third
likewise not tenable. time by advancing his car forward. The
grandson suffered broken legs only and
Pedro acted in legitimate defense of survived but Mang Jose suffered multiple
relative, he being the brother of Boy Bala. fractures and broken ribs, causing his
All the requisites of this justifying instant death. The driver was arrested and
circumstance are present. Thus: charged with Murder for the death of Mang
Jose and Serious Physical Injuries through
There was unlawful aggression. At the Reckless Imprudence with respect to the
time that Pedro stabbed Aniceto, the latter grandson.
199
had already shot at Boy Bala and was in

the act of shooting him for the second time. Are the charges correct? Explain. (5%)
Page
The aggression is unlawful although (2001 Bar Question)

SUGGESTED ANSWER: Candido should be charged with murder

qualified by treachery because the
Yes, the charges are correct. suddenness of the stabbing caught the
victim by surprise and was totally
For deliberately running over Mang Jose's defenseless. Being under the influence of
prostrate body after having bumped him dangerous drugs is a qualifying
and his grandson, the driver indeed aggravating circumstance in the
committed Murder, qualified by treachery. commission of a crime (Sec. 25, Rep Act
Said driveris deliberate intent to kill Mang 9165 Comprehensive Dangerous Drug Act
Jose was demonstrated by his running of 2002); hence, the penalty for murder
over the latteris body twice, by up the van shall be imposed in the maximum.
and driving it forward, whereas the victim
was helpless and not in a position to
defend himself or to retaliate.
Art. 249: Homicide
As to the serious physical injuries
sustained by Mang Jose's 10-year old
grandson, as a result of having been hit by Criminal law Crimes against persons
the speeding vehicle of said driver, the Homicide; when justified; when aggravated
same were the result of reckless
imprudence which is punishable as a Lucresia, a store owner, was robbed of her
quasi-offense in Article 365 of the Revised bracelet in her home. The following day, at
Penal Code. The charge of Reckless about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, a
Imprudence Resulting to Serious Physical neighbor. 22-year old JunJun, who had an
Injuries is correct. The penalty next higher unsavory reputation, came to her store to
in degree to what ordinarily should be buy bottles of beer. Lucresia noticed her
imposed is called for, since the driver did bracelet wound around the right arm of
not lend help on the spot, which help he Jun-Jun. As soon as the latter left, Lucresia
could have given to the victims. went to a nearby police station and sought
the help of a policeman on duty. Pat. Willie
Reyes. He went with Lucresia to the house
Art. 248: Murder of Jun- Jun to confront the latter. Pat Reyes
introduced himself as a policeman and
Candido stabbed an innocent bystander tried to get hold of Jun-Jun who resisted
who accidentally bumped him. The and ran away. Pat Reyes chased him and
innocent bystander died as a result of the fired two warning shots in the air. Jun-Jun
stabbing. Candido was arrested and was continued to run and when he was about 7
tested to be positive for the use of shabu" meters away, Pat. Reyes shot him in the
at the time he committed the stabbing. right leg. Jun-Jun was hit and he fell down
but he crawled towards a fence, intending
What should be the proper charge against to pass through an opening underneath.
Candido? Explain. (3%) (2005 Bar When Pat. Reyes was about 5 meters
200
Question) away, he fired another shot at Jun-Jun

hitting him at the right lower hip. Pat. Reyes
Page
SUGGESTED ANSWER: brought Jun-Jun to the hospital, but

because of profuse bleeding, he eventually The circumstances of using poison, in

died. Pat Reyes was subsequently charged consideration of a promise or reward, and
with homicide. During the trial, Pat Reyes cruelty which attended the killing of Rico
raised the defense, by way of exoneration, could only be appreciated as generic
that he acted in the fulfillment of a duty. Is aggravating circumstances since none of
the defense tenable? Explain. (3%) them have been alleged in the Information
to qualify the killing to murder. A qualifying
a) Rico, a member of the Alpha Rho circumstance must be alleged in the
fraternity, was killed by Pocholo, a member Information and proven beyond reasonable
of the rival group, Sigma Phi Omega. doubt during the trial to be appreciated as
Pocholo was prosecuted for homicide such.
before the Regional Trial Court in Binan,
Laguna. During the trial, the prosecution
was able to prove that the killing was
committed by means of poison in Art 249: Homicide
consideration of a promise or reward and On July 1, 2004, Jet Matulis, a pedophile,
with cruelty. If you were the Judge, with gave P1,000.00 to Sherly, an orphan and a
what crime will you convict Pocholo? prostitute and brought her to a motel. He
Explain. (2%) (2000 Bar Question) inserted a rusty and oversized vibrator into
her vagina with such force that she bled
SUGGESTED ANSWER: profusely. Jet panicked and fled. Sherly
was brought to the hospital and died a few
No, the defense of Pat. Reyes is not days later because of shock caused by
tenable. The defense of having acted in the hemorrhage.
fulfillment of a duty requires as a condition,
inter alia, that the injury or offense What crime or crimes did Jet Matulis
committed be the unavoidable or commit? Explain. (2005 Bar Question)
necessary consequence of the due
performance of the duty (People us. Oanis, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
etaL, 74PhiL 257). It is not enough that the
accused acted in fulfillment of a duty. Jet Matulis should be liable only for the
crime of homicide for the death of Sherly,
After Jun-Jun was shot in the right leg and assuming that she was not a minor (in the
was already crawling, there was no need light of the following question) since the
for Pat. Reyes to shoot him further. Clearly, sexual assault was committed without any
Pat. Reyes acted beyond the call of duty of the circumstances mentioned in of
which brought about the cause of death of Article 266-A (1) of the Revised Penal
the victim. Code as rape. It appears that the offender
and the offended party went to the hotel for
Pocholo should be convicted of the crime mutual sexual gratification.
of homicide only because the aggravating
circumstances which should qualify the Criminal law Crimes against persons
crime to murder were not alleged in the Homicide; Special penal law - Child abuse;
201
information. Special Protection of Children Against

Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Page
Discrimination (RA 7610, as amended)

you sustain the conviction upon appeal?

Art. 249: Homicide Explain your answer.
On July 1, 2004, Jet Matulis, a pedophile, ANSWER:

gave P1,000.00 to Sherly, an orphan and a No, because none of the circumstances
prostitute and brought her to a motel. He qualifying the killing to murder in Art. 248
inserted a rusty and oversized vibrator into attended the crime. The faithhealer and his
her vagina with such force that she bled co-accused should only be liable for
profusely. Jet panicked and fled. Sherly homicide, because they are not authorized
was brought to the hospital and died a few by law to practice medicine and were
days later because of shock caused by therefore acting illegally although the
hemorrhage. wrongful act done was different from what
they intended.
If Sherly were a minor when she died,
would your answer be the same?
Explain. (5%) (2005 Bar Question) Criminal law Crimes against persons
Attempted homicide; Slight physical injury
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Arts. 250: Penalty for Frustrated Parricide,
If Sherly were a minor when she died, the Murder, or homicide ; Art.254: Discharge of
crimes of homicide and child abuse in Firearms; Art. 266: Slight Physical Injury
violation of Rep. Act 7610 (Special
Protection of Children against abuse, In a free-for-all brawl that ensued after
exploitation, discrimination and for other some customers inside a night club
purposes), are committed by Jet Matulis, became unruly, guns were fired by a group,
provided Sherly is not less than 12 years among them A and B, that finally put the
old. If Sherly was less than 12 years old customers back to their senses.
then, the crime committed by Matulis is Unfortunately, one customer died.
rape (through sexual assault) with Subsequent investigation revealed that A's
Homicide, a special complex crime under gunshot had inflicted on the victim a slight
Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code. wound that did not cause the deceaseds
death nor materially contribute to it. It was
Eddie brought his son Randy to a local Bs gunshot that inflicted a fatal wound on
faithhealer known as "Mother Himala." He the deceased. A contended that his liability
was diagnosed by the faithhealer as being should, if at all, be limited to slight physical
possessed by an evil spirit. Eddie injury. Would you agree? Why? (2003 Bar
thereupon authorized the conduct of a Question)
"treatment" calculated to drive the "spirit"
from the boy's body. Unfortunately, the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
procedure conducted resulted in the boy's
death. No. I beg to disagree with As contention
that his liability should be limited to slight
The faithhealer and three others who were physical injury only. He should be held
202
part of the healing ritual were charged with liable for attempted homicide because he
murder and convicted by the lower court. If inflicted said injury with the use of a firearm
Page
you were the appellate court Justice, would which is a lethal weapon. Intent to kill is
inherent in the use of a firearm. (Araneta, Criminal law Crimes against persons
Jr. v. Court of Appeals. 187 SCRA 123 Abortion; infanticide
[1990])
Art. 255: Infanticide
Art. 251: Death caused in a tumultuous Ana has been a bar girl/GRO at a beer
affray house for more than 2 years. She fell in
love with Oniok, the bartender, who
A, B and C are members of SFC Fraternity. impregnated her. But Ana did not inform
While eating in a seaside restaurant, they him about her condition and instead, went
were attacked by X, Y and Z members of a to Cebu to conceal her shame.
rival fraternity. A rumble ensued in which
the above-named members of the two However, her parents drove her away. So,
fraternities assaulted each other in she returned to Manila and stayed with
confused and tumultuous manner resulting Oniok in his boarding house. Upon learning
in the death of A. As it cannot be of her pregnancy, already in an advanced
ascertained who actually killed A, the state, Oniok tried to persuade her to
members of the two fraternities who took undergo an abortion, but she refused.
part in the rumble were charged for death Because of their constant and bitter
caused in a tumultuous affray. Will the quarrels, she suffered birth pangs and
charge prosper? Explain. (4%) (2010 Bar gave birth prematurely to a live baby girl
Question) while Oniok was at his place of work. Upon
coming home and learning what happened,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: he prevailed upon Ana to conceal her
dishonor. Hence, they placed the infant in
No, the charge of death caused in a a shoe box and threw it into a nearby creek.
tumultuous affray will not prosper. In death However, an inquisitive neighbor saw them
caused by tumultuous affray under Art. 251 and with the help of others, retrieved the
of the Revised Penal Code, it is essential infant who was already dead from
that the persons involved did not compose drowning. The incident was reported to the
groups organized for the common purpose police who arrested Ana and Oniok. The 2
of assaulting and attacking each other were charged with parricide under Article
reciprocally. 246 of the Revised Penal Code. After trial,
they were convicted of the crime charged.
In this case, there is no tumultuous affray
since the participants in the rumble belong Was the conviction correct? 5% (2006 Bar
to organized fraternities. The killer of A, a Question)
member of SFC Fraternity could not be any
other but member of the rival fraternity.
Conspiracy is therefore present among the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
attackers from the rival fraternity and thus
rules out the idea of an affray. The liability The conviction for parricide was correct if
of the attackers should be collective for the the infant was already three (3) days old or
crime of homicide or murder as the case more when killed because Ana and Oniok
203
may be. are the parents of the child. But if the child
was less than 3 days old when killed, the
Page
crime of both Ana and Oniok is infanticide

and they should be convicted for Will your answers to (a) and (b) be the
infanticide, not parricide. same if before the incident Gavino and
Alma were legally separated? Explain.
(1995 Bar Question)
Art 266-A: Rape SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A complaint for rape was filed by the victim No. A husband cannot be charged with the
against her father. When the victim was rape of his wife because of the matrimonial
about to finish her testimony, she and her consent which she gave when she
aunt (her closest relative) executed assumed the marriage relation, and the law
separate affidavits of desistance wherein will not permit her to retract in order to
they stated that they are forgiving the charge her husband with the offense (Sate
accused. The judge dismissed the case. Is vs. Haines, 11 La. Ann. 731 So. 372; 441
the dismissal proper? (1991 Bar Question) RA 837).
Yes. He may be guilty of serious physical
SUGGESTED ANSWER: injuries. This offense is specially
mentioned in Art. 263 (4), paragraph 2
No, the dismissal of the case is not proper. which imposes a higher penalty for the
While the affidavit of desistance executed crime of physical injuries in cases where
by the victim amounts to a pardon, the the offense shall have been committed
same does not extinguish criminal liability. against any of the persons enumerated in
In the crime of rape and other private Art 246 (the crime of parricide). C. No. my
crimes, pardon by the offended party only answer will not be the same.
bars prosecution if given before the
institution of the criminal action. After the C. If Gavino, and Alma were legally
criminal action had been instituted, such separated at the time of the incident, then
pardon only waives the civil liability but not Gavino could be held liable for rape.
the criminal liability of the offender.
A legal separation is a separation of the
Art 266-A: Rape; Art 263: Serious Physical spouses from bed and board [U.S. vs.
Injuries Johnson 27 Phil. 477, cited in II Reyes,
RPC, p. 853, 1981 edition).
Gavino boxed his wife Alma for refusing to In the crime of rape, any crime resulting
sleep with him. He then violently threw her from the infliction of physical injuries
on the floor and forced her to have sexual suffered by the victim on the occasion of
intercourse with him. As a result Alma the rape, is absorbed by the crime of rape.
suffered serious physical injuries. The injuries suffered by the victim may,
however, be considered in determining the
Can Gavino be charged with rape? Explain. proper penalty which shall be imposed on
(1995 Bar Question) the offender. Serious physical injuries
Can Gavino be charged with serious cannot be absorbed in rape; it can be so if
204
physical injuries? Explain. (1995 Bar the injury is slight.

Question)
Page
Art 266-A: Rape

bringing her to Quezon City, Roger brought

The complainant, an eighteen-year old Flordeluna to his house in Cavite where
mental retardate with an intellectual she was detained for two (2) weeks. She
capacity between the ages of nine and was raped for the entire duration of her
twelve years, when asked during the trial detention. May Roger be charged and
how she felt when she was raped by the convicted of the crime of rape with serious
accused, replied Masarap, it gave me illegal detention? Explain. (5%) (2000 Bar
much pleasure." Question)
With the claim of the accused that the SUGGESTED ANSWER:

complainant consented for a fee to the No, Roger may not be charged and
sexual intercourse, and with the foregoing convicted of the crime of rape with serious
answer of the complainant, would you illegal detention. Roger may be charged
convict the accused of rape if you were the and convicted of multiple rapes. Each rape
Judge trying the case? Explain. (1996 Bar is a distinct offense and should be
Question) punished separately. Evidently, his
principal intention was to abuse
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Flordeluna; the detention was only
incidental to the rape.
Yes, I would convict the accused of rape.
Since the victim is a mental retardate with
an intellectual capacity of a child less than Criminal law Crimes against persons
12 years old, she is legally incapable of Rape through sexual assault
giving a valid consent to the sexual
intercourse. The sexual intercourse is Art 266-A: Rape
tantamount to a statutory rape because the
level of intelligence is that of a child less A. A, a male, takes B, another male, to a
than twelve years of age. Where the victim motel and there, through threat and
of rape is a mental retardate, violence or intimidation, succeeds in inserting his penis
intimidation is not essential to constitute into the anus of B. What, if any, is As
rape. (People vs. Ttimor, G.R. 106541- criminal liability? Why? (3%) (2002 Bar
42,31 Mar 95) As a matter Question)
of fact, RA No. 7659, the Heinous Crimes
Law, amended Art. 335, RPC, by adding SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the phrase "or is demented.
A shall be criminally liable for rape by
committing an act of sexual assault against
Art. 266-A: Rape B, by inserting his penis into the anus of the
latter.
Flordeluna boarded a taxi on her way home
to Quezon City which was driven by Roger. Even a man may be a victim of rape by
Flordeluna noticed that Roger was always sexual assault under par. 2 of Article 268-
placing his car freshener in front of the car Aof the Revised Penal Code, as amended,
205
aircon ventilation but did not bother asking when the offenders penis is inserted into
Roger why. Suddenly. Flordeluna felt dizzy his mouth or anal orifice.
Page
and became unconscious. Instead of

On July 1, 2004, Jet Matulis, a pedophile,

gave P1,000.00 to Sherly, an orphan and a
Special law - Rep. Act No. 8049 (Anti- prostitute and brought her to a motel. He
Hazing Law) Hazing; initiation rites inserted a rusty and oversized vibrator into
her vagina with such force that she bled
A. What is hazing as defined by law? (2%) profusely. Jet panicked and fled. Sherly
(2002 Bar Question) was brought to the hospital and died a few
days later because of shock caused by
SUGGESTED ANSWER: hemorrhage.
Hazing, as defined by law, is an initiation If Sherly were a minor when she died,
rite or practice as a prerequisite for would your answer be the same?
admission into membership In a fraternity, Explain. (5%) (2005 Bar Question)
sorority or organization by placing the
recruit, neophyte or applicant in some SUGGESTED ANSWER:
embarrassing or humiliating situations
such as forcing him to do menial, silly, If Sherly were a minor when she died, the
foolish and similar tasks or activities or crimes of homicide and child abuse in
otherwise subjecting him to physical or violation of Rep. Act 7610 (Special
psychological suffering or injury. Protection of Children against abuse,
exploitation, discrimination and for other
A. What does the law require before purposes), are committed by Jet Matulis,
initiation rites may be performed? (3%) provided Sherly is not less than 12 years
(2002 Bar Question) old. If Sherly was less than 12 years old
then, the crime committed by Matulis is
SUGGESTED ANSWER: rape (through sexual assault) with
Homicide, a special complex crime under
Section 2 of Rep. Act No. 8049 (Anti- Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code.
Hazing Law) requires that before hazing or
initiation rites may be performed, notice to Special law Special Protection of
the school authorities or head of Children against Child abuse, Exploitation
organizations shall be given seven (7) days and Discrimination Act RA 7610; Child
before the conduct of such rites. The trafficking
written notice shall indicate (a) the period
of the initiation activities, not exceeding A childless couple, A and B, wanted to
three (3) days; (b) the names of those to be have a child they could call their own. C, an
subjected to such activities, and (c) an unwed mother, sold her newborn baby to
undertaking that no physical violence shall them. Thereafter, A and B caused their
be employed by anybody during such names to be stated in the birth certificate of
initiation rites. the child as his parents. This was done in
connivance with the doctor who assisted in
Special law - Child abuse; Special the delivery of C. What are the criminal
206
Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, liabilities, if any, of the couple A and B, C
Exploitation and Discrimination (RA 7610, and the doctor? (2002 Bar Question)
Page
as amended)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: herself in the streets in Manila. They were

C, the unwed mother is criminally liable for alone in one room in a beach resort and
child trafficking, a violation of Article IV, stayed there for two (2) nights. No sexual
Sec. 7 of Rep. Act No. 7610. The law intercourse took place between them.
punishes inter alia the act of buying and Before they parted, retired Lt. Col. Agaton
selling of a child. gave the girl PI,000.00 for her services.
She gladly accepted it. What crime may the
retired colonel be charged with, if any?
Special law Special Protection of Discuss. (1993 Bar Question) What
Children against Child abuse, Exploitation possible defenses can he interpose?
and Explain. (1993 Bar Question)
Discrimination Act (RA 7610 Child
abuse, punishable acts SUGGESTED ANSWER:
S. A, with lewd designs, took a 13-year old The retired colonel may be charged with
girl to a nipa hut in his farm and there had child abuse, in violation of Rep. Act 7610,
sexual intercourse with her. The girl did not a law providing special protection against
offer any resistance because she was child abuse, exploitation, and
infatuated with the man, who was good discrimination.
looking and belonged to a rich and
prominent family in the town. What crime, if One of the acts of child abuse or
any, was committed by A? Why? (2%) exploitation penalized under Article VI of
(2002 Bar Question) RA 7610 is that of keeping company of a
minor who is ten (10) years or more
SUGGESTED ANSWER: younger than the offender in a hotel, motel,
beer house, disco joint, pension house,
A committed "Child Abuse under Rep. Act cabaret, sauna or massage parlor, beach
No. 7610. As defined in said law, "child resort, and similar places. Considering that
abuse includes sexual abuse or any act Lt Col. Agaton is a retiree pursuant to a
which debases, degrades or demeans the compulsory retirement, while the child he
intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a kept company within a private room in the
human being, whose age is below eighteen beach resort, is only 14 years old, there
(18) years. must be an age difference of more than 10
years between them. This fact plus the
circumstance that Lt. Col. Agaton stayed
Special penal law RA 7610 - Child abuse with the child, a girl, in one room at such
or exploitation, punishable acts beach resort for two nights, and thereafter
he gave her PI,000.00 for her services",
Sometime in December, 1992, retired Lt. constitutes the very evil punished, among
Col. Agaton, celebrating the first year of his other acts, in said law.
compulsory retirement from the Armed
Forces of the Philippines, had in his The possible defenses Lt. Col. Agaton may
company a fourteen (14) year-old girl interpose are that the child is related to him
207
whose parents were killed by the Mt. by affinity, or by consanguinity within the
Pinatubo eruption and being totally fourth degree, or by a bond recognized in
Page
orphaned has been living or fending for law, or local customs and traditions, or that
he was only acting in pursuance of a moral, ART.248-Murder

social, or legal duty (Sec. 10(b), Art. VI. RA
7610). Lina worked as a housemaid and yaya of
the one-week old son of the spouses John
Special law Republic Act No. 7610 Child and Joana. When Lina learned that her 70-
abuse; maltreatment, punishable acts year old mother was seriously ill, she asked
John for a cash advance of P20,000.00, but
A. Mrs. MNA was charged of child abuse. It the latter refused. In anger, Lina gagged
appears from the evidence that she failed the mouth of the child with stockings,
to give immediately the required medical placed him in a box, sealed it with masking
attention to her adopted child, BPO, when tape, and placed the box in the attic. Lina
he was accidentally bumped by her car, then left the house and asked her friend
resulting in his head injuries and impaired Fely to demand a P20,000.00 ransom for
vision that could lead to night blindness. the release of the spouses' child to be paid
The accused, according to the social within twenty-four hours. The spouses did
worker on the case, used to whip him when not pay the ransom. After a couple of days,
he failed to come home on time from school John discovered the box in the attic with his
Also, to punish him for carelessness in child already dead. According to the
washing dishes, she sometimes sent him autopsy report, the child died of
to bed without supper. asphyxiation barely minutes after the box
was sealed.
She moved to quash the charge on the
ground that there is no evidence she What crime or crimes, if any, did Lina and
maltreated her adopted child habitually. Fely commit? Explain. (5%) (2016 BAR)
She added that the accident was caused
by her driver's negligence. She did punish Lina is liable for murder. Gagging
her ward for naughtiness or carelessness, the mouth of the child with stockings,
but only mildly. placing him in a box, sealing it with masking
tape, and placed the box in the attice were
Is her motion meritorious? Reason briefly. only methods employed by the defendant
(5%) (2004 Bar Question) in committing murder qualified by the
circumstance of treachery (People v. Lora,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: GR No, L-49430, 30 March 1982). Taking
advantage of the defenseless condition of
No, the motion to quash is not meritorious. the victim by reason of his tender age in
It is not necessary that movant's killing him is treachery (People v. Fallorina,
maltreatment of a child be habitual" to GR No. 137347, 4 March 2004). She is not
constitute child abuse. The wrongful acts liable for kidnapping with murder, the
penalized as "Child Abuse" under Rep. Act essence of which is the actual confinement
No. 7610 refers to the maltreatment of the or restraint of the victim or the deprivation
child, "whether habitual or not": this is of his liberty. In this case, the victim was not
expressly stated in Sec. 2(b) of the said deprived of liberty since he immediately
Law. died. The demand for ransom did not
208
covert the offense in to kidnapping with

Mrs. MNA should be liable for child abuse. murder. The defendant was well aware that
Page
the child would be suffocated to death in a

few moments after she left. The demand for SUGGESTED ANSWER
ransom is only a part of the diabolic No. Art. 247 of the Revised Penal
scheme of the defendant to murder the Code is not applicable.
child, to conceal his body and then demand Under the Revised Penal Code, for
money before the discovery of the cadaver Art. 247 to apply, the offender must catch
(People v. Lora, supra). his or her spouse in the act of committing
sexual intercourse with another person. In
Fely is not liable for murder as People of the Philippines v. Marciano
principal or accomplice. Since Fely did not Gonzales (G.R. No. 46310, 31 October
participate in the actual killing of the child, 1939), the Supreme Court held that to avail
she can only be held liable for murder as of the privilege under Art. 247, the accused
principal or accomplice on the basis of should surprise his wife in the very act of
conspiracy or community of design. But in sexual intercourse. Sexual intercourse
this case, there is neither conspiracy nor generally presupposes the penetration of
community of design to commit murder the mans sexual organ into that of a
since her criminal intention pertains to womans.
kidnapping for ransom. Moreover, her In this case, the paramour was of
participation of demanding ransom for the the same gender as the erring spouse. As
release of the child is not connected to such, there is legally, no sexual intercourse
murder. Neither is Fely liable for kidnapping to speak of, hence, Art. 247 is not
for ransom. Her criminal mind to assist Lina applicable.
in committing kidnapping for ransom is not
constitutive of a felony. Mens rea without b] Is Felipa liable for adultery for having
actus reus is not a crime. sexual relations with Alma? (2.5%)
ART.247 and 333 SUGGESTED ANSWER

No. Under Article 333 of the Revised
Jojo and Felipa are husband and wife. Penal Code, adultery is committed by any
Believing that his work as a lawyer is married woman who shall have sexual
sufficient to provide for the needs of their intercourse with a man not her husband,
family, Jojo convinced Felipa to be a stay Thus, Felipa in having homosexual
at- home mom and care for their children. intercourse with Alma, a woman, is not
One day, Jojo arrived home earlier than committing adultery.
usual and caught Felipa in the act of having
sexual intercourse with their female nanny, CRIMES AGAINST
Alma, in their matrimonial bed. In a fit of
rage, Jojo retrieved his revolver from inside PERSONAL LIBERTY AND
the bedroom cabinet and shot Alma, SECURITY AND SECURITY
immediately killing her.
ART.267
[a] Is Art. 247 (death or physical injuries
inflicted under exceptional circumstances) Angelino, a Filipino, is a transgender who
of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) underwent gender reassignment and had
209
applicable in this case given that the implants in different parts of her body. She
paramour was of the same gender as the changed her name to Angelina and was a
Page
erring spouse? (2.5%) (2016 BAR) finalist in the Miss Gay International. She
came back to the Philippines and while she October 5, 2011; People v. Larranaga,
was walking outside her home, she was 138874-75, February 3, 2004).
abducted by Max and Razzy who took her Max is liable for kidnapping with
to a house in the province. She was then homicide as an accomplice since he
placed in a room and Razzy forced her to concurred in the criminal design of Razzy
have sex with him at knife's point. After the in depriving Angelino his liberty and
act, it dawned upon Razzy that Angelina is supplied the former material aid in an
actually a male. Incensed, Razzy called efficacious way by helping him beat the
Max to help him beat Angelina. The latter.
beatings that Angelina received eventually
caused her death. What crime or crimes, if ART. 267 - KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS
any, were committed? Explain. (5%) (2016 ILLEGAL DETENTION; RELEASE OF
BAR) VICTIM, NOT ABSOLUTORY
SUGGESTED ANSWER
B. DAN, a private individual, kidnapped
Razzy is liable for kidnapping with CHU, a minor. On the second day, DAN
homicide. Abducting Angelino is not released CHU even before any criminal
forcible abduction since the victim in this information was filed against him. At the
crime must be a woman. Gender trial of his case, DAN raised the defense
reassignment will not make him a woman that he did not incur any criminal liability
within the meaning of Art. 342 of the RPC. since he released the child before the lapse
There is no showing, moreover, that at the of the 3-day period and before criminal
time of abduction is committed with lewd proceedings for kidnapping were instituted.
design; hence, his abduction constitutes
illegal detention. Since Angelino was killed Will DANS defense prosper? Reason
in the course of the detention, the crime briefly. (5%) (2004 Bar Question)
constitutes kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with homicide under Art. 267. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Having sexual intercourse with B. No. DAN's defense will not prosper.
Angelino is not rape through sexual Voluntary release by the offender of the
intercourse since the victim in this crime offended party in kidnapping is not
must be a woman. This act is not rape absolutory. Besides, such release is
through sexual assault either, Razzy did irrelevant and immaterial in this case
not insert his penis into the anal orifice or because the victim being a minor, the crime
mouth of Angelino or an instrument or committed is kidnapping and serious illegal
object into the latters anal orifice or genital detention under Art. 267, Revised Penal
orifice, hence this act constitutes acts of Code, to which such circumstance does not
lasciviousness under Art. 336. Since the apply. The circumstance may be
acts of lasciviousness is committed by appreciated only in the crime of Slight
reason or on occasion of kidnapping, it will Illegal Detention in Art. 268 Asistio v. San
be integrated into one and indivisible felony Diego 10 SCRA 673 [1964D]
of kidnapping with homicide (People v. De
210
Leon, GR No. 179943, June 26, 2009;

People v. Jugueta, GR No. 202124, April
Page
05, 2016; People v. Laog, GR No. 178321,

CRIMES AGAINST and pocketed the money. Due to the

neglect of Domingo, one of the horses was
PROPERTY stolen. Knowing that he will be blamed for
the loss, Domingo slaughtered the other
ART.315- Val, a Nigerian, set up a perfume horse, got the meat, and sold it to Pastor.
business in the Philippines. The investors He later reported to Hannibal that the two
would buy the raw materials at a low price horses were stolen.
from Val. The raw materials consisted of
powders, which the investors would mix [a] What crime or crimes, if any, did Tristan
with water and let stand until a gel was commit? Explain. (2.5%) (2016 BAR)
formed. Val made a written commitment to
the investors that he would buy back the gel SUGGESTED ANSWER
at a higher price, thus assuring the Tristan is liable for Estafa through
investors of a neat profit. When the Misappropriation under Art. 315 of the
amounts to be paid by Val to the investors RPC. He received the cows under
reached millions of pesos, he sold all the obligation involving the duty to return the
equipment of his perfume business, same thing deposited, and acquired legal
absconded with the money, and is nowhere or juridical possession in so doing, since
to be found. What crime or crimes were their transaction is a commodatum. Selling
committed, if any? Explain. (5%) (2016 the cows as if he owned it constitutes
BAR) misappropriation or conversion within the
contemplation of Art. 315.
SUGGESTED ANSWER [b] What crime or crimes, if any, were

committed by Domingo? Explain. (2.5%)
The crime committed in estafa
through false pretenses (Art. 315 par. 2(a)). SUGGESTED ANSWER
Val defrauded the investors by falsely
pretending to possess business or Domingo is liable for qualified theft
imaginary transactions. The fact that he under Art. 308 of the RPC. Although Tristan
sold all the equipment of his perfume received the horse with the consent of the
business, and absconded with the money owner, Hannibal, his possession is merely
when the amounts to be paid by him to the physical or de facto since the former is an
investors reached millions of pesos shows employee of the latter. Slaughtering the
that the transaction or his business is horse, which he physically possessed, and
imaginary, and he defrauded the victims. selling its meat to Pastor shall be
considered as taking without consent of the
owner with intent to gain, which constitutes
theft (Balerta v. People, GR No. 205144, 26
ART. 308 and 3015-Estafa- November 2014). Since the horse is
accessible to him, the theft is qualified by
Domingo is the caretaker of two (2) cows the circumstance of abuse of confidence
and two (2) horses owned by Hannibal. (Yangco v. People, GR No. 209373, 30
211
Hannibal told Domingo to lend the cows to July 2014).

Tristan on the condition that the latter will
give a goat to the former when the cows are
Page
returned. Instead, Tristan sold the cows

Further, Domingo committed the A. They committed the crime of

crime of violation of the Anti-Cattle Rustling attempted robbery with homicide with band
Law of 1974 (PD No. 533). Cattle rustling is as a generic aggravating circumstance.
the taking away by any means, method or Article 297 of the Revised Penal Code
scheme, without the consent of the provides that Attempted... robbery
owner/raiser, of large cattle, which includes committed under certain circumstances.
cows and horses, whether or not for profit When on the occasion of an attempted
or gain, or whether committed with or robbery a homicide is committed the
without violence against or intimidation of person guilty of such offenses shall be
any person or force upon things. It includes punished by reclusion temporal
the killing of large cattle, or taking its meat
or hide without the consent of the B. Robbery with homicide was
owner/raiser. committed by the malefactors. Article 297
of the Revised Penal Code provides that
Art. 297 Robbery with homicide Attempted and frustrated robbery
committed under certain circumstances.
A. An armed band tried to stop a When by reason...of an attempted or
passenger bus, and the driver who sensed frustrated robbery a homicide is committed
that the band might commit robbery, did not the person guilty of such offenses shall be
stop the bus but drove it faster. The punished by reclusion temporal. .
members of the band then fired at the bus,
killing one passenger who was hit in the C. The robber committed the crime of
head. robbery with homicide in violation of Article
B. As the malefactor were about to 297 of the Revised Penal Code which
enter the house of A, the latter hid himself provides that ... when ... on the occasion
inside the ceiling. Once inside the house, of an attempted robbery a homicide is
the malefactor took from As wife cash and committed the person guilty of such
pieces of jewelry. One of the malefactors offenses shall be punished by reclusion
stood on a table and fired his gun at the temporal.
ceiling. After they had left As wife called for
him and receiving no answer, she went up
the ceiling and found him already dead. Art 308: Who are liable for theft
What crime was committed? Explain. (1988
Bar Question) Fe is the manager of a rice mill in Bulacan.
C. In the course of robbery there was In order to support a gambling debt, Fe
confusion and in the exchange of shots made it appear that the rice mill was
between the robbers and the victims, one earning less than it actually was by writing
of the robbers happened to shoot one of his in a "talaan" or ledger a figure lower than
own companions. what was collected and paid by their
customers. Fe then pocketed the
What crime was committed? Explain. (1988 difference. What crime/s did Fe commit, if
Bar Question) any? Explain your answer. (2007 Bar
Question)
212
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page
The crimes committed by Fe are theft and CRIMES AGAINST

falsification of private document because
Fes possession of the proceeds of the rice CHASTITY
mill was only physical, not juridical,
possession, and having committed the
crimes with grave abuse of confidence, it is ART.336 in rel to RA 7610-
qualified theft. The falsification is a
separate crime from the theft because it Braulio invited Lulu, his 11-year old
was not committed as a necessary means stepdaughter, inside the master bedroom.
to commit the theft but resorted to only to He pulled out a knife and threatened her
hide or conceal the unlawful taking. with harm unless she submitted to his
desires. He was touching her chest and sex
organ when his wife caught him in the act.
Art 315: Swindling The prosecutor is unsure whether to
charge Braulio for acts of lasciviousness
Malo, a clerk of court of a trial court, under Art. 336 of the RPC; for lascivious
promised the accused in a drug case conduct under RA 7610 (Special Protection
pending before the court, that he would against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
convince the judge to acquit him for a Discrimination Act); or for rape under Art.
consideration of P5 million. The accused 266-A of the RPC. What is the crime
agreed and delivered the money, through committed? Explain. (5%) (2016 BAR)
his lawyer, to the clerk of court. The judge, The acts of Braulio of touching the
not knowing of the deal, proceeded to rule chest and sex organ of Lulu, who is under
on the evidence and convicted the 12 years of age, are merely acts of
accused. (2014 BAR) lasciviousness and not attempted rape
because intent to have sexual intercourse
b. Art 315: Malo was charged with is not clearly shown (People v. Banzuela,
estafa under Article 315 because he GR No. 202060,11 December 2013). To be
misrepresented that he had influence, held liable of attempted rape, it must be
when he actually had none. Is the charge shown that the erectile penis is in the
correct? position to penetrate (Cruz v. People GR
no. 166441, 8 October 2014) or the
Answer: offender actually commenced to force his
penis into the victims sexual organ (People
Yes, estafa is committed by any person v. Banzuela, supra).
who shall ask for money from another for The same acts of touching the chest
the alleged purpose of bribing a and sex organ of Lulu under psychological
government employee when in truth the coercion or influence of her stepfather,
offender intended to convert the money to Braulio constitutes sexual abuse under
his own personal use and benefit (Art. Sec. 5 (b) of RA No. 7610 (People v.
315(2)(c), RPC). Optana, GR No. 133922, 12 February
2001).
Since the requisites for acts of
213
lasciviousness under Art. 336 of the RPC

are met, in addition to the requisites for
sexual abuse under Sec. 5 of RA No. 7610,
Page
and the victim is under 12 years of age,

Braulio shall be prosecuted for acts of of the privilege under Art. 247, the accused
lasciviousness under the RPC but the should surprise his wife in the very act of
penalty imposable is that prescribed by RA sexual intercourse. Sexual intercourse
No. 7610 (Amployo v. People, GR No. generally presupposes the penetration of
157718, 26 April 2005). Under Sec. 5 (b) of the mans sexual organ into that of a
RA No. 7610, when the victim (child womans.
subjected to sexual abuse) is under 12
years of age, the perpetrators shall be In this case, the paramour was of
prosecuted (for acts of lasciviousness) the same gender as the erring spouse. As
under Art. 336 of the RPC, provided, that such, there is legally, no sexual intercourse
the penalty for lascivious conduct when the to speak of, hence, Art. 247 is not
victim is under 12 years of age shall be applicable.
reclusion temporal in its medium period.
b] Is Felipa liable for adultery for having
ART.247 and 333--Jojo and Felipa are sexual relations with Alma? (2.5%) (2016
husband and wife. Believing that his work BAR)
as a lawyer is sufficient to provide for the
needs of their family, Jojo convinced Felipa SUGGESTED ANSWER
to be a stay at- home mom and care for
their children. One day, Jojo arrived home No. Under Article 333 of the Revised
earlier than usual and caught Felipa in the Penal Code, adultery is committed by any
act of having sexual intercourse with their married woman who shall have sexual
female nanny, Alma, in their matrimonial intercourse with a man not her husband,
bed. In a fit of rage, Jojo retrieved his Thus, Felipa in having homosexual
revolver from inside the bedroom cabinet intercourse with Alma, a woman, is not
and shot Alma, immediately killing her. committing adultery.
[a] Is Art. 247 (death or physical injuries

inflicted under exceptional circumstances) CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL
of the Revised Penal Code (RPC)
applicable in this case given that the STATUS OF PERSONS
paramour was of the same gender as the
erring spouse? (2.5%) CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
SUGGESTED ANSWER ART.353-Libel-A is the president of the
corporate publisher of the daily tabloid,
No. Art. 247 of the Revised Penal Bulgar; B is the managing editor; and C is
Code is not applicable. the author/writer. In his column, Direct Hit,
C wrote about X, the head examiner of the
Under the Revised Penal Code, for BIR-RDO Manila as follows:
Art. 247 to apply, the offender must catch
his or her spouse in the act of committing "Itong si X ay talagang BUWAYA kaya ang
sexual intercourse with another person. In logo ng Lacoste T shirt niya ay napaka
214
People of the Philippines v. Marciano suwapang na buwaya. Ang nickname niya

Gonzales (G.R. No. 46310, 31 October ay si Atty. Buwaya. Ang PR niya ay 90% sa
Page
1939), the Supreme Court held that to avail bayad ng taxpayer at ang para sa RP ay
10% lang. Kaya ang baba ng collection ng reckless disregard of whether the same
RDO niya. Masyadong magnanakaw si X were false or not (Erwin Tulfo v. People,
at dapat tanggalin itong bundat na bundat GR No. 161032, 16 September 2008).
na buwaya na ito at napakalaki na ng A, president of the publishing
kurakot." company, B, managing editor, and C, writer
of the defamatory articles, are all liable for
A, B and C were charged with libel before libel. Under Art. 360 of the RPC, the
the RTC of Manila. The three (3) publisher, and editor of newspaper, shall
defendants argued that the article is within be responsible for the defamation
the ambit of qualified privileged contained therein to the same extent. The
communication; that there is no malice in law makes the publisher and editor liable
law and in fact; and, that defamatory for libel as if they were the author (Tulfo v.
comments on the acts of public officials People, supra).
which are related to the discharge of their
official duties do not constitute libel. ART.355-Crimes against honor - libel by
theatrical exhibition
Was the crime of libel committed? If so, are
A, B, and C all liable for the crime? Explain. In the course of proceeding during a so-
(5%) (2016 BAR) called public hearing held before a crowd
in a place open to the public, the leaders of
the meeting tried certain public officials
Yes. The crime of libel is committed. and thereafter sentenced them to death
Fair comment on acts of public officers by assassination or ambuscades.
related to the discharge of their duties is a
qualified privileged communication, hence, Are the leaders criminally liable? Decide
the accused can still be held liable for libel the case. (1988 Bar Question)
if actual malice is shown. In fair comment,
actual malice can be established by SUGGESTED ANSWER:
showing that comment was made with
knowledge that it was false or with reckless The leaders are criminally liable for the
disregard of whether it was false or not crime of libel by theatrical exhibition. Article
(Guingguing v. the Honorable Court of 355 of the Revised Penal Code provides:
Appeals, GR No. 128959, 30 September libel by means of writing or similar
2005). Journalists bear the burden of means. A libel committed by means of
writing responsibly when practicing their writing, printing lithography, engraving,
profession, even when writing about public radio, phornographs, painting, theatrical
figures or matters of public interest. The exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or
report made by C describing a lawyer in the any similar means, shall be punished by
Bureau of Customs as corrupt cannot be prision correctional
considered as fair and true since he did
not do research before making his ART.358-Crimes against honor - slander or
allegations, and it has been shown that slight defamation
these allegations were baseless. The
215
articles are not fair and true reports, but A. Romeo Cunanan, publisher of the
merely wild accusations. He has written Baguio Daily, was sued by Pedro Aguas for
Page
and published the subject articles with libel for the public publication of his picture
with the notice that: This is to inform the

public that Mr. Pedro Aguas whose picture During a seminar workshop attended by
appears above has ceased to be government employees from the Bureau of
connected with the Sincere Insurance Customs and the Bureau of Internal
Company as underwriter as of December Revenue, A, the speaker, in the course of
31, 1987. Any transaction entered into by his lecture, lamented the fact that a great
him after said date will not be honored. majority of those serving in said agencies
were utterly dishonest and corrupt. The
Is the publication defamatory? Explain following morning, the whole group of
briefly. (1988 Bar Question) employees in the two bureaus who
attended the seminar, as complainants,
B. For some time, bad blood had filed a criminal complaint against A for
existed beween the two families of Maria uttering what the group claimed to be
Razon and Judge Gadioma who were defamatory statements of the lecturer. In
neighbors. First, there w&s a boundary court, A filed a motion to quash the
dispute between them which was still information, reciting fully the above facts,
pending in court. Marias mother also filed on the ground that no crime were
an administrative complaint against the committed. If you were the judge, how
judge which was however dismissed. The would you resolve the motion? (2003 Bar
Razons also felt intimidated by the position Question)
and alleged influence of their neighbor.
Fanning fire to the situation was the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
practice of the Gadiomas of throwing
garbage and animal excrement into the I would grant the motion to quash on the
Razons premises. In an explosion of ground that the facts charged do not
anger, Maria called Judge Gadioma land constitute an offense, since there is no
grabber'*, shameless, and hypocrite." definite person or persons dishonored. The
crime of libel or slander, is a crime against
What crime was committed by Maria, if honor such that the person or persons
any? Explain briefly. (1988 Bar Question) dishonored must be identifiable even by
innuendoes: otherwise the crime against
SUGGESTED ANSWER: honor is not committed. Moreover, A was
not making a malicious imputation, but
A. The publication is not defamatory merely stating an opinion; he was
because the element of intent to defame is delivering a lecture with no malice at all
absent. This is a mere announcement and during a seminar workshop. Malice being
does not carry any implication. inherently absent in the utterance, the
B. Maria committed the crime of statement is not actionable as defamatory.
slander or slight defamation only because
she was under the influence of anger. ART.355- Crimes against honor - Libel
When Maria called Judge Gadioma a
hypocrite and land grabber she imputed to In an interview aired on television, Cindee
him the commission of crimes. uttered defamatory statements against
216
Erika, a successful and reputable

ART. 355, 358-Crimes against honor businesswoman.
Page
Libel or slander
What crime or crimes did Cindee commit? Angelinas website is fake and that
Explain. (3%) (2005 Bar Question) Angelina is known to sell counterfeit items.
Angelina wants to file a case against
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Bettina. She seeks your advice. What
advice will you give her? (4%) (2010 Bar
Cindee committed libel. Defamation made Question)
in a television program is penalized as libel
under Art. 355 of the Revised Penal Code. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Televison falls under similar means" in the
enumeration as radio phonograph, I will advise Angelina to file a criminal case
theatrical exhibition, cinematographic of libel against Bettina because the
exhibition, or any similar means" in said imputations made by Bettina is libelous.
Article. [People v. Casten, et al.t CJL G.R. Whether the imputation of a defect, status,
No. 07924 - CR., Dec. 13, 1974) or condition is real or imaginary, if it publicly
tends to discredit, dishonor or place in
ART.355-Crimes against honor Proof of contempt or ridicule a particular person
truth in the crime of libel who is identified, the imputation is
presumed by law to be malicious and thus
TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the penalized as libel under Art 355 of the
statement is true, or FALSE if the Revised Penal Code.
statement is false. Explain your answer in
not more than two (2) sentences. (5%) Moreover, if Bettina is engaged in similar
(2009 Bar Question) line of trade, her statement against the
goods sold by Angelina may constitute a
In the crime of libel, truth is an absolute violation of the law on Unfair Competition
defense. (Rep. Act No. 8291.)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: ART.358-Crimes against honor - grave oral

defamation; light slander
False. Article 361 of the RPC provides that
proof of truth shall be admissible in libel Lando and Marco are candidates in the
cases only if the same imputes a crime or local elections. In his speeches Lando
is made against a public officer with respect attacked his opponent Marco alleging that
to facts related to the discharge of their he is the son of Nanding, a robber and a
official duties, and moreover must have thief who amassed his wealth through
been published with good motives and for shady deals. May Marco file a case against
justifiable ends. Hence, "truth" as a Lando for grave oral defamation? State
defense, on its own, is not enough. your reasons. (1990 Bar Question)
ART.355-Crimes against honor Libel by
means of writings or similar means Suppose Marco also delivered a speech
stating therein that he had charged Lando
Angeline maintains a website where of estafa through falsification in the
visitors can give their comments on the Tanodbayan so much so that since his
217
posted pictures of the goods she sells in (Lando's) integrity is doubtful he should not
her exclusive boutique. Bettina posted a be elected. May Marco also be held liable
Page
comment that the red Birkin bag shown in

for grave oral defamation? State your offended party. The individual defamed or
reasons. (1990 Bar Question) slandered was not singled out (People vs.
Uy Tioco, 32 Phil. 624).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ART.353-Crimes against honor Libel;
Marco cannot file a case for grave oral publication in the newspapers; broadcast
defamation. If at all, he may file a case for over the radio
light slander. In the case of People v.
Laroga (40 O.G. 123), it was held that A was nominated Secretary of a
defamation in a political meeting, when Department in the Executive Branch of the
feelings are running high and people could government. His nomination was thereafter
not think clearly, only amount to light submitted to the Commission on
slander. Appointments for confirmation. While the
Commission was considering the
No, Marco cannot be held liable for grave nomination, a group of concerned citizens
oral defamation considering that Lando caused to be published in the newspapers
was merely stating what appears in a public a full-page statement objecting to A's
record, referring to the exercise of a legal appointment. They alleged that A was a
right to file suit. Moreover, his statement drug dependent, that he had several
against Marco pertains to a person who is mistresses, and that he was corrupt, having
running for public office wherein a wider accepted bribes or favors from parties
latitude is given. transacting business in his previous office,
and therefore he was unfit for the position
ART.358-Crimes against honor - Oral to which he had been nominated. As a
defamation or slander result of the publication, the nomination
was not confirmed by the Commission on
Because of a pendency of a labor dispute, Appointments. The official sued the
two (2) belligerent labor unions had a concerned citizens and the newspapers for
confrontation in a picket line during which libel and damages on account of his non-
the President and the Secretary of one confirmation. How will you decide the
union shouted to the members and officers case? (3%) (2002 Bar Question)
of the rival union composed of men and
women, the following: SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Mga supot, mga walang bayag, mga kabit I will acquit the concerned citizens and the
ng Intsik, mga tuta, mga segunda mano." newspapers Involved, from the crime of
libel, because obviously they made the
Are the President and the Secretary of said denunciation out of a moral or social duty
union liable for oral defamation/slander? and thus there is absence of malice.
Explain.
Since A was a candidate for a very
SUGGESTED ANSWER: important public position of a Department
Secretary, his moral, mental and physical
218
No. The President and the Secretary of the fitness for the public trust in such position
Union are not liable for oral defamation or becomes a public concern as the interest of
Page
slander because there is no identity of the the public is at stake. It is pursuant to such
concern that the denunciation was made; Office a complaint for slander by deed
hence, bereft of malice. against Maria. After preliminary
investigation, the Fiscal forgot all about the
If defamatory imputations are made not by case until the 179th day, which was a
publication in the newspapers but by Saturday, from the commission of the
broadcast over the radio, do they constitute crime. Since the following day was a
libel? Why? (2%) (2002 Bar Question) Sunday, the fiscal filed the information in
court on Monday, the 181st day from the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: commission of the crime. After trial, the
Judge convicted Maria. She engaged
Yes, because libel may be committed by another lawyer who on appeal asserted
radio broadcast Article 355 of the Revised that the crime of slander by deed had
Penal Code punishes libel committed by prescribed because it was filed in court one
means, among others, of radio broadcast, day after the six-month period of
Inasmuch as the broadcast made by radio prescription under Art. 90 of the Revised
is public and may be defamatory. Penal Code. The Fiscal argued that since
ART.358-Crimes against honor - Slander the 180th day fell on a Sunday, he could file
the information the following Monday. He
Distinguish clearly but briefly: (10%) (2004 also said that, in any event, Maria waived
Bar Question) Between oral defamation the defense of prescription because she
and criminal conversation. did not raise it during the trial of case.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Decide the case. (1987 Bar Question)
Oral defamation, known as slander, is a SUGGESTED ANSWER:

malicious imputation of any act, omission,
condition or circumstance against a The crime of slander by deed has already
person, done orally in public, tending to prescribed as it was tiled one day after the
cause dishonor, discredit, contempt, six month period of prescription. The rule is
embarrassment or ridicule to the latter. This if the last day of the period of prescription
is a crime against honor penalized in Art. of a crime falls on a Sunday, as in the
358 of the Revised Penal Code. problem, the information cannot be filed on
the next working day, which is Monday as
Criminal conversation. The term is used in that will lengthen the period of prescription,
making a polite reference to sexual which will not be favorable to the accused.
intercourse as in certain crimes, like rape, (Japdiangco vs. Bartolome 122 SCRA 713)
seduction and adultery. It has no definite The contention of the Fiscal that Maria
concept as a crime waived the defense of prescription because
ART.359-Crimes against honor - slander she did not raise it during the trial of die
by deed case is untenable. It has already been
settled that prescription, although not
Maria called Lydia names and slapped her raised in the trial may be invoked on
at the dance floor in the presence of many appeal. (People vs. Balagtas 105 Phil.
219
people because she suspected that Lydia 1362; People vs. Castro 95 Phil 462).
was flirting with her boyfriend. The
following day, Lydia filed with the Fiscals
Page
QUASI-OFFENSES danger to the discharge of the firearm is not

ART. 365-Criminal negligence - Simple clearly manifest, thus considered as simple
Negligence Resulting in Less Serious imprudence only. The crime committed is
Physical Injuries; Simple Imprudence Simple Imprudence Resulting In Less
Resulting in Less Serious Physical Injuries; Serious Physical Injuries, since the
Reckless imprudence resulting in less physical injuries required only twelve (12)
serious physical injuries days of medical attention.
During a concert of Gary V., and in order to

prevent the crowd from rushing to the ART. 365-Criminal negligence Reckless
stage, Rafael Padilla (a security guard) imprudence resulting in homicide
pointed his gun at the onrush of people.
When the crowd still pushed forward, Eddie brought his son Randy to a local
Rafael fired his gun into the air to scare faithhealer known as "Mother Himala." He
them off. However, the bullet hit one of the was diagnosed by the faithhealer as being
metal roof supports, ricocheted and then hit possessed by an evil spirit. Eddie
one of the stage crew members, causing thereupon authorized the conduct of a
injuries which resulted in the latter's "treatment" calculated to drive the "spirit"
confinement in a hospital for twelve days. from the boy's body. Unfortunately, the
procedure conducted resulted in the boy's
What crime/ s did Rafael commit? Explain death.
your answer (2007 Bar Question)
The faithhealer and three others who were
SUGGESTED ANSWER: part of the healing ritual were charged with
murder and convicted by the lower court. If
The crime committed by Rafael is Simple you were the appellate court Justice, would
Negligence Resulting in Less Serious you sustain the conviction upon appeal?
Physical Injuries. Rafael is a security guard Explain your answer.
and was on duty when he discharged the
firearm. The discharge of the firearm was SUGGESTED ANSWER:
not calculated to cause alarm or danger but
simply to ward off the unruly crowd which No, the conviction for murder should not be
persisted in pushing forward, thereby sustained, because there is no indication
challenging the duty he was to fulfill there. that the accused acted with intent to kill
The discharge of the firearm, therefore, Randy. On the contrary, the facts show that
should neither constitute a crime of Alarms the accused acted to "treat" the victim in a
and Scandal under Art. 155 of the Revised way of driving the evil spirit which was
Penal Code nor may such discharge believed to have "possessed" him.
amount to a crime of Illegal Discharge of Considering that proximate cause of the
Firearms under Art. 254 of the Code since victim's death was the healing ritual done
it was not directed towards a particular by the accused which is, not recognized in
person when the firearm was discharged. law as legitimate, the accused are
criminally liable for the victim's death. As
220
However, the physical injuries resulting they may have overdone the "healing ritual"
from the discharge of the firearm betrays a they conducted on the victim's body,
Page
lack of precaution in a situation where the causing the latter's death, although the
intent to kill was absent, the accused may along smoothly. However, on the fifth year
be held criminally liable for Reckless onwards, they would often quarrel when
Imprudence Resulting in Homicide. Romeo comes home drunk. The quarrels
became increasingly violent, marked by
ART. 365-Criminal negligence Reckless quiet periods when Julia would leave the
imprudence resulting in homicide conjugal dwelling. During these times of
quiet, Romeo would "court" Julia with
Olimpio caught a cold and was running a flowers and chocolate and convince her to
fever. His doctor prescribed paracetamol. return home, telling her that he could not
Olimpio went to a drug store with the live without her; or Romeo would ask Julia
prescription, and the pharmacist sold him to forgive him, which she did, believing that
three (3) tablets. Upon arriving home, he if she humbled herself, Romeo would
took a tablet. One hour later, he had a change. After a month of marital bliss,
seizure and died. The autopsy showed that Romeo would return to his drinking habit
the tablet he had taken was not and the quarrel would start again, verbally
paracetamol but a pill to which he was at first, until it would escalate to physical
allergic. The pharmacist was charged with violence.
murder. Is the charge proper? If not, what
should it be? Explain. (6%) (2008 Bar One night, Romeo came home drunk and
Question) went straight to bed. Fearing the onset of
another violent fight, Julia stabbed Romeo
SUGGESTED ANSWER: while he was asleep. A week later, their
neighbors discovered Romeo's rotting
The pharmacist committed a serious corpse on the marital bed. Julia and the
mistake. But the mistake could not children were nowhere to be found. Julia
characterize the death as murder because was charged with parricide. She asserted
the specific intent to kill the victim was "battered woman's syndrome" as her
absent. The pharmacist could not be liable defense.
for murder.
[a] Explain the "cycle of violence."
The pharmacist should be charged instead (2.5%)(2016 BAR)
with reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide (Art. 365, RPC) because The battered woman syndrome is
Olimpio's death was the result of the characterized by the so-called cycle of
pharmacist's serious negligence or violence, which has three phases: (1) the
imprudence as there is no specific intent to tension building phase; (2) the acute
kill and no requisite qualifying battering incident; and (3) the tranquil,
circumstance. loving (or, at least, nonviolent) phase.
During the tension-building phase,

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS minor battering occurs- it could be verbal or
slight physical abuse or another form of
SPECIAL LAW-R.A 9262
hostile behavior. The woman tries to pacify
221
the batterer through a kind, nurturing

Romeo and Julia have been married for
behavior; or by simply staying out of his
twelve (12) years and had two (2) children.
Page
way. The acute battering incident is

The first few years of their marriage went
characterized by brutality, destructiveness of another violent fight and honestly

and, sometimes, death. The battered believed the need to defend herself even if
woman deems this incident as Romeo had not commenced an unlawful
unpredictable, yet also inevitable. During aggression. Even in the absence of
this phase, she has no control; only the unlawful aggression, however, Battered
batterer may put an end to the violence. Woman Syndrome is a defense. Under
The final phase of the cycle of violence Sec. 27 of RA No. 9262, Battered Woman
begins when the acute battering incident Syndrome is a defense notwithstanding the
ends. During this tranquil period, the couple absence of any of the elements for
experience profound relief. justifying circumstances of self-defense
under the RPC such as unlawful
[b] Is Julia's "battered woman's syndrome" aggression (Sec. 26 of RA No. 9262).
defense meritorious? Explain. (2.5%)
Yes. Under Sec. 3 (c) of RA No. SPECIAL LAW- RA 9165-

9262, Battered Woman Syndrome refers
to a scientifically defined pattern of Dimas was arrested after a valid buy-bust
psychological and behavioral symptoms operation. Macario, the policeman who
found in women living in battering acted as poseur-buyer, inventoried and
relationships as a result of cumulative photographed ten (10) sachets of shabu in
abuse. Under Sec. 3 (b), Battery refers to the presence of a barangay tanod. The
an act of inflicting physical harm upon the inventory was signed by Macario and
woman or her child resulting in physical the tanod, but Dimas refused to sign. As
and psychological or emotional distress Macario was stricken with flu the day after,
(Sec. 3). he was able to surrender the sachets to the
PNP Crime Laboratory only after four (4)
In sum, the defense of Battered days. During pre-trial, the counsel de
Woman Syndrome can be invoked if the oficio of Dimas stipulated that the
woman in a marital relationship with the substance contained in the sachets
victim is subjected to cumulative abuse or examined by the forensic chemist is in fact
battery involving the infliction of physical methamphetamine hydrochloride
harm resulting to the physical and or shabu. Dimas was convicted of violating
psychological or emotional distress. Section 5 of RA 9165. On appeal, Dimas
Cumulative means resulting from questioned the admissibility of the
successive addition. In sum, there must be evidence because Macario failed to
at least two battering episodes between observe the requisite "chain of custody" of
the accused and her intimate partner and the alleged "shabu" seized from him. On
such final episode produced in the battered behalf of the State, the Solicitor General
persons mind an actual fear of an claimed that despite non-compliance with
imminent harm from her batterer and an some requirements, the prosecution was
honest belief that she needed to use force able to show that the integrity of the
in order to save her life (People v. Genosa, substance was preserved. Moreover, even
GR No. 135981, 15 January 2004). with some deviations from the
222
requirements, the counsel of Dimas

In this case, because of the stipulated that the substance seized from
Page
battering episodes, Julia, feared the onset

Dimas was shabu so that the conviction elected public official who shall be required
should be affirmed. to sign the copies of the inventory and be
given a copy thereof and within twenty-four
[a] What is the "chain of custody" (24) hours upon such confiscation, the drug
requirement in drug offenses? (2.5%) shall be submitted to the PDEA Forensic
(2016 BAR) Laboratory for examination.
[b] Rule on the contention of the State.
(2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
SUGGESTED ANSWER
To establish the chain of custody,
the prosecution must show the movements The contention of the State is
of the dangerous drugs from its meritorious. Macario, the policeman failed
confiscation up to its presentation in court. to comply with Sec. 21 of RA No. 9165
The purpose of establishing the chain of since the inventory and photograph of the
custody is to ensure the integrity of the drugs was only made in the presence of
corpus delicti (People v. Magat, GR No. barangay tanod and the same was not
179939, 29 September 2008). The submitted to the PNP Crime Laboratory
following links that must be established in within 24 hours. The rule is settled that
the chain of custody in a buy-bust situation failure to strictly comply with Sec. 21(1),
are: first, the seizure and marking, if Article II of RA No. 9165 does not
practicable, of the illegal drug recovered necessarily render an accuseds arrest
from the accused by the apprehending illegal or the items seized or confiscated
officer; second, the turnover of the illegal from him inadmissible. The most important
drug seized by the apprehending officer to factor is the preservation of the integrity
the investigating officer; third, the turnover and evidentiary value of the seized item.
by the investigating officer of the illegal Moreover, the issue of non-compliance
drug to the forensic chemist for laboratory with Sec. 21 of RA No. 9165 cannot be
examination; and fourth, the turnover and raised for the first time on appeal (People
submission of the marked illegal drug v. Badilla, GR No. 218578, August 31,
seized from the forensic chemist to the 2016).
court (People v. Kamad, GR No. 174198,
29 January 2010).
SPECIAL LAW RA 6805; Instances of
To establish the first link in the chain legal use of an alias by a Filipino citizen
of custody, and that is the seizure of the
drug from the accused, the prosecution When can a Filipino citizen residing in this
must comply with Sec. 21 of RA No. 9165, country use an alias legally? Give 3
which requires that the apprehending instances. 2.5% (2006 Bar Question)
officer after the confiscation of drug must
immediately physically inventory and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
photograph the same in the presence of the
accused or the person from whom such Yes, an alias may be legally used -
223
items were confiscated, or his

representative or counsel, a representative a. as a pseudonym in cinema and
Page
from the media and the DOJ, and any other entertainment field;
b. as a pen name in literary with the use of explosives; hence criminal

composition or work; intent is essential. The claim by the fish
c. as a pseudonym in television and vendors that they only bought the fish from
radio broadcasting (Ursua v. CA, 256 fishing boats which they duly identified",
SCRA 147 11986); RA 6085, Secs. 1 & 2; renders their possession of such fish
innocent unless the prosecution could
prove that they have knowledge that
SPECIAL LAW PD 704 punishable explosives were used in catching such fish,
acts and the accused had knowledge thereof.
Upon a laboratory examination of the fish

seized by the police and agents of the SPECIAL LAW- Pres. Decree Nos. 704
Fisheries Commission, it was indubitably and 1058 - Fishing with the use of
determined that the fish they were selling explosives; punishable acts
were caught with the use of explosives.
Accordingly, the three vendors were Two (2) Philippine National Police (PNP)
criminally charged with the violation of officers, X and Y, on board on motorboat
Section 33 of P.D. 704 which makes it with Z, a civilian as motorman, arrested A
unlawful for any person to knowingly and B who were in a banca, for dynamite
possess, deal in, or sell for profit any fish fishing. The latters banca was towed
which have been illegally caught. During towards the municipality. On the way, the
the trial, the three vendors claimed that PNP motorboat was intercepted by a third
they bought the fish from a fishing boat banca whose occupants, C, D. and E, tried
which they duly identified. The prosecution to negotiate for the release of A and B and
however claimed that the three vendors their banca. The PNP officers refused and
should nevertheless be held liable for the instead shouted at C, D, and E that they are
offense as they were the ones caught in all under arrest. Thereupon, C, D, and E
possession of the fish illegally caught. simultaneously threw dynamite sticks at the
PNP motorboats. The first explosion killed
On the basis of the above facts, if you were X. A and B also reacted by throwing
the judge, would you convict the three fish dynamite at the PNP motorboat: its
vendors? Explain. (1996 Bar Question) explosion killed Y and Z.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: What crime or crimes did A, B, C, D and E

commit? (1991 Bar Question)
No, I would not convict the three fish
vendors if I were the judge. Mere SUGGESTED ANSWER:
possession of such fish without knowledge
of the fact that the same were caught with Firstly, A and B committed a violation of
the use of explosives does not by itself Pres. Decree No. 534 (on illegal fishing) as
render the seller-possessor criminally liable amended by Pres. Decree Nos. 704 and
under P.D. 704. Although the act penalized 1058. Fishing with the use of explosives is
in said Decree may be a malum prohibitum, punishable under said Decree.
224
the law punishes the possession, dealing in

or selling of such fish only when
Page
knowingly" done that the fish were caught

SPECIAL LAW Act Defining Certain statement is false. Explain your answer in
Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or not more than two (2) sentences. (5%)
Under Custodial Investigation (RA 7438) (2009 Bar Question)
Rights which can be violated
[e] For a person who transacts an
Upon complaint of Baby, NBI agent Cesar instrument representing the proceeds of a
invited estafador to the NBI headquarters covered unlawful activity to be liable under
where Cesar showed to Estafador the the Anti-Money Laundering Act (R.A. 9160,
sworn complaint of Baby for estafa. He as amended), it must be shown that he has
thereafter began questioning Estafador knowledge of the identities of the culprits
who told him that he (Estafador) is willing to involved in the commission of the predicate
submit to an Investigation since he has crimes.
nothing to hide. Thereupon, Cesar got a
typewriter and took down the statement of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Estafador without informing the latter that
he has a right to remain silent and to secure False. There is nothing in the law which
the services of a lawyer. After the requires that the accused must know the
statement was signed by Estafador, his identities of the culprits involved in the
fiancee, Fadora, came and asked Cesar to commission of the predicate crimes. To
allow her to confer with Estafador but establish liability under RA 9160, it is
Cesar refused saying that after all. Fadora sufficient that proceeds of an unlawful
is not a lawyer, and that Estafador activity are transacted, making them
voluntarily gave his statement. appear to have originated from legitimate
sources.
If you were the lawyer of Estafador, with
what crime would you charge the NBI
agent? Explain. .(1993 Bar Question) Special Law. under Republic Act (RA)
No. 9160, as amended (Anti- Money
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Laundering Act)
Violation of RA 7438, defining rights of There being probable cause to believe that
persons arrested. certain deposits and investments in a bank
are related to an unlawful activity of
1. Failure to inform him of his right to smuggling by Alessandro as defined under
counsel and to remain silent (Sec. 4, par. Republic Act (RA) No. 9160, as amended
1); and (Anti- Money Laundering Act) an
2. Prevent an immediate member of application for an order to allow inquiry into
his family which includes fiancee, to confer his deposit was filed with the Regional Trial
with Estafador (Sec. 4(b) Court.
After hearing the application, the court

Special law. RA 9160: Anti-Money granted the application and issued a freeze
Laundering Act order.
225
TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the Pass upon the correctness of the courts
Page
statement is true, or FALSE if the order. Explain. (3%) (2010 Bar Question)
opened an account in the Mayors name

SUGGESTED ANSWER: and regularly deposited various amounts
ranging from P500,000.00 to PI Million.
The freeze order issued by the Regional From this account, the Mayor withdrew and
Trial Court is not correct, because used the money for constructing feeder
jurisdiction to issue said freeze order is now roads, barangay clinics, repairing schools
vested with the Court of Appeals under Rep and for all other municipal projects. It was
Act 9194, amending the Anti-Money subsequently discovered that Don Gabito
Laundering Act (Rep. Act No. 9160). The was actually a jueteng operator and the
Regional Trial Court is without jurisdiction amounts he deposited were proceeds from
to issue a freeze order of the money his jueteng operations.
involved.
What crime/s were committed? Who are
Define Money laundering. What are the criminally liable? Explain. (6%)(2005 Bar
three (3) stages in money laundering? (3%) Question)
(2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1) Money laundering under Rep. Act 9160
Money Laundering is the process by which (Anti- Money Laundering Act of 2001), as
a person conceals the existence of amended by Rep. Act 9194, since the
unlawfully obtained money and makes it money proceeds from an unlawful activity,
appear to have originated from lawful i.e., jueteng are transacted as though
sources. The intention behind such a coming from a legitimate source; (crime
transaction is to hide the beneficial owner committed by Don Gabito)
of said funds and allows criminal
organizations or criminals to enjoy 1) Money laundering under the same laws
proceeds of such criminal activities. above- mentioned if after learning that the
money deposited in his account were
The three (3) stages in money laundering proceeds of jueteng, he still continued
are: using said funds; (crime committed by the
Mayor)
1. Placement/ infusion or the physical
disposal of criminal proceeds
2. Layering or the separation of the RA3019, PD 1829: During a PNP buy-bust
criminal proceeds from their source by operation, Cao Shih was arrested for
creating layers of financial transactions to selling 20 grams of methamphetamine
disguise such proceeds as legitimate and hydrochloride (shabu) to a poseur-buyer.
avoid audit trail; and Cao Shih, through an intermediary, paid
3. Integration or the provision of Patrick, the Evidence Custodian of the PNP
apparent legitimacy to the criminal Forensic Chemistry Section, the Evidence
proceeds. Custodian of the PNP Forensic Chemistry
Section, the amount of P500.000.00 in
226
consideration for the destruction by Patrick

Don Gabito, a philanthropist, offered to of the drug. Patrick managed to destroy the
Page
fund several projects of the Mayor. He drug.

b) The Comprehensive Dangerous

State with reasons whether Patrick Drugs Act of 2002 (R.A. No. 9165) (i)
committed the following crimes: Punishable acts
(ii) Who are liable (iii) Attempt or
Direct bribery; conspiracy, effect on liability (iv) Immunity
Indirect bribery; from prosecution and punishment (v)
Section 3(e) of RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Custody and disposition of confiscated,
Corrupt Practices Act); Obstruction of seized and/or surrendered dangerous
Justice under PD 1829; (7%) (2005 Bar drugs (Section 21, R.A. No. 9165)
Question)
c) Implementing Rules and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Regulations (IRR) of R.A. No. 9165
Patrick committed the crimes of direct

bribery under Article 210 of the Revised Special penal law - Crimes relative to
Penal Code, Violation of Section 3(e) of the opium and other prohibited drugs - Rep.
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. Act No. 9165, the Comprehensive
3019), and Obstruction of Justice under Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002
Section 1(b) of PD 1829.
MNO, who is 30 years old, was charged as
Direct bribery was committed by Patrick a drug pusher under the Comprehensive
when, for a consideration of P500.000.00, Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. During pre-
he committed a violation ofPD 1829 by trial, he offered to plead guilty to the lesser
destroying the drugs which were evidence offense concerning use of dangerous
entrusted to him in his official capacity. drugs.
Indirect bribery is not committed, because Should the Judge allow MNOs plea to the
he received the P500,000.00 as a lesser offense? Explain briefly. (5%)
consideration for destroying the evidence (2004 Bar Question)
against the offender, which was under his
official custody as a public officer. The SUGGESTED ANSWER:
money was not delivered to him simply as
a gift or present by reason of his public No, the Judge should not allow MNOs plea
office. to a lesser offense, because
pleabargaining in prosecutions of drug-
Patrick also violated Section 3(e), R.A. related cases is no longer allowed by Rep.
3019 causing undue injury to the Act No. 9165, the Comprehensive
government through evident bad faith, Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, regardless
giving unwarranted benefit to the offender of the imposable penalty.
by destroying evidence of a crime.
Obstruction of justice under Section 1 (b) of Obie Juan is suspected to have in his
P.D. 1829 is committed by destroying possession an unspecified amount of
227
evidence intended to be used in official methamphetamlne hydrochloride or

proceedings in criminal case. shabu". An entrapment operation was
Page
conducted by police officers, resulting in his

arrest following the discovery of 100 grams Ong arrived at the airport, the group
of the said dangerous drug in his arrested him and seized his attache case.
possession. He was subjected to a drug Upon inspection inside the Immigration
test and was found positive for the use of holding area, the attache case yielded 5
marijuana, another dangerous drug. He plastic bags of heroin weighing 500 grams.
was subsequently charged with two crimes: Chief Inspector Gamboa took the attache
Violation of Section 11, Article II of RA 9165 case and boarded him in an unmarked car
for the possession of shabu" and violation driven by P03 Pepito Lorbes. On the way to
of Section 15, Article II of RA 9165 for the Camp Crame and upon nearing White
use of marijuana. Plains comer Edsa. Chief Inspector
Gamboa ordered P03 Lorbes to stop the
A. Are the charges proper? Explain. car. They brought out the drugs from the
B. So as not to be sentenced to death, case in the trunk and got 3 plastic sacks of
Obie Juan offers to plead guilty to a lesser heroin. They then told Ong to alight from
offense. Can he do so? Why? (5%) (2005 the car. Ong left with the 2 remaining plastic
Bar Question) sacks of heroin. Chief Inspector Gamboa
advised him to keep silent and go home
SUGGESTED ANSWER: which the latter did. Unknown to them, an
NBI team of agents had been following
A. The charge of possession of shabu them and witnessed the transaction. They
is proper as the mere possession of such arrested Chief Inspector Gamboa and P03
drug is punishable, but the charge of use of Lorbes. Meanwhile, another NBI team
marijuana is not proper as Section 15 of followed
Rep. Act 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Ong and likewise arrested him. All of them
Drugs Act of 2002) expressly excludes were later charged
penalties for use of dangerous drugs
when the person tested is also found to What are their respective criminal
have in possession such quantity of any liabilities? 5% (2006 Bar Question)
dangerous drug" provided for in Section 11
of such Act. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B. No, because Section 23 of R.A. The two police officers are criminally liable
9165 expressly provides that "Any person for violation of Sec. 27, R.A. 9165 of the
charged under any provision of this Act same law for misappropriation and failure
regardless of the imposable penalty shall to account for the confiscated or seized
not be allowed to avail of the provision on dangerous drugs.
plea-bargaining. For this reason, Obie
Juan cannot be allowed to plead guilty to a On the other hand, Dante Ong is criminally
lesser offense. liable for the illegal importation or bringing
into the Philippines of the dangerous drugs.
(Article 11, Sec. 4, RA 9165)
After receiving a reliable information that
Dante Ong, a notorious drug smuggler,
228
was arriving on PAL Flight No. PR181, After receiving a reliable information that
PNP Chief Inspector Samuel Gamboa Dante Ong, a notorious drug smuggler,
Page
formed a group of anti-drug agents. When was arriving on PAL Flight No. PR181,
PNP Chief Inspector Samuel Gamboa order to prevent the arrest, prosecution and
formed a group of anti-drug agents. When conviction of the violator.
Ong arrived at the airport, the group
arrested him and seized his attache case.
Upon inspection inside the Immigration Tuburcio asked Anastacio to join their
holding area, the attache case yielded 5 group for a "session". Thinking that it was
plastic bags of heroin weighing 500 grams. for a mahjong session Anastacio agreed.
Chief Inspector Gamboa took the attache Upon reaching Tiburcio's house, Anastacic
case and boarded him in an unmarked car discovered that it was actually a shabu
driven by P03 Pepito Lorbes. On the way to session. At that precise time, the place was
Camp Crame and upon nearing White raided by the police, and Anastacio was
Plains comer Edsa. Chief Inspector among those arrested.
Gamboa ordered P03 Lorbes to stop the
car. They brought out the drugs from the What crime can Anastacio be charged with,
case in the trunk and got 3 plastic sacks of if any? Explain your answer.
heroin. They then told Ong to alight from (2007 Bar Question)
the car. Ong left with the 2 remaining plastic
sacks of heroin. Chief Inspector Gamboa SUGGESTED ANSWER:
advised him to keep silent and go home
which the latter did. Unknown to them, an Anastacio may not be charged of any
NBI team of agents had been following crime.
them and witnessed the transaction. They
arrested Chief Inspector Gamboa and P03 Sec. 7 of Rep. Act. 9165 on the
Lorbes. Meanwhile, another NBI team Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs of 2002
followed punishes employees and visitors of a den,
Ong and likewise arrested him. All of them dive or resort where dangerous drugs are
were later charged used in any form. But for a visitor of such
place to commit the crime, it is a requisite
What are their respective criminal that he "is aware of the nature of the place
liabilities? 5% (2006 Bar Question) as such and shall knowingly visit the
same." These requisites are absent in the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: facts given.
Chief Inspector Samuel Gamboa and P03

Pepito Lorbes incur criminal liability under Special law Anti-Graft and Corrupt
Art. 11, Sec. 4 last par., R.A. No. 9165, Practices Act (RA 3019, as amended)
otherwise known as the Comprehensive Preventive suspension
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. They acted
as protector/coddler to the unlawful A month after the arraignment of Brad Kit
bringing into the Philippines of the Commissioner of the Housing and Land
dangerous drugs. A protector/ coddler Use Regulatory Board, who was charged
refers to any person who uses his power or with violation of Section 3 (h) of Republic
position in, inter alia, facilitating the escape Act 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
229
of any person whom he knows or believes, Act) before the Sandiganbayan, the Office
has violated the Dangerous Drugs Law, in of the Special Prosecutor filed a Motion to
Page
Suspend Accused Pendente Lite pursuant

to Section 13 of the Anti-Graft Law. The nevertheless convicted for an offense

Court granted the motion and suspended punished by the Revised Penal Code
accused Brad Kit for a period of 90 days.
Accused assailed the constitutional validity Mr. Carlos Gabisi, a customs guard, and
of the suspension order on the ground that Mr. Rico Yto, a private individual, went to
it partakes of a penalty before judgment of the office of Mr. Diether Ocuarto, a customs
conviction is reached and is thus violative broker, and represented themselves as
of his constitutional right to be presumed agents of Moonglow Commercial Trading,
innocent. He also claimed that this an importer of childrens clothes and toys.
provision of the law on suspension Mr. Gabisi and Mr. Yto engaged Mr.
pendente lite applies only to electiye Ocuarto to prepare and file with the Bureau
officials and not to appointed ones like him. of Customs the necessary Import Entiy and
Rule with reasons. (5%) (2000 Bar Internal Revenue Declaration covering
Question)
Moonglows shipment Mr. Gabisi and Mr.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yto submitted to Mr. Ocuarto a packing list,
a commercial invoice, a bill of lading and a
The suspension order does not partake of Sworn Import Duty Declaration which
a penalty and is thus not violative of Brad declared the shipment as childrens toys,
Kit's constitutional right to be presumed the taxes and duties of which were
innocent. Under the law, the accused computed at P60,000,00. Mr. Ocuarto filed
public officers shall be suspended from the aforementioned documents with the
office while the criminal prosecution is Manila International Container Port
pending in court (Sec. 13, R.A. 3019). Such However, before the shipment was
preventive suspension is mandatory to released, a spot check was conducted by
prevent the accused from hampering the Customs Senior Agent James Bandldo,
normal course of the investigation (Rios vs. who discovered that the contents of the van
Sandiganbayan, 279SCRA 581J1997): (shipment) were not childrens toys as
Bunye vs. Escareal 226 SCRA 332 declared in the shipping documents but
[19931). 1.000 units of video cassette recorders with
taxes and duties computed at
Neither is there merit in Brad Kit's claim that P600,000.00. A hold order and warrant of
the provision on suspension pendente lite seizure and detention were then issued by
applies only to elective officials and not to the District Collector of Customs. Further
appointed ones like him. It applies to all investigation showed that Moonglow is
public officials indicted upon a valid non-existent. Consequently, Mr. Gabisi and
information under R. A. No. 3019, whether Mr. Yto were charged with and convicted
they be appointive or elective officials; or for violation of Section 3(e) of RA. 3019
permanent or temporary employees, or which makes it unlawful among others, for
pertaining to the career or non-career public officers to cause any undue injuiy to
service (Segovia vs. Sandiganbayan, 288 any party, including the Government, in the
SCRA 328 [1998]). discharge of official functions through
manifest partiality, evident bad faith or
230
Special law RA 3019 - Attempted or gross inexcusable negligence. In their

frustrated stage of the violation charged is motion for reconsideration, the accused
Page
not punishable, but the accused be alleged that the decision was erroneous
because the crime was not consummated amounts he deposited were proceeds from
but was only at an attempted stage, and his jueteng operations.
that in fact the Government did not suffer
any undue injury. What crime/s were committed? Who are
criminally liable? Explain. (6%)(2005 Bar
A. Is the contention of both accused Question)
correct? Explain.(3%) (2000 Bar Question)
B. Art. 315: Assuming that the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
attempted or frustrated stage of the
violation charged is not punishable, may 4. Corruption of public officials under
the accused be nevertheless convicted for Article 212 of the Revised Penal Code for
an offense punished by the Revised Penal having given the amounts that were
Code under the facts of the case? Explain. deposited in an account which he opened
(3%) (2000 Bar Question) in the Mayors name for no reason but the
public position or office held by the Mayor;
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (crime committed by Don Gabito)
A. Yes, the contention of the accused 5. Indirect Bribery for accepting such
that the crime was not consummated is moneys deposited in his account by using
correct. R.A. 3019 is a special law them when they were given to him for no
punishing acts mala prohibita. As a rule, other reason except for his public position
attempted violation of a special law is not as a Mayor. (crime committed by the
punished. Actual injury is required. Mayor)
B. Yes, both are liable for attempted
estafa thru falsification of commercial 6. Violation of Rep. Act 6713 (Code of
documents, a complex crime. They tried to Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public
defraud the Government with the use of Officials and Employees) for receiving such
false commercial and public documents. gift from someone who may be affected by
Damage is not necessary. the functions of his office. (crime committed
by the Mayor)
Special penal law - Violation of Rep. Act
6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Criminal law Crimes committed by
Standards for Public Officials and public officers - Indirect bribery; Special
Employees) penal law - Republic Act No. 3019-
Don Gabito, a philanthropist, offered to directly or indirectly requesting or receiving

fund several projects of the Mayor. He any gift, present, percentage, or benefit in
opened an account in the Mayors name connection with any contract or transaction
and regularly deposited various amounts x x x wherein the public officer, in his official
ranging from P500,000.00 to PI Million. capacity, has to intervene under the law
From this account, the Mayor withdrew and
used the money for constructing feeder RA 3019: Charina, Clerk of Court of an
roads, barangay clinics, repairing schools RTC Branch, promised the plaintiff in a
231
and for all other municipal projects. It was case pending before the court that she
subsequently discovered that Don Gabito would convince the Presiding Judge to
Page
was actually a jueteng operator and the decide the case in plaintiff's favor. In
consideration therefor, the plaintiff gave programs for 2008. Records show that the
Charina P20,000.00. amount of P2-million was purportedly used
as financial assistance for a rice production
Charina was charged with violation of livelihood project. Upon investigation,
Section 3 (b) of Republic Act No. 3019, however, it was found that Roger and
prohibiting any public officer from directly or Jessie falsified the disbursement vouchers
indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, and supporting documents in order to make
present, percentage, or benefit in it appear that qualified recipients who, in
connection with any contract or transaction fact, are non-existent individuals, received
x x x wherein the public officer, in his official the money.
capacity, has to intervene under the law.
Roger and Jessie are charged with
While the case was being tried, the violation of Section 3 (e) of R.A. 3019 for
Ombudsman filed another information causing undue injury to the government.
against Charina for Indirect Bribery under Discuss the propriety of the charge filed
the Revised Penal Code. Charina against Roger and Jessie. Explain. (4%)
demurred to the second information, (2009 Bar Question)
claiming that she can no longer be charged
under the Revised Penal Code having SUGGESTED ANSWER:
been charged for the same act under R.A.
3019. They should be charged of violation of
Section 3(e) of Rep. Act 3019 for the
Is Charina correct? Explain. (3%) (2009 breach of public trust and undue injury
Bar Question) caused to the Government. The violation is
a crime malum prohibitum.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Charina is not correct. Although the Criminal law Crimes committed by
charge for violation of Rep. Act No. 3019 public officers - direct bribery; Special
and the charge for Indirect Bribery (Art. penal law - Republic Act No. 3019
211, RPC) arose from the same act, the
elements of the violation charged under RA 3019: May a public officer charged
Rep. Act No. 3019 are not the same as the under Section 3(b) of Republic Act No.
felony charged for Indirect Bribery under 3019 [directly or indirectly requesting or
the Rev. Penal Code (Mejia v. Pamaran, receiving any gift, present, share,
160 SCRA 457 [1988]). Hence, the crimes percentage or benefit, for himself of for any
charged are separate and distinct from other person, in connection with any
each other, with different penalties. The contract or transaction between the
two charges do not constitute a ground for government and any other party, wherein
a motion to dismiss or motion to quash, as the public officer in his official capacity has
there is no jeopardy against the accused. to intervene under the law] also be
simultaneously or successively charged
Roger and Jessie, Municipal Mayor and with direct bribery under Article 210 of the
232
Treasurer, respectively, of San Rafael, Revised Penal Code? Explain. (4%) (2010
Leyte, caused the disbursement of public Bar Question)
Page
funds allocated for their local development

SUGGESTED ANSWER: investigation of the bank which gave the

gift. Penal laws must be strictly construed
Yes, a public officer charges under Sec. 3 against the State. In any case, Thereof is
(b) of Rep. Act 3019 (Anti-Graft and administratively liable.
Corrupt Practices Act) may also be
charged simultaneously or successively for ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
the crime of direct bribery under Art. 210 of
the Revised Penal Code, because two Yes, Thereof may be prosecuted under
crimes are essentially different and are Rep. Act 3019 because he is a public
penalized under distinct legal philosophies. officer' within the purview of said law, and
Whereas violation of Sec. (b) of R.A. 3019 Thereof received the valuable gift from a
is a malum prohibitum, the crime under Art. bank which is under investigation by the
210 of the Code is a malum in se. Central Bank where he is employed as a
public officer.
Criminal law Crimes committed by
public officer - Republic Act No. 3019 Receiving gift, directly or indirectly by a
(Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) public officer from a party who has a
transaction with the Government is wrong,
The Central Bank (Bangko Sentralna more so when the gift-giver is under
Pilipinas), by a resolution of the monetary investigation by the government office to
board, hires Thereof Sto. Tomas, a retired which the public officer is connected.
manager of a leading bank as a consultant. Proserfina, an assistant public high school
Thereof later receives a valuable gift from principal, acted to facilitate the release of
a bank under investigation by the Central salary differentials and election duty per
Bank. May Thereof be prosecuted under diem of classroom teachers with the
Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and agreement that they would reimburse her
Corrupt Practices Act) for accepting such a for her expenses.
gift? Explain. (2003 Bar Question)
Did Proserfina commit a crime? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (5%) (2010 Bar Question)
No, Thereof may not be prosecuted under SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Rep. Act 3019, but may be prosecuted for
violation of Pres. Decree No. 46, under Yes, Proserfina committed violation of Sec.
which such act of receiving a valuable gift 3(b) of Rep. Act No. 3019 which considers
is punished. as corrupt practice, the act of:
Although Thereof is a public officer within (b) Directly or indirectly requesting or

the application of the Anti-Graft and receiving any gift, present, share,
Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019), yet his act percentage, or benefit, for himself or for
of receiving such gift does not appear to be any other person, in connection with any
included among the punishable acts under contract or transaction between the
Rep. Act 3019), yet his act of receiving Government and any other party, wherein
233
such gift does not appear to be included the public officer in his official capacity has
among the punishable acts under Rep. Act to intervene under the law.
Page
not to intervene in his official capacity in the

Being the assistant public high school 2. Indirect Bribery for accepting such
principal, it is her duty to intervene in the moneys deposited in his account by using
release of salary differentials and per diem them when they were given to him for no
of classroom teachers under her. Her act of other reason except for his public position
doing so, made a request for a share or as a Mayor. (crime committed by the
benefit therefor constitutes graft or corrupt Mayor)
practice under Sec 3(b) of Rep. Act No.
3019. Considering that the acts prohibited 3. Violation of Rep. Act 6713 (Code of
or punished under this law are mala Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public
prohibita, and thus punishable thereunder, Officials and Employees) for receiving such
whether done with criminal intent or not. gift from someone who may be affected by
the functions of his office. (crime committed
Special penal law - Violation of Rep. Act by the Mayor)
6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical
Standards for Public Officials and Special penal law Violation of Code of
Employees) Conduct and Ethical Standards for
Public Officials (RA 6713) - Requesting
Don Gabito, a philanthropist, offered to donations of gifts
fund several projects of the Mayor. He
opened an account in the Mayors name Commissioner Marian Torres of the Bureau
and regularly deposited various amounts of Internal Revenue (BIR) wrote solicitation
ranging from P500,000.00 to PI Million. letters addressed to the Filipino-Chinese
From this account, the Mayor withdrew and Chamber of Commerce and Industry and to
used the money for constructing feeder certain CEOs of various multinational
roads, barangay clinics, repairing schools corporations requesting donations of gifts
and for all other municipal projects. It was for her office Christmas party. She used the
subsequently discovered that Don Gabito Bureau's official stationery. The response
was actually a jueteng operator and the was prompt and overwhelming so much so
amounts he deposited were proceeds from that Commissioner Torres' office was
his jueteng operations. overcrowded with rice cookers, radio sets,
freezers, electric stoves and toasters. Her
What crime/s were committed? Who are staff also received several envelopes
criminally liable? Explain. containing cash money for the employees'
(6%)(2005 Bar Question) Christmas luncheon.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Has Commissioner Torres committed any

impropriety or irregularity? What laws or
1. Corruption of public officials under decrees did she violate? 5% (2006 Bar
Article 212 of the Revised Penal Code for Question)
having given the amounts that were
deposited in an account which he opened SUGGESTED ANSWER:
in the Mayors name for no reason but the
public position or office held by the Mayor; Yes, Commissioner Torres committed an
234
(crime committed by Don Gabito) impropriety. She violated Sec. 7(d) of Rep.
Act 6713 otherwise known as the Code of
Page
Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public

Officials and Employees. Sec. 7(d) the crime of illegal possession of firearms
mandates that public officials and and ammunition. What the law requires is
employees shall not solicit or accept merely possession, which includes not only
directly or indirectly any gift, favor, actual physical possession but also
entertainment, loan or anything of constructive possession where the firearm
monetary value from any person in the and explosive are subject to ones control
course of her official duties or any and management. [People us. De Grecia,
transaction which may be affected by the 233 SCRA 716; U.S. vs. Juan, 23 Phil, 105;
functions of their office. People vs. Soyag, 110 Phil. 565).
Special Law. PD 1866, as amended by Special law Penalties Grave offense;

RA8294 and RA 10591 : life imprisonment
A has long been wanted by the police QUESTION

authorities for various crimes committed by A. RR represented to AA, BB, CC and DD
him. Acting on an information by a tipster, that she could send them to London to work
the police proceeded to an apartment there as sales ladies and waitresses. She
where A was often seen. The tipster also collected and received from them various
warned the policemen that A was always amounts of money for recruitment and
armed. At the given address, a lady who placement fees totalling P400.000. After
introduced herself as the elder sister of A, their dates of departure were postponed
opened the door and let the policemen in. several times, the four prospects got
Inside, the team found A sleeping on the suspicious and went to POEA (Phil.
floor. Immediately beside him was a clutch Overseas Employment Authority). There
bag which, when opened, contained a .38 they found out that RR was not authorized
caliber paltik revolver and a hand grenade. nor licensed to recruit workers for
After verification, the authorities discovered employment abroad. They sought refund to
that A was not a licensed holder of the .38 no avail.
caliber paltik revolver. As for the hand
grenade, it was established that only Is RR guilty of any grave offense? Explain
military personnel are authorized to carry briefly. (5%) (2004 Bar Question)
hand grenades. Subsequently, A was
charged with the crime of Illegal SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Possession of Firearms and Ammunition.
During trial, A maintained that the bag A. Yes. RR is guilty of a grave offense,
containing the unlicensed firearm and hand having engaged in illegal recruitment
grenade belonged to A, his friend, and that constituting the offense of economic
he was not in actual possession thereof at sabotage which is punishable with life
the time he was arrested. Are the imprisonment and a fine of P100,000.00.
allegations meritorious? Explain. (3%)
(2000 Bar Question) Economic sabotage is an offense defined
in 38(b) of the Labor Code, as amended by
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Pres. Decree No. 2018, which is incurred
235
when the illegal recruitment is carried out in

As allegations are not meritorious. large scale or by a syndicate. It is in a large
Page
Ownership is not an essential element of scale when there are three or more
aggrieved parties, individually or as a his conviction by the trial court (Section 4,

group. And it is committed by a syndicate P.D. 968, as amended).
when three or more persons conspire or
cooperate with one another in carrying out Special law -Juvenile Justice and Welfare
the illegal transaction, scheme or activity. Act - Processes of intervention and
Special penal law - Section 24 of RA 9165 diversion
(Comprehensive Dangerous Drug Act of
2002) Joe was 17 years old when he committed
homicide in 2005. The crime is punishable
Matt was found guilty of drug trafficking by reclusion temporal. After two years in
while his younger brother Jeff was found hiding, he was arrested and appropriately
guilty of possession of equipment, charged in May 2007. Since Republic Act
instrument, apparatus and other 9344 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of
paraphernalia for dangerous drugs under 2006) was already in effect, Joe moved to
Section 12 of Republic Act No. 9165. avail of the process of intervention or
diversion.
Matt filed a petition for probation. Jeff
appealed his conviction during the [a] What is intervention or diversion? Is Joe
pendency of which he also filed a petition entitled to intervention or diversion?
for probation. Explain. (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
The brothers' counsel argued that they SUGGESTED ANSWER:

being first time offenders, their petitions for
probation should be granted. How would The two terms are different.
you resolve the brothers' petitions for
probation? Explain. (3%) (2010 Bar "Intervention" refers to a series of activities
Question) which are designed to address issues that
caused the child to commit an offense. It
SUGGESTED ANSWER: may take the form of an individualized
treatment program which may include
The brothers' petition for probation should counseling, skills training, education, and
both be denied. other activities that will enhance his/her
psychological, emotional and psycho-
Matt's petition for probation shall be denied social wellbeing. This is available to a child
because he was convicted for 15 years old or less at the time of the
drugtrafficking. Section 24 of RA 9165 commission of the crime or although over
(Comprehensive Dangerous Drug Act of 15 but below 18 years old at the time of
2002) expressly provides, "Any person commission of the crime, the child acted
convicted for drug trafficking or pushing without discernment.
under this Act, regardless of the penalty
imposed by the court, cannot avail of the "Diversion" refers to an alternative, child-
privilege granted by the Probation Law or appropriate process of determining the
Presidential Decree No. 968, as amended." responsibility and treatment of a child in
236
On the other hand, Jeff's application for conflict with the law on the basis of his/her
probation cannot also be entertained or social, cultural, economic, psychological or
Page
granted because he has already appealed educational background without resorting

to formal court proceedings. This process unlawfully acquired? Explain your answer.
governs when the child is over 15 years old (1990 Bar Question)
but below 18 at the time of the commission
of the crime and he acted with discernment. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. Joe is entitled to diversion. Being only I would interpose the defense of
17 years old at the time he committed the prescription as the right to file a petition for
crime of homicide, he is treated as a child forfeiture under Republic Act No. 1379
in conflict with the law under RA 9344 Section 2 prescribes in four (4) years from
the date of resignation.
[b] Suppose Joe's motion for intervention or
diversion was denied, and he was Property which may still be considered as
convicted two (2) years later when Joe was unlawfully acquired, though not in the name
already 21 years old, should the judge of Maloling at the time of filing of the petition
apply the suspension of sentence? Explain. for forfeiture, shall include:
(2%) (2009 Bar Question)
1. Property unlawfully acquired by the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: respondent but its ownership concealed by
being recorded in the name of, or held by,
No. The judge should not suspend the respondents spouse, ascendants,
sentence anymore because Joe was descendants, relatives or any other person;
already 21 years old. Suspension of and
sentence is availing under Rep. Act 9344
only until a child reaches the maximum age 2. Property unlawfully acquired by the
of twenty-one (21) years. respondent, but transferred by him to
another person/s. (R-A. 1379 Section 1(b)).
Prescription for violation of special laws Special law - Highway Robbery under
- Petition for forfeiture under Republic Presidential Decree No. 532
Act No. 1379
a) Distinguish Highway Robbery under
Maloling is a public official who resigned Presidential Decree No. 532 from Robbery
from the service on February 1, 1984. On committed on a highway. (3%) (2000 Bar
February 15, 1990, the Solicitor General Question)
filed a petition in court for the forfeiture of
the property of Maloling which was b) A, B, C, D and E were in a
allegedly unlawfully acquired. beerhouse along MacArthur Highway
having a drinking spree. At about 1 oclock
If you were the counsel of Maloling, what in the morning, they decided to leave and
defense or defenses would you interpose? so asked for the bill. They pooled their
Explain your answer. (1990 Bar Question) money together but they were still short of
P2.Q00.00. E then orchestrated a plan
Besides property unlawfully acquired whereby A, B, C and D would go out, flag a
237
found to be in the name of Maloling, what taxicab and rob the taxi driver of all his
are the other properties not in his name money while E would wait for them in the
Page
which may nevertheless be considered beerhouse. A, B, C and D agreed. All

armed with balisongs, A, B, C and D hailed occasional against a predetermined victim,

the first taxicab they encountered. After without frequency in public highways.
robbing X, the driver, of his earnings, which
amounted to P1,000.00 only, they needed b) A, B, C, D and E are liable for two (2)
P1,000.00 more to meet their bill. So, they counts of robbery under Article 294 of the
decided to hail another taxicab and they Rev. Penal Code; not for highway Robbery
again robbed driver Y of his hard-eamed under PD 532. The offenders are not
money amounting to PI,000.00. On their brigands but only committed the robbery to
way back to the beerhouse, they were raise money to pay their bill because it
apprehended by a police team upon the happened that they were short of money to
complaint of X, the driver of the first cab. pay the same.
They pointed to E as the mastermind. What
crime or crimes, if any, did A, B, C, D and Special law Anti-Piracy and Anti-
E commit? Explain fully. (3%) (2000 Bar Highway Robbery (PD 532) punishable
Question) acts
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Police Sgt. Diego Chan, being a member of

the Theft and Robbery Division of the
a) Highway Robbery under Pres. Decree Western Police District and assigned to the
532 differs from ordinary Robbery South Harbor, Manila, was privy to and
committed on a highway in these respects: more or less familiar with the schedules,
routes and hours of the movements of
In Highway Robbery under PD 532, the container vans, as well as the mobile police
robbery is committed indiscriminately patrols, from the pier area to the different
against persons who commute in such export processing zones outside Metro
highways, regardless of the potentiality Manila. From time to time, he gave
they offer; while in ordinary Robbery valuable and detailed information on these
committed on a highway, the robbery is matters to a group interested in those
committed only against predetermined shipments in said container vans. On
victims; several instances, using the said
information as their basis, the gang
It is Highway Robbery under PD 532, hijacked and pilfered the contents of the
when the offender is a brigand or one who vans. Prior to their sale to fences in
roams in public highways and carries out Banawe, Ouezon City and Bangkal, Makati
his robbery in public highways as venue, City, the gang informs Sgt. Chan who then
whenever the opportunity to do so arises. It inspects the pilfered goods, makes his
is ordinary Robbery under the Revised choice of the valuable items and disposes
Penal Code when the commission thereof of them through his own sources or
in a public highway is only incidental and fences. When the highjackers were
the offender is not a brigand; and traced on one occasion and arrested, upon
custodial investigation, they implicated Sgt.
In Highway Robbery under PD 532, there Chan and the fiscal charged them all,
is frequency in the commission of the including Sgt. Chan as co-principals. Sgt.
238
robbery in public highways and against Chan, in his defense, claimed that he
persons travelling thereat; whereas should not be charged as a principal but
Page
ordinary Robbery In public highways is only only as an accessory after the fact under
P.D. 532, otherwise known as the Anti- "Chain of custody" requirement in drug
Piracy and AntiHighway Robbery Act of offenses refers to the duly recorded,
1972. authorized movement and custody of
seized dangerous drugs, controlled
Is the contention of Sgt. Chan valid and chemicals, plant sources of dangerous
tenable? Explain. (5%) (2001 Bar drugs, and laboratory equipment for
Question) dangerous drugs from the time of
confiscation/seizure thereof from the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: offender, to its turn-over and receipt in the
forensic laboratory for examination, to its
No, the contention of Sgt. Chan is not valid safekeeping and eventual
or tenable because by express provision of presentation/offer in court as evidence of
P.D. 532, Section 4, a person who the criminal violation, and for destruction.
knowingly and in any manner, aids or (Dangerous Drugs Board Regulation No.1
protects highway robbers/brigands, such Series of 2002)
as giving them information about the
movement of police officers or acquires or Its rationale is to preserve the authenticity
receives property taken by brigands, or of the corpus delicti or body of the crime by
who directly or indirectly abets the rendering it improbable that the original
commission of highway item seized/confiscated in the violation has
robbeiy/brigandage, shall be considered as been exchanged or substituted with
accomplice of the principal offenders and another or tampered with or contaminated.
punished in accordance with the rules in It is a method of authenticating the
the Revised Penal Code. evidence as would support a finding
beyond reasonable doubt that the matter is
Special penal law - The Comprehensive what the prosecution claims it to be.
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (R.A. No.
9165) Chain of custody Failure to observe the "chain of custody"
requirement renders the evidence
Following his arrest after a valid buy-bust questionable, not trustworthy and
operation, Tommy was convicted of insufficient to prove the corpus delicti
violation of Section 5, Republic Act 9165. beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, Tommy
On appeal, Tommy questioned the would be acquitted on reasonable doubt.
admissibility of the evidence because the
police officers who conducted the buybust The Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency
operation failed to observe the requisite (PDEA) had intelligence reports about the
"chain of custody" of the evidence drug pushing activities of Rado, but could
confiscated and/or seized from him. not arresthim for lack of concrete evidence.
SP03 Relio, a PDEA team leader,
What is the "chain of custody" requirement approached Emilo and requested him to
in drug offenses? What is its rationale? act as poseur-buyer of shabu and transact
What is the effect of failure to observe the with Rado. Emilo refused, saying that he
requirement? (3%) (2009 Bar Question) had completely been rehabilitated and did
239
not want to have anything to do with drugs

SUGGESTED ANSWER: anymore. But he was prevailed upon to
Page
help when SP03 Relio explained that only

he could help capture Rado because he crime. In a buy-bust operation, the idea to
used to be his customer. SP03 Relio then commit a crime originates from the
gave Emilo the marked money to be used offender, without anybody inducing or
in buying shabu from Rado. The operation prodding him to commit the offense.
proceeded. After Emilo handed the marked Second, the immunity does not extend to
money to Rado in exchange for the sachets violators of Section 5 of RA 9165 or the sale
of shabu weighing 50 grams, and upon of shabu (sec. 33, RA 9165). Lastly, he was
receiving the pre-arranged signal from the offender of the crime and apparently
Ernilo, SP03 Relio and his team members the most guilty of the offense.
barged in and arrested Rado and Ernilo,
who were both charged with violation of ART.220 in rel to RA 3019
R.A. 9165, otherwise known as the
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act Governor A was given the amount of PIO
of2002. (2015 BAR) million by the Department of Agriculture for
the purpose of buying seedlings to be
a) What defense, if any, may Ernilo distributed to the farmers. Supposedly
invoke to free himself from criminal liability? intending to modernize the farming industry
Explain. in his province, Governor A bought farm
equipment through direct purchase from
Answer: XY Enterprise, owned by his kumpare B,
Ernilo may invoke Section 33, Art. II of RA the alleged exclusive distributor of the said
9165 or the Comprehensive Drugs Act of equipment. Upon inquiry, the Ombudsman
2002. He may have violated Section 11 of discovered that B has a pending patent
RA 9165 for possession of shabu but he is application for the said farm equipment.
immune from prosecution and punishment Moreover, the equipment purchased turned
because of his role as the poseur-buyer in out to be overpriced. What crime or crimes,
the entrapment operation. There was if any, were committed by Governor A?
virtually instigation. He is exempted from Explain. (5%)(2016 BAR)
prosecution or punishment because the
information obtained from him by the PDEA
agents, who had no direct and concrete SUGGESTED ANSWER
evidence of Rados drug-pushing activities, Governor A committed the crimes
led to the whereabouts, identity and arrest of: (1) Technical Malversation; and (2)
of Rado. So long as the information and Violation of Sections 3(e) and (g) of
testimony given are pleaded and proven, Republic Act No. 3019.
Emililo cannot be prosecuted for violation Governor A committed the crime of
of RA 9165. illegal use of public funds or property
punishable under Art. 220 of the Revised
b) May Rado adopt as his own Emilo's Penal Code. This offense is also known as
defense? Explain. technical malversation. The crime has
three elementsL: a) that the offender is an
Answer: accountable public officer; b) that he
No. First, an entrapment operation is a applies public funds or property under his
240
valid means of arresting violators of RA administration to some public use; and c)

9165. It is an effective way of apprehending that the public use for which such funds or
Page
law offenders in the act of committing a property had been applied is different from
the purpose for which they were originally The act committed by Governor is
appropriated by law or ordinance (Ysidora also in violation of Sec. 3 (g) of RA No.
v. People. G.R. No. 192330, 14 November 3019 for entering a contract on behalf of the
2012). government which is manifestly and
The amount of P 10M granted by the grossly disadvantageous to the same.
Department of Agriculture to Governor A, SPECIAL LAW- P.D 1612
an accountable public officer, is specifically
appropriated for the purpose of buying Ofelia, engaged in the purchase and sale
seedlings to be distributed to the farmers. of jewelry, was charged with violation of PD
Instead, Governor A applied the amount to 1612, otherwise known as the Anti-Fencing
acquire modern farm equipment through Law, for having been found in possession
direct purchase from XY Enterprise owned of recently stolen jewelry valued at Pl
by his kumpare. The law punishes the act 00,000.00 at her jewelry shop. Her defense
of diverting public funds earmarked by law is that she merely bought the same from
or ordinance for a specific public purpose Antonia and produced a receipt covering
to another public purpose, hence, the the sale. She presented other receipts
liability for technical malversation. given to her by Antonia representing
Governor A can also be held liable previous transactions. Convicted of the
for Violation of Section 3 (e) of R.A. 3019 charge, Ofelia appealed, arguing that her
or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, acquisition of the jewelries resulted from a
which has the following elements: (1) the legal transaction and that the prosecution
accused is a public officer discharging failed to prove that she knew or should
administrative, judicial or official functions; have known that the pieces of jewelry
(2) he must have acted with manifest which she bought from Antonia were
partiality, evident bad faith or gross proceeds of the crime of theft.
inexcusable negligence; and (3) his action
caused any undue injury to any party, [a] What is a "fence" under PD 1612?
including the government, or gave any (2.5%) (2016 BAR)
private party unwarranted benefits,
advantage or preference in the discharge SUGGESTED ANSWER
of his functions.
Fencing is the act of any person
The facts show that the first element who, with intent to gain for himself or for
is present. The second element is likewise another, shall buy, receive, possess, keep,
present because, through manifest acquire, conceal, sell or dispose of, or shall
partiality in favoring his kumpare, buy and sell, or in any other manner deal in
Governor A did not hold a public bidding any article, item, object or anything of value
and directly purchased the farm equipment which he knows, or should be known to
from the latter. With respect to the third him, to have been derived from the
element, Governor As actions caused proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft
undue injury to the government as well as (Sec. 2 of PD 1612)
the farmers who were deprived of the [b] Is Ofelia liable under the Anti-Fencing
seedlings. His acts likewise gave his Law? Explain. (2.5%)
241
kumpare, a private party, the unwarranted

benefit, advantage or preference, to the SUGGESTED ANSWER
Page
exclusion of other interested suppliers.

No. Ofelia is not liable under the or robbery are also applicable to
Anti-Fencing Law. While under the said law carnapping (People v. Asamudding GR No.
mere possession of any good, article, item, 213913, 2 September 2015). In theft,
object or anything of value which has been unlawful taking should be understood
the subject of robbery or thievery shall be within the Spanish concept of
prima facie evidence of fencing, such apoderamiento. In order to constitute
evidence when sufficiently overturned apoderamiento, the physical taking must
constitutes a defense. be coupled with the intent to appropriate
In this case, Ofelias defense that the object, which means intent to deprive
she merely acquired the jewelries through the lawful owner of the thing, whether
a legitimate transaction is sufficient. permanently or temporarily (People v.
Further, there is no other circumstance as Valenzuela, GR No. 160188, 21 June
regards the jewelries which would indicate 2007). In this case A took the car without
to Ofelia, an innocent purchaser, that the the consent of B with intent to temporarily
jewelries were the subject of theft. There deprive him of the car. Although the taking
was even a receipt produced by Ofelia for was temporary and for a joy ride, the
the transaction. Supreme Court in People v. Bustinera,
(supra), sustains as the better view that
SPECIAL LAW- RA 6539-Anti- which holds that when a person, either with
carnapping Law the object of going to a certain place, or
learning how to drive, or enjoying a free
A is the driver of B's Mercedes Benz car. ride, takes possession of a vehicle
When B was on a trip to Paris, A used the belonging to another, without the consent
car for a joy ride with C whom he is of its owner, he is guilty of theft because by
courting. Unfortunately, A met an accident. taking possession of the personal property
Upon his return, B came to know about the belonging to another and using it, his intent
unauthorized use of the car and sued A for to gain is evident since he derives
qualified theft. B alleged that A took and therefrom utility, satisfaction, enjoyment
used the car with intent to gain as he and pleasure.
derived some benefit or satisfaction from its SPECIAL LAW- R.A Child exploitation
use. On the other hand, A argued that he
has no intent of making himself the owner Arnold, 25 years of age, was sitting on a
of the car as he in fact returned it to the bench in Luneta Park watching the statue
garage after the joy ride. What crime or of Jose Rizal when, without his permission,
crimes, if any, were committed? Explain. Leilani, I 7 years of age, sat beside him and
(5%)(2016 BAR) asked for financial assistance, allegedly for
SUGGESTED ANSWER payment of her tuition fee, in exchange for
The crime commited by A is sex. While they were conversing, police
carnapping. The unlawful taking of motor operatives arrested and charged him with
vehicles is now covered by the Anti- violation of Section l 0 of RA 76 I 0 (Special
Carnapping Law (RA 6539 as amended) Protection of Children against Child Abuse,
and not by the provisions on qualified theft Exploitation and Discrimination Act),
or robbery (People v. Rustinera, GR No. accusing him of having in his company a
242
148233, 8 June 2004). The concept of minor, who is not related to him, in a public
carnapping is the same as that of robbery place. It was established that Arnold was
Page
and theft. Hence, rules applicable to theft

not in the performance of a social, moral

and legal duty at that time.
Is Arnold liable for the charge? Explain.

(5%) (2016 Bar)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
No. Arnold is not liable. Under Sec.

10 of RA No. 7610, any person who shall
keep or have in his company a minor,
twelve (12) year or under or who is ten (10)
years or more his junior in any public or
private place, hotel, motel, beer joint,
discotheque, cabaret, pension house,
sauna, or massage parlor, beach and/or
other tourist resort or similar places is liable
for child abuse.
Arnold is not liable for the charge. To

be held liable under Sec. 10 (b) of RA No.
7610, it is indispensable that the child in the
company of the offender must be 12 years
or under or who in 10 years or more his
junior in a public place. In this case, Leilani
is 17 years of age, and only 8 years
younger than Arnold.
Morever, Leilani sat beside Arnold

without his permission, hence he is not in
the company of a child in a public place.
Lastly, applying the ejusdem generis

principle, Arnold is not liable for child abuse
because Luneta is not a place similar to
hotel, motel, beer joint, discotheque,
cabaret, pension house, sauna or massage
parlor, beach and/or other tourist resort.
243
Page

4A CRIM BQ - Finalwpage

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

4A CRIM BQ - Finalwpage

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016

Compiled by: 4A - Aiza, Gloovy, Vianney,

Territoriality (1994) ............................ 18

Circumstantial evidence; Proof beyond Constitutional limitations on the power of

Construction of penal laws Doctrine of Constitutional limitations on the power of

Corpus delicti, Elements (2000) .......... 12 What is aberratio ictus? (2015)............ 22

Corpus delicti (2001) ........................... 12 Aberratio Ictus vs Impossible Crime

Absence of corpus delicti .................... 13 (1993) .................................................. 22

(1989) ................................................. 13 prohibita (2005, 2003, 2001, 1999, 1997,

Territoriality (2004) ............................ 17

Art 4 Criminal Liability In relation to Art ART 4. In rel to ART 267Impossible

Art. 4 Criminal Liability Proximate ART. 4- Impossible crimes (2000) ........ 34

Manner (2012) ..................................... 41

Art. 8: Conspiracy (1991) .................... 41 ART.8-Define conspiracy. (2012) ......... 51

Art. 8: Conspiracy (1993) .................... 42 ART.8-- Conspiracy (1991) ................... 52

Art. 8: Conspiracy to commit robbery ART.8-- Conspiracy; murder (1993) ..... 52

Art. 8: Criminal law Conspiracy ART.8- Felonies Proposal to commit

Art. 8: Implied conspiracy (1998) ........ 44 ART.8--Conspiracy (1994) .................... 53

Art. 8: Conspiracy to commit sedition ART.8- Conspiracy - Implied conspiracy

(1987) ................................................. 45 (1998) .................................................. 55

ART.8- Implied conspiracy (2003) .... 55

Art. 8: Conspiracy to commit robbery JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES .................. 56

robbery with homicide (2003) ............. 48 ........................................................... 58

to Special complex crime of robbery with Sustained (2000) ................................. 58

homicide (2007) .................................. 49 Art. 11: Defense Of Honor; When

Art. 8: Conspiracy and proposal In Untenable (1998) ................................. 59

Art. 8: Conspiracy and proposal (2008) 50

Art. 11: Battered Woman Syndrome Art 12: Minority; ................................. 68

Art. 12: Insanity (1991) ....................... 63 Art. 13: Mitigating Circumstance

(2013) ................................................. 65 guilty; when not considered (1992) ..... 75

applicable (1995) ................................. 66 Art 13 Plea of Guilty (1999) ................. 76

Art 12: Persons exempt from criminal

liability In relation to Art 332 (2008) .. 67

Arti. 14 Recidivism In relation to Art. 62 Use of an unlicensed firearm in the

Accessory (2015) ................................. 92

ART. 17 Principal by inducement; Duration and Effect of Penalties,

ART. 17 Principal by inducement; Duration and Effect of Penalties,

ACCOMPLICES ....................................... 95 Alternative Penalty............................ 103

ART. 18- Who is an accomplice? Civil Indemnity ................................. 103

Art. 19. Accessories And Art. 20 ART 27 Penalties Reclusion perpetua;

ART. 19- Accessories (2004) ................ 99 Death Penalty .................................... 106

Art. 48: Complex crime of Murder, Art. 48 Complex crimes - Frustrated

ART. 48--Doctrine of aberratio ictus .. 123

Art. 62 Habitual delinquency (1991) .. 143 B. Crimes covered by the grant of

security Qualified piracy ................. 162

Pardon vs Amnesty ........................... 154

ART.122, 123--Crimes against National SPECIAL LAW Act Defining Certain

CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY ............... 213 ......................................................... 229

SPECIAL LAW- RA 9165- ................... 222 Criminal law Crimes committed by

legal use of an alias by a Filipino (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices

citizen .............................................. 223 Act) ................................................... 233

acts ................................................... 224 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical

Employees) ........................................ 234

Special Law. PD 1866, as amended by FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND

Special law Penalties Grave offense; FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE --

ART.220 in rel to RA 3019 ................ 240 SUGGESTED ANSWER

Are human rights violations considered as

Not necessarily, since there are human

can be no crime when there is no law

punishing an act or omission as a crime.

If I were the judge and the evidence

commits two crimes with single criminal

impulse demonstrates lesser perversity