Pros Sagssago Notes in Criminal Law 2017 Edition

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
L E CT U R E N O T E S
C R I M I N A L L A W
REVIEW
ELMER MANUEL SAGSAGO

DEPUTY CITY PROSECUTOR
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
BAGUIO CITY
PROFESSOR
SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY OF BAGUIO
PROS.ELMERM.SAGSAGO Page 1
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
INTRODUCTION
There are two basic principles which underlie the basis for prosecuting a person because of his
conduct. These are: (i) The Principle of Legality and (ii) The Principle of Publicity.
The Principle of Legality.
I. The principle which declares that for any human conduct to be considered as a criminal act, there
must be a specific penal statute or law declaring such conduct as a crime and providing for its penalty.
II. Any human conduct, no matter how evil or reprehensible it may be, can not subject the actor to
punishment if there is no law punishing the act.
III. This is expressed in the maxim “Nullum crimen noella poena sine lige”.
IV. This principle is the opposite of ―Common Law Crimes‖.
A. Common Law Crimes are often called ―Court Declared/Created Crimes‖
B. Common law crimes are those acts or omissions declared by courts to be crimes not because
they violate a specific penal law but because they violate good customs, moral principles and
precepts, or because the court finds the conduct to be improper or reprehensible and ought not to
have been engaged in.
V. Under this principle, for an omission to be punishable, there must be a written law directing the doing
of an act so that he who claims to have been injured by an omission cannot rely solely on good sense
or an appeal to humanity as basis for criminal liability.
A. Thus he who fails to render assistance to one he finds in danger of dying in an uninhabited place
is liable since there is a specific provision of the Revised Penal Code punishing such omission. But
one is not criminally liable for the failure to give food to a neighbor who then dies due to starvation.
B. If a person sees a boy being chased by a mad dog and did nothing although he was in a position
to prevent the boy from being bitten, is he criminally liable for his inaction?
C. If a person utters obscenities and profanities without taking precautions to prevent minor from
hearing him, is he liable?
VI. Rule in the Philippines:
A. The Philippines adhere to the Principle of Legality.

1). All crimes in the Philippines are of Statutory Origin and there are no common law crimes in
the Philippines.
2). This is evidenced by the Provisions of: (a). paragraph 2 of Article 5 which declares that it is
the duty of the court to dismiss a criminal prosecution or to acquit the accused if it finds that the
act/omission is not punished by any law, and to recommend instead that the same be the subject
of a penal legislation and (b) article 21 which provides that no felony shall be punished by a penalty
not prescribed by law prior to its commission.
Principle of Publicity: Ignorance of the law.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
I. The binding effect of a written criminal law depends upon its existence and contents being made
known to the people upon whom the law is to be applied. This is the Principle/Requirement of
Publicity or public dissemination or to make known the existence and contents of a penal law to the
public. It is based on fair play and due process. No person is expected to obey a law and be punished
for disobeying the law unless the existence of the law and its provisions have been made known to him.
II. In the Philippines the requirement of publicity of the penal law is satisfied by a publication of the law
either in the Offficial Gazette or in a news paper of general circulation. This is the only authorized mode
of publicity. Public dissemination through other modes such as through the radio, television, public
discussions or distribution of pamphlets is not the publicity required by law.
III. Once the penal law has been publicized in the manner prescribed, all are presumed to have been
properly informed of its existence and provisions. The publicity gives rise to constructive notice to all
such that lack of actual knowledge of its existence and its provisions is no defense. This is the rationale
for the principle: IGNORANTIA LEGIS NEMENEM EXCUSAT.
CRIMINAL LAW IN GENERAL
I. Concept: that branch of municipal substantive law which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and
provides for their punishments.
The components or functions of a penal law therefore are:

a). to define a crime: this includes identifying a particular conduct or omission and declaring
it as a crime and may include giving the crime its particular name
b). treats of it nature: to delineate the conditions or circumstances under which the specific
conduct will become a crime: how the crime is incurred or how it arises, and providing for its
elements as well as identifying persons who are liable
c). provides for the punishment: the law must specify what penalty will be suffered for
anyone found violating the law because a law which prohibits an act or directs that an act
be done which however does not provide for a penalty, is more of an advisory law. Failure
to comply with the latter law is not a crime.
II. Sources of Penal Laws in the Philippines
A. The Revised Penal Code ( Act N0. 3815).
This was made effective on January 1, 1932. It is called ―Revised‖ because the Code Committee
created to draft a penal code came out with a proposal which merely revised the then existing Penal
Code and laws related to it. The committee did not codify all penal laws nor produced a modern code
or one conforming to advanced theories.
1. The RPC is based principally on the Spanish Penal Code of 1887, however, there are crimes
provided there under which are of American concept such as the crimes of perjury and libel.
2. The original text was written in Spanish and then translated into English.
3. The RPC is criticized as being inadequate and outmoded and unable to cover crimes arising
from, or related to, modern technology, such as computer –related offenses or cyber crimes e.g.
hacking, sending of virus through the internet or internet liable, human trafficking using the internet
.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
4. It consists of two major parts: Book I which deals with criminal liability in general and the rules
on civil liability, Book II which enumerates and defines the specific crimes and their specific
penalties.
5. Many provisions have been repealed and/or amended e.g. the provisions of dangerous drugs,
gambling, provisions involving minor offenders, the new concept of rape, the added crime known as
coup d‘ etat.
B. Special Laws: Any penal law other than the Revised Penal Code.
1. Those of national application.

a). Those passed by Congress which are known either as
i) Acts- those passed during the American Military Regime

ii). Commonwealth Acts- those enacted during the commonwealth period
iii). Republic Acts- those passed after 1946 when the Philippines became a republic with its
own government.
iv. Batas Pambansa- those passed by the Batasang Pambansa during the period of Martial
law.
b). Those decreed by President Marcos during the Martial Law Period known as Presidential
Decrees.
c). Those passed by administrative bodies which are referred to as the administrative penal
rules and regulations or circulars.
2. Those which are of local application i.e. city/municipal penal ordinances.
III. Power to enact penal laws.
A. Nature: the power is essentially legislative and is plenary or all encompassing. Congress may
determine what acts or omissions are deemed reprehensible and then provide a penalty therefore. The
power includes the prerogative to set forth a presumption of the commission of a violation of a penal
law and then place the burden on the accused to overcome this presumption. This is exemplified by
the presumption of authorship of theft or falsification based on the possession of stolen goods or of a
falsified document.
B. Limitations to the power.

1. There must be observance of due process
2. The law must be equally applied to all
3. The law should not constitute an ex post facto law.
a). one which punishes an act when at the time of its commission, the act was innocent
(retroactive penal laws)
b). or aggravates the crime and makes it greater than what it was at the time of its commission
c). or it inflicts a greater/graver punishment
d). or which alters the rules of evidence and makes it easier to convict
e). or which assumes to regulate certain civil rights and remedies but in effect it imposes a
penalty or it deprives a person of a right he was entitled to
f). or which deprives the accused of some lawful protection to which he was entitled to i.e.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
amnesty
4. It should not be a Bill of Attainder or one which inflicts punishment without judicial trial, or which
partakes of a legislative determination of guilt.
5. It should not impose an excessive fine or cruel or unusual punishment.
IV. Interpretation of Penal Laws
A. Application of the Principle of Pro Reo. ( IN DUBIO PRO REO-when in doubt rule in favor of
the accused). Penal laws are to be construed liberally in favor of the accused and strictly against
the state. All doubts are to be resolved in favor of the accused particularly in the following: (a)
where there is a question on whether the act or omission is punished or is within the coverage
of the law (b) as to the criminal participation of the accused (c) as to the gravity of the offense
(d) as to the penalty to be imposed.
1. This is in conjunction with the Rule of Lenity which directs that in case of two possible
interpretations of a penal statute, the court is to adopt an interpretation which is more lenient to
the accused.
B. Application of the Principle of Prospective Interpretation in that the law is to be interpreted as

applying only to those acts or omissions committed or incurred after its effectivity. Exceptions: (i) when
the law is more favorable to the accused (favorabilia sunt ampliada adios aristregenda)who is not
a habitual offender, or (ii) the law expressly declares its non applicability to pending cases.
However, a favorable penal law shall be given retroactive effect even if the accused is a habitual
delinquent: (i) if it is a new law which repeals an existing law and decriminalizes an act and (ii) the
accused is a CICL ( Dorado vs. People, Oct. 2, 2016 and Atizado vs. PP, Oct. 13, 2016)
C. As to the Revised Penal Code, in case of conflict between the Spanish Text and its English
translation, the Spanish text prevails, except to provisions which are new or are amendments
introduced after 1930.
V. Repeal of Penal Laws. Classification:
A. As to the manner of repeal:
1. Express Repeal which takes place in two ways. (a). The first is when a new law is enacted which
contains a repealing clause making reference to the law or laws the whole or part of which are
repealed. Thus it maybe general in the sense that an existing law is repealed in its entirety or it may
be specific because only certain provisions of the old law are repealed. b). The second is where the
laws are revised through codification and consolidation, but there are provisions which are omitted
or not included and are deemed thereby expressly repealed.
2. Implied. (Repeal by Incompatibility).There is no provision in the new law making reference to an

existing law, or parts thereof, as being repealed, but the provisions of the old law and the new law
are incompatible. This mode is not favored. When the new law is itself repealed the old law is deemed
revived.
B. As to Scope:
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. Absolute or total repeal. The act or omission is decriminalized. The effects are as follows: (a) all
cases pending trial are to be dismissed and all convictions under appeal will be reversed and the
accused acquitted (b) all those convicted and serving sentence under the old law may be
released upon a Petition for Habeas Corpus. (c) but those who served their sentence under the
old law cannot ask for reparation from the state.
Example: The so called Premature marriages by a woman penalized under Article 351 of the
RPC is no longer a crime as R.A. 10655 has expressly repealed said article. Likewise vagrancy
has been decriminalized under RA 10158. Prostitution likewise has been decriminalized as with
squatting as these crimes were expressly repealed.
2. Partial Repeal. The act or omission remains a crime but there are changes or modifications to
the existing crime: (a) the penalty is either increased or decreased (b) conditions for criminal
liability are modified. The effect on pending cases will depend on the principles governing the
retroactive application of penal laws unless there is a saving clause in the new law.
For example: While Article 336 defining and penalizing Rape has been repealed, the crime of
rape is still a crime but its concept has been modified by the Anti Rape La.
Change of the penalty to a lower penalty retroacts even if accused is already serving sentence.
Thus one serving life imprisonment is entitled to have his penalty be replaced by the new penalty
of reclusion perpetua which is a more favorable penalty.
VI. Theories Underlying Criminology
A. The Juristic or Classical Theory. Its characteristics are as follows:

1. The basis of criminal responsibility is human free will. Man has the intelligence to distinguish what
is legal from illegal. He has the freedom to choose either to obey or violate law. If he opts to violate
the law, then he must bear the consequences.
2. The purpose of penalty is retribution i.e vengeance. Since the criminal injured society, then society
has the right to demand that he must pay and suffer for his actions.
3. There is a direct and mechanical proportion between crime and penalty which penalty has already
been determined before hand. For every kind of offense there is already a prescribed corresponding
penalty.
4. The emphasis is the act itself with little regard for the actor/criminal. ―The song not the singer‖.
B. The Positivist or Humanist Theory. Its characteristics are:

1. Man is essentially good but by reason of outside factors or influences he is constrained to do
wrong despite his volition to the contrary.
2. The purpose of penalty is to reform the offender
3. The penalty to be imposed is that arrived at upon recommendation of a social scientist,
sociologist, psychologist and similar experts. The penalty therefore varies for each offender although
they committed the same violation.
4. The emphasis is on the actor/criminal. ―The singer not the song‖.
C. The Ecclectic or Mix Theory. This combines the good features of both the classical and positivist
theories.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
D. The Utilitarian Theory or Protective Theory. This holds that although a person violated a penal
law, still the person is punished only if it is proven the person is an actual or a potential danger to
society. Per Magno vs. CA (June 26, 1992)‖ the primary function of punishment is the protection of
society against actual and potential wrongdoers and it behooves upon a court of law that in applying
the punishment imposed upon the accused, the object of retribution of a wronged society, should be
directed against the actual and potential wrongdoers‖.
1. This theory was applied as justification in several criminal cases of violation of B.P. 22 where the
accused was meted only a fine as well as in libel cases where again the penalty imposed was only
a fine and not imprisonment.
VII. Theory to which the Philippines adhere.
The Philippines does not adhere to one theory exclusively.
1. The Revised Penal Code is essentially of the Classical School. It is based on the Spanish Penal
Code which in turn is based on the French Penal Code and both codes belong to the classical
school. However there are certain provisions which apply the Positivist Theory such as the
provisions on minors, the articles on the modifying circumstances, the provision on impossible
crimes.
2. As for special laws, there are those following the positivist theory such as the Probation Law, the
Special Protection to Women and Children while others are based on the classical school, such as
the Heinous Crime Law and the Dangerous drugs Law, The Anti Torture Law, The Anti- Human
Trafficking law, law on firearms and explosives.
3. The Supreme Court has often applied the Utilitarian Theory in B.P. 22 and libel cases to justify
the imposition of fine as sole penalty and deleted imprisonment.
VII. Characteristics of Penal Laws.
A. Generality. A Penal Law must not be selective or exclusive in its application but must be
applied generally to all the inhabitants. This answers the question: who are bound by the penal law?
Upon whom is the penal law applicable? This applies whenever an accused claims he is not criminally
liable because of his unique personal character referring either to his nationality, profession, occupation
or religion and similar personal characteristics.
1. Penal Laws shall apply to all who live or sojourn in the Philippines irrespective of race, sex,
religion, wealth, nationality or citizenship. They may be permanent or temporary residents or are
transients or foreign visitors, such as tourists.
2. This is in conformity with article 14 of the New Civil Code which provides: ―Penal laws and those
of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in Philippine territory
subject to the principles of public international law and treaty stipulations‖.
3. But the following are exempt i.e. they cannot be arrested or prosecuted for violation of Philippine
Penal laws:
a). Those who enjoy immunity from arrest and prosecution by reason of the Principles of Public
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
International law . The immunity, referred to as ―Diplomatic Immunity” is of two kinds: (i)
Functional Immunity- the immunity is granted to foreign officials by reason of the fact that they are
performing state functions and (ii) Personal Immunity: those granted to foreign nationals by reason
of their peculiar personal circumstances, or because of the particular office which they are holding.
The immunity includes acts not related to their functions.
(i). Sovereigns and heads of Foreign states whether on official or personal visit including
members of their official or personal family.
(ii). Visiting Foreign political representatives, the nuncio, including members of their official
retinue or entourage.
(iii). Resident Foreign Diplomatic Officers particularly the Ambassadors, Ministers Residents,
Charge d‘ affaires, internuncios
Iv). Foreign delegates to international conventions who enjoy ―Functional Immunity‖
What about the personnel and staff of diplomats? Under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic
Relations, by way of extension the Heads of Missions and their diplomatic staff enjoy diplomatic
immunity but not the administrative, technical and support staff.
b) Those who enjoy immunity from prosecution by reason of treaty stipulations. They refer to
foreign nationals who are covered by exemption granted by a treaty to which the Philippines is a
signatory. For example: the officers of the World Health Organization enjoy immunity because the
Philippines acceded to the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies
of the United Nations. ( WHO vs. Aquino, Nov. 29, 1972)
Example: Consular Immunity. As a rule consuls i.e persons appointed by a state to take charge and
represent the commercial interest of the sending state do not enjoy the diplomatic immunity of
diplomatic agents/officials.
If at all there is consular immunity, two requirements must be met:
(i) The consular immunity must be provided for in a treaty adhered to by the receiving state
and
(ii) This immunity extends only to acts performed in relation to the exercise of consular
functions i.e function related.
The Philippines is a signatory to the the 1967 Convention on Consular Convention. Thus, the rule in
the Philippines is this: consuls of foreign states who are in the Philippines are immune from arrest
and prosecution by virtue of Article 43 of the l967 Convention on Consular Relation.
c). Those who are exempt or immune by reason of a Law of Preferential Application i.e a law
which specifically grants immunity from arrest and prosecution to certain specified persons.
1. The constitution provides: (i) Presidential immunity to the President during his term of office but
only in respect to acts executed in the performance of his official duties (ii) Parliamentary
immunity, under certain conditions, to members of congress
2. R.A. 75 which recognizes certain immunities of foreign resident diplomatic and consular
representatives provided said foreign country grants the same immunities to Philippine
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
diplomatic and consular representatives stationed in said country (Principle of Reciprocity).

a). The law extends the immunity to the domestic servants of the foreign ambassadors
provided their names were registered with the Department of Foreign Affairs and transmitted
to the Chief of Police of Manila.
b). Note that even without R.A 75, the immunity granted to the resident foreign diplomatic
representatives would be in accordance with customary international practices.
3 Code of Muslim Personal laws (P.D. 1083) under which it provides that‖ penal laws relative to the
crime of bigamy shall not apply to a person married under Muslim Law where the requirements
set therein are met‖.
4. Laws involving children or CICLs whereby persons who were charged for an offense during the
period of their minority but which case was dismissed, or they were acquitted, or were convicted
but they underwent successful rehabilitation, cannot be held criminally liable but only as to the
offenses of perjury or falsification.
5. Sec. 17-C of RA 10364: The Expanded Anti Trafficking in Persons Act of 2012) which grants
immunity from any action or suit in favor of ―(a) law enforcement official (b) social worker or (c)
persons acting in compliance with a lawful order from any of the above persons, for lawful acts
done or statements made during an authorized rescue operations, recovery or
rehabilitation/intervention or an investigation or prosecution of an anti-trafficking case, provided
that such acts shall have been made in good faith‖
B. Prospectivity. This answers the question: in reference to the time of commission, what
acts/omissions are covered by the penal law? Penal laws apply only to future acts or omissions
committed or incurred after the effectivity of the law. They do not have retroactive application
(Irretrospectivity). Acts/omissions are punished in accordance with the laws in force at the time of their
commission.
1. However a penal law may be given retroactive effect if it is favorable to the accused provided he
is not a habitual delinquent. But even if favorable, there is no retroactive effect if it so provided by
the law.
2. The term law includes Judicial Decisions and Rules of Procedure as well as administrative rulings
and circulars. Thus the Circular issued by the Supreme Court as to the penalty for Violation of B.P.
22 was applied retroactively to those charged prior to said Circular.
C. Territoriality. A penal law must be applicable to conduct committed only within a definite
territory. This answers the question: in what place or where is a penal law enforceable? As a rule a
penal law is applicable or enforceable only within the territorial jurisdiction of the authority which enacted
the law.
1. Thus city/municipal penal ordinances are enforceable only within the territorial jurisdiction of the
city/municipality concerned. Laws of national application are enforceable only within Philippine
Territory.
2. Under the Principle of Intra-territoriality, for the Philippine Penal Law to be applied the act must
be committed within Philippine Territory, or if it is a continuing or transitory act, an element must
have taken place within Philippine territory. Consequently, if none of the elements took place within
the Philippine territory, the act will not be punished under Philippine Penal Laws even if the effects
of said act took place within the Philippine territory.
a). Where the offenders contract a second marriage abroad, and thereafter reside in the
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Philippines, the offenders may not be liable for bigamy. However they maybe liable for
concubinage or adultery as the case may be.
b). In case of bouncing checks where the check was issued in the Philippines even If drawn
against a foreign bank, or where the check was issued abroad but drawn against a local bank,
Philippine penal laws will apply.
c). Philippine penal laws on kidnapping/abduction will apply where the victim was taken abroad
and brought to the Philippines, or where the victim was taken away in the Philippines and then
brought abroad.
2. Philippine territory includes:

a). The geographical territory. The terestial ( land or native soil) fluvial and maritime territory i.e
inland and territorial waters, as defined in the Constitution and recognized by the international
community
b). The extended territory by legal fiction (ex territoriality) under public international law
i). The premises of Philippine Diplomatic missions abroad
ii). War ships and airships
c).Up to 24 miles from the base of the territorial sea for purposes of enforcing the Tariff and
Customs Law
d). Within 200 miles (The Exclusive Economic Zone) for purposes of protecting the maritime
wealth
e). As to the aerial territory, there are 3 schools of thought:
i). The Absolute Theory in that subjacent state exercises full authority up to the outer space
ii). The Relative Theory in that the subjacent state exercises authority up to where it has
effective control
iii). The Open Space theory in that no country may exercise jurisdiction over the air space
4. Will Philippine Penal laws apply to violations thereof committed within the premises of foreign
diplomatic missions in the Philippines? Yes because the ground occupied by the foreign
diplomatic mission is not in fact the territory of the foreign state but part of the native soil.
However, the service or judicial process must be with the prior permission from the foreign
diplomatic representatives because of the principle of “ inviolability of diplomatic premises‖ (
Reagan vs. CIR, 30 SCRA 968).
6. Justifications for Extra-territoriality: Principles Invoked by States to justify their jurisdiction over
acts committed beyond their territory:
a), Passive Personality Principle: crimes committed outside the territory of a state are subject to its
penal laws if the victims are its nationals
b). Protective Principle: this is based on national security under which a state may have jurisdiction
over persons accused of acts in pursuance of overthrowing the state‘s government
c). Affects Doctrine: a state may have jurisdiction over acts beyond its territory if it affects its
commerce or harms its citizens
d). Universality Principle under which states have jurisdiction over crimes universally recognized to
be crimes against humanity such as piracy, slave-trading, torture, genocide and terrorism.
7. Extraterritorial Application of Philippine Penal laws
1. Pursuant to Principles of Public International law
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
2. Pursuant to Article 2 of the RPC

3. Pursuant to provisions of Special Laws
ARTICLE 2. EXTRA TERRRITORIALITY
Article 2 enumerates the various situations when the Revised Penal Code may apply to offenses
committed beyond the territory of the Philippines.
A. Over offenses committed on board a Philippine Ship or Airship
1. This is based on the Affects Doctrine

2. This paragraph applies only to commercial ships/air ships. This should be understood to mean
non-military ships or airships, whether used for commercial purposes or for private use. If a crime
is committed on board a military ship/air ship, such crimes are covered by Philippine Penal laws
not because of this paragraph but by virtue of public international law (ex territoriality) which holds
that such military crafts are extensions of the territory of the state which owns them.
3. The nationality of the vessel as a Philippine ship/airship is determined by its registration in
accordance with Philippine laws and not by the nationality of its owners. This is in consonance
with the Flag State Rule. All vessels registered elsewhere are foreign vessels. However, during
war time, enemy vessels are those owned by the nationals of the enemy even if registered in the
Philippines or elsewhere.
4. This paragraph applies in two situations:
a). If the Philippine ship is in the international waters or in the high seas i.e. that portion of the
waters which is not within the territory of any state
b) If the Philippine ship is within the territorial waters of a foreign state. Under the principle of
International Comity the foreign state is given the priority to assume jurisdiction over the offense.
If it does not then the Philippine courts can try the offense.
c) If the ship is within Philippine waters what applies is the Principle of Territoriality.
5. General Principles governing the jurisdiction over offenses committed on board merchant
vessels within the territorial waters of another state:
a). French Rule: The stress is on the nationality of the vessel. Such offenses are triable by the
courts of the state which owns the vessel, unless the crimes affect the security, peace and order
of the host state
b) English/British Rule: The stress is on the territory or place where the vessel is hence the
crimes are triable under the laws of the host state, unless the crimes pertain merely to the internal
management or discipline of the vessel and its crew.
It is said that the Philippines adhere to the English rule. There is however no difference in the
effect of both rules. One rule is the exception to the other.
6. QUESTION: Do Philippine Penal laws apply to crimes committed on board foreign vessels
which are within Philippine waters?
a). No if the vessel is a warship
b). Yes if the vessel is unregistered or is a pirate ship
c) If it is a merchant vessel:
i). Yes, if the Philippine is the port of destination under the principle of territoriality, unless the
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
crime pertains merely to the internal management/discipline of the vessel ( English Rule)
ii). No, if the vessel is merely passing in transit, or is forced to temporarily dock or enter
Philippine waters, unless the crime affects the security, peace and order of the Philippines,
such as killings, rape or serious infliction even if committed by a crew against another crew.
iii). QUESTION: A Filipino crew member of a Japanese ship which docked in Manila was
found keeping ten kilograms of shabu in his bunker. Is he liable under the Dangerous Drugs
law? Answer: No if the vessel is merely in transit, unless he sniffs the shabu. Yes if the
Philippines is the port of destination. In PP. vs. Wong Cheng ( 46 Phil. 729) it was held that
smoking opium on board a vessel in transit is already punishable as it produces its pernicious
effects upon the Philippines, but mere possession of opium on board a vessel in transit is not
punishable per se, per U.S vs. Look Chaw ( 18 Phil. 573)
d). Note however that under the Convention on the Law of the Sea to which the Philippines is
a signatory, it provides that the criminal jurisdiction of the coastal state i.e. Philippines, should not
be exercised in connection with any offense committed on board the ship during its passage
except in the following cases:
(i) if the consequence of the crime extends to the coastal state
(ii) if the crime is a kind to disturb the peace of the country, like killing, or the good order of the
territorial sea
(iii) if the assistance of the local authorities has been requested by the master of the ship or by a
diplomatic agent or consular officer of the flag state
(iv) if such measures are necessary for the suppression of illicit traffic in narcotic drugs or
psychotropic substances
B. Over crimes involving the forging or counterfeiting of Philippine notes, currencies, and bringing into
the Philippines of said forged notes.
1. The act of forging/counterfeiting is in a foreign country and the actors may be foreigners.
2. The reason is to protect the monetarial system and economy of the country and preserve its
financial credit and stability.(Affects Doctrine)
C. Over Crimes committed by public officers in relation to their office.
1. If the offense is not related to their office but committed within the premises of the Philippine
Diplomatic Missions, Philippine laws still apply.
2. The reason is because the offenses affect the integrity of Philippine public administration. There
is a need to preserve public faith in the government.
3. Examples: bribery, malversation, infidelity, falsification, graft and corruption.
D. Over Crimes against the Law of Nations and those against national security. This is based on the
Universality Principle.
1. Crimes against the law of nations include:
(a). The traditional crimes of (i). Piracy in the High Seas (ii) Mutiny in the High Seas
(b). Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court:
(i).Genocide: acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
or religious group
(ii). Crimes Against Humanity: acts committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack
directed against civilian population
(iii). War crimes: violations of the Geneva conventions of August 12, 1949 and serious violations
of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established
framework of international law.
2. Pirates are hostis humanis generis or universal criminals and they may be tried under the laws of
the country which first acquire jurisdiction over them. The Somali pirates who took hostage an
American captain may be tried in the Philippines.
3. The crimes against national security are those covered under Title I, Book II such as: treason
proper, conspiracy and proposal to commit treason, and espionage.
E. The following are examples of specific Philippine Penal Laws which provide for extra territorial
application:
(i). Violations of R.A. No. 9851 known as the Philippine Act on Crimes Against International
Humanitarian Law, Genocide and Other Crimes Against Humanity
(ii). The crime known as terrorism under R.A. 9372 or the Human Security Act of 2007. This law
applies to any person who commits an act covered by the law if committed: (a) against Philippine
citizens (b) or persons of Philippine descent, when their citizenship or ethnicity was a factor in the
commission of the crime‖ even if the act was done outside the Philippines. This is based on the
Passive Personality principle.
(iii). Trafficking In Persons or Violations of RA. 10364: Section 26-A of The Expanded Anti-
Trafficking Against Persons Act of 2012 provides:
― The state shall exercise jurisdiction over violations of the law even if committed outside
the Philippines and whether or not such act or acts constitute an offense at the place of
commission having been commenced in the Philippines and other elements having been
committed in another country, if the suspect or accused is a Philippine citizen or is a permanent
resident of the Philippines or has committed the act against a citizen of the Philippines‖.
The act or an element must have begun in the Philippines to be covered.
CRIMES AND FELONIES
I. In General: Penal laws punishes only external conduct whether in the form of a physical act,
written, oral; intentional, act of omission or refusal to act or negligent acts.
1. A crime is an act or omission in violation of any penal law forbidding or commanding the doing
the act, under pain of penalty.
2. Felony refers to an act or omission which is punished by the Revised Penal Code
3. An infraction is a violation of an ordinance
4. An offense is a violation of a special law.
5. Misdemeanor is an American concept and is not used in the Philippines.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
II. CLASSIFICATION OF CRIMES/FELONIES
A. According to their inherent nature

1. Mala In Se. These are acts/omissions which are inherently wrong and are universally
condemned as such. Even without a law they are in themselves evil/bad and ought not to be done.
Thus, killing or injuring a human being, sex crimes, the taking of the property of another without
or against his will, destruction of the property of another, are in themselves universally considered
as wrong.
The principles involve the following:

a). Criminal liability is based on the moral trait of the offender hence the existence of intent or
dolo is essential in determining criminal liability
b). Good faith and lack of intent are defenses
c). In determining the penalty the following are taken into account: (i) the presence or absence of
modifying circumstances (ii) the degree of accomplishment of the crime (iii) the degree of
participation of the offender
d). All crimes defined and penalized under the Revised Penal Code are considered as mala in se
e). Crimes punished by special laws are mala in se in two situations:
First if they are inherently wrong such as (i) disenfranchising a voter (ii) the practice known as
―dagdag-bawas‖ . The reason for the latter being : ― otherwise, even errors and mistakes due to
over work and fatigue would be punishable… intentionally increasing or decreasing the number
of votes received by a candidate is inherently immoral, since it is done with malice and intent to
injure another‖ (Garcia vs. C.A., March 14, 2006).(iii) Child Abuse (iv) VAWC (v) trafficking in
persons
Second is if the act is a derivative of a felony such as: piracy in Philippine Waters and Highway
robbery under P.D. 532; carnapping, cattle rustling.
f). Heinous: a grievious, odious, and hateful offense which by reason of its inherent or manifest
wickedness, viciousness, atrocity, and perversity, are regarded as seriously outrageous to the
common standards or norms of decency and morality in a just, civilized and orderly society.
2. Mala Prohibita. Acts or omissions which are not inherently evil or immoral but become
punishable because of a law which says they are forbidden. They are violations of regulatory
statutes or rules of convenience designed to secure a more orderly regulation of the affairs of
society. Laws defining crimes mala prohibita condemn behavior directed not against any particular
individual but against public order. A violation is deemed a wrong against society as a whole and
generally unattended with any particular harm to definite persons ( PP .vs Doria, Jan. 22, 1999).
The principles involve the following:

a). The moral trait is not considered
b). Good faith and lack of criminal intent are not defenses. The sole issue is whether the law has
been violated.
i). However it must be proven that there was an Intent to perpetrate the act i.e. that the act
was performed voluntarily, willfully and persistently despite knowledge that the act is
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
prohibited. The act is not a casual or accidental performance.

ii). In crimes involving the possession of prohibited articles, this requirement is met by proof of
an Intent to Possess (animus possidendi).
Example: R.A. 9516 (Further Amending PD 1866) provides that‖ a temporary, incidental,
casual, harmless, or transient possession or control of any explosive or incendiary device,
without the knowledge of its existence or its explosive or incendiary character, shall not be a
violation…‖
c). Modifying circumstances, the degree of accomplishment/execution and degree of

participation, are not taken into account. Hence there are no attempted or frustrated stages as
well as accomplices or accessories unless the law provides otherwise.
d). There are crimes which, though punished by special laws, are still mala inse
a). those which are inherently wrong, such as the crime known as Child Abuse and wife battery,
disenfranchising a voter and the practice known as ―dagdag-bawas‖ . The reason for the latter
being : ― otherwise, even errors and mistakes due to over work and fatigue would be
punishable… intentionally increasing or decreasing the number of votes received by a
candidate is inherently immoral, since it is done with malice and intent to injure another‖ (Garcia
vs. C.A., March 14, 2006)
b). Offenses which are derivatives of crimes under the Revised Penal Code such as cattle
rustling, carnapping, piracy in Philippine waters
B. According to the manner of commission they are either intentional or culpable ( Article 3)
1. Intentional or those committed with deliberate intent (Malice). They were consciously performed
with full knowledge of their consequences and accompanied with a purpose of causing injury or
harm.
a). They may be by positive acts, such as the act of taking property, injuring, or performing a
lascivious act such as kissing the victim. They may be oral or written.
b). They may be by omissions. Crimes by omissions result when there is failure to act when
required by law, a deliberate refusal to do what the law commands. Examples are: Misprision of
treason, Arbitrary Detention under Article 125, Failure to issue receipts, Refusal to Render
Assistance towards the administration of Justice, Abandonment of Persons in Danger of Dying,
Abandonment of Minors.
c) Its elements are freedom, intelligence and intent. If any of these elements is absent, the act
will not give rise to an intentional crime
4. Culpable or those which result from a lack of skill (imprudence) or lack of foresight
(negligence).
a).What is punished is the state of mind of the accused unlike in intentional felonies where the
law looks into the act.
b). Its elements are freedom, intelligence and lack of skill/foresight
c). QUESTION: Is negligence a mode of committing a crime or is it the crime itself?

(i). Under Article 3 negligence is a mode of incurring criminal liability. It is one of the two ways
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
by which a crime is committed. However under Article 365, negligence is the felony itself. The
resulting injuries are considered merely for purposes of determining the penalty to be imposed.
The negligence is considered as reckless if the result is foreseeable otherwise it is considered
as simple negligence.
d). Nomenclature of crimes through negligence if several injuries result.

i). There is only one crime which is the negligence. Since the felony is the negligence itself the
proper name of the crime would be reckless/simple negligence resulting in multiple homicide,
multiple physical injuries and/or damage to property.
Ii). In the case of Jason Ivler vs. Hon. Modesto San Pedro ( Nov. 10, 2010), the Supreme Court
finally declared that reckless imprudence is only one crime and the consequences on persons
and property are material only to determine the penalty. This decision effectively abandoned
the pronouncements in previous cases which held the contrary view.
e). The basis for the penalty for culpable felonies are (i) whether the harm was foreseeable and
(ii) the gravity of the resulting injury. The penalty is, as a rule lower than the penalty provided for
had the offense been intentional. The exception is in the crime of malversation where the penalty
is the same whether it was intentional or culpable.
f). If the accused is prosecuted under an Information charging him with an intentional felony but
the evidence shows the crime was through negligence, he may be convicted for negligence
without amending the original Information. This is because, under the principle of inclusion of
offenses, an intentional felony includes a culpable felony. Thus an accused charged for intentional
malversation or falsification may be convicted of culpable malversation or negligence resulting in
falsification ( PP vs. Jose Uy, 475 SCRA 248)
g). There are felonies which cannot be committed through negligence (i). if the nature of the crime
requires a specific state of mind on the part of the accused, or (ii). if the elements of the felony
include malice, deceit, or specific intent, or (iii). when the very nature of the crime is such that it
can only arise if it was intended.
The following cannot be committed by negligence:
(i). Murder and rape

(ii). Estafa, theft/robbery which requires the intent to gain as an element
(iii). Sex crimes which requires a lewed design or intent to obtain sexual gratification
(iv). Crimes against personal security such as kidnapping and abduction, threats and coercion
(v). Crimes against National Security and the Law of Nations
(vi). Political crimes
(vii). All crimes against honor
(vii). Crimes Against Public Morals such as gambling, prostitution, vagrancy, grave scandal
(viii). Certain crimes by public officers such as Bribery and Technical Malversation
h). There can be no conspiracy through negligence

i). Violations of special laws cannot be committed through negligence
j). Following the decision in the Ivler case, the principle of complex crimes do not apply to
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
culpable felonies.
3. Requirement of Voluntariness: whether the felony is intentional or culpable, it must be

voluntary which requires
a). Freedom in that the accused acted of his own free will and was not under compulsion from
any form of threat or force
b). Intelligence in that the accused was aware of the nature of his actions and of its
consequences
c) In intentional crimes he acted with evil intent (malice) in that he intended to do harm, or that
he was careless or negligent in a culpable felony.
C. According to whether they are capable of being accomplished and are capable to
produce material injuries (Article 4)
1. Real/Material Crimes: the act results in actual damage to a victim either to his life, security,
rights, property or honor.
2. Impossible Crimes: where the acts do not produce any actual damage or injury. They refer to
acts which would have been an offense against persons or property, but the crime is not produced
by reason of its inherent impossibility of accomplishment or on account of inadequate or
ineffectual means (Article 4).
a). Kinds of Impossibility: Legal and Physical Impossibility.
i). Legal Impossibility- the accused performed the act prohibited by law with the intention of
bringing about the crime, but based on the juridical nature, concept or elements of the offense,
the intended crime does not result.
Examples:
(i) Shooting a person not knowing he is already dead is an impossible crime because
homicide or murder requires that the victim must be alive at the time the injury was inflicted.
ii) Stealing a property which turns out to be the property of the thief results to an impossible
crime because the law requires that in theft, the property must belong to another. One cannot
be guilty of theft of his own property.
ii). Physical impossibility- the intended crime can not be produced due to factors or
circumstances beyond the control of, or unknown to, the accused. Example: pick-pocketting an
empty pocket, opening a safe without contents. Firing into a room not knowing the intended
victim was absent therefrom ( Intod vs. CA 215 SCRA 52 ). Stealing a check which turns out
be a watered check.
b). Ineffectual means: under no circumstances can the means employed produce the crime.
Examples: (i) putting sugar in the food can never produce instant death (ii) pulling the trigger
aimed at an unsuspecting victim which gun had no bullet. Inadequate means: the quantity or
amount is not sufficient to produce the desired result. A milligram of arsenic cannot kill. If the
means used is adequate but the intended result is not produced, the accused is liable for the
frustrated stage of the intended crime. Thus if 10 grams of poison failed to kill the victim due
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
to medical attention, the accused is liable for frustrated murder.
c). Principles involved:
i). The accused must not be aware of the impossibility of accomplishment of the intended crime
or that the means is inadequate or ineffectual.
ii). An impossible crime is a crime of last resort in that the act performed should not be
punished by another provision of the Revised Penal Code. Thus when one forcibly robs another
but the property turns out to be his own, such act is punished as grave coercion hence the
principle of impossible crime does not apply.
Where the crime requires the victim to be a woman, e.g. abduction, seduction or consented
acts of lasciviousness, and the accused honestly believed his victim to be a woman but who
turned out to be a man, the principle of impossible crime has no application. The accused
should be charged with another offense.
iii). An impossible crime has no stages of execution and is punished by a fixed penalty of
Arresto Mayor and a fine of P500.00. It can not be committed through negligence.
iv).The resulting injury is limited to crimes against persons; such as those resulting in death,
physical injuries or rape; and crimes against property such as theft and estafa. There may be
an impossible crime of robbery by force upon things but there is no impossible crime of robbery
by means of violence or intimidation.
v). The correct and complete nomenclature is: ―Impossible crime of theft, murder, homicide
physical injuries‖, as the case may be.
d). The principle of an impossible crime is based on the positivist theory because while objectively
the accused has not committed a crime, subjectively he is a potential criminal. He is punished to
protect society from his criminal tendencies. (Personal opinion: it is more the protective principle
which applies.)
D. According to whether they have Stages of Commission (Article 6).
1. Formal Crimes: those committed in one instance and do not have any attempted or frustrated
stages. Examples: threats, coercion, physical injuries, libel, defamation, Alarms and Scandal.
2. Material Crimes: those with at least two stages of execution.
E. According to their Stage of Execution (article 6)
1. Attempted Felony
2. Frustrated Felony
3. Consummated felony
F. According to their Gravity (Article 9).
1. Grave felony
2. Less Grave felony
3. Light Felony
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
G. According to the Number of Violations Constituting the Crime
1. Singular Crimes: One Separate Crime Per Violation or Separate Act–Separate Crime Principle:
there is one crime resulting from one injury or act or violation and meriting a penalty distinct and
separate from the penalty imposed for similar injuries from similar acts. Thus if A shoots X, stabs Y
and boxed Z, each act results to individual crimes with separate penalties.
2. Plural crimes: Several Violations/Injuries But One Crime and One PenaltyPrinciple: a crime
where there are several violations or acts committed or injuries inflicted but all of these are
considered only as producing one crime and given a single penalty. Under the law and in the mind
of the offender the several acts constitute only one crime.
a). Complex Crime Proper ( delito compuesto) when one act gives rise to two or more grave or
less grave felonies. Under article 48, the penalty for the most serious offense is that imposed.
E.g.: multiple homicide.
b). Compound crime ( delito complejo) when one offense is necessary to commit another. Under
article 48 there is only penalty- that of the most serious offense. E.g.: Estafa through Falsification
c). Composite Crimes or Special complex Crimes: when two or more different crimes are
committed but these are considered only as one felony and only one fixed penalty is imposed.
E.g.: robbery with homicide.
d). Continuous/Continued Crimes ( delito continuado): an instantaneous but single offense

consisting of several acts arising from one criminal intent, which are committed at or about the
same time, in or about the same and place, against one or more persons, and violating the same
penal provision. E.g.: taking of two roosters belonging to different persons. (Two birds with one
stone). Robbery of several persons or different houses within the same area pursuant to a single
intent to commit a general robbery, is only one crime of robbery. Threat against two or more
persons in a single occasion.
(i). When applied to theft, this sometimes is known as the single larceny doctrine that is, ―
the taking of several things whether belonging to the same or different owners, at the same
time and place, constitutes but one larceny‖ ( Santiago vs. Garchitorena 228 SCRA 214)
(ii). The principle applies to violations of Special laws such as in the crime of large Scale Illegal
Recruitment, carnapping, cattle rustling, Human Trafficking, Violation of the Anti-Graft law (
Santiago vs. Garchitorena)
(iii). It does not apply to crimes against persons. Querry: Does it apply to estafa by deceit? Or
to crimes against personal security such as kidnapping of several victims?
e). Absorption of Crime Principle: There is only one crime for which the actor will be held liable
and the other acts or injuries or crimes will be deemed elements or ingredients of this one crime,
consequently they lose their identity as distinct crimes
(i) generally it is the most serious offense which is preferred for which the actor is liable
except as to political offenses
(ii) in cases of felonies, what they absorb is another felony and not an offense except as to
political offenses
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
(iii) an offense cannot absorb a felony unless the special law so provides . An example is
VAWC which absorbs certain felonies.
f). Other Crime as Aggravating Circumstance: there is only one crime and the other injuries
or violations will be considered aggravating circumstances
H. According to the situs or place of commission. This classification is important for purpose of
determining the venue or court where the offender is to be prosecuted and tried.
1. Localized crimes: those where all of the elements took place in one jurisdiction, such as theft,
homicide, threats
2. Transitory crimes: also known as moving crimes refer to those where the elements took place in
different jurisdictions such as estafa, kidnapping, abduction. Note crimes: committed on board
moving vehicles or ships are placed in this category.
I. According to the Time Frame of Commission
1. Instantaneous Crimes: those which are produced or which arise at the very moment the acts of
execution are performed. E.g.: theft, defamation, physical injuries, bigamy.
2. Continuing: a single offense which is executed, or which arose from acts performed, within a span
of time. Example: estafa, kidnapping.
Note: a continued crime (delito continuado) is different in concept from a continuing crime. A
continued crime is always localized and instantaneous but a continuing crime may be either localized
or transitory. Kidnapping may be localized or continuing, and transitory. The crimes of rebellion and
treason are examples of continuing and transitory crimes.
J. According to its Procedural requirement for Prosecution.
1. Private Crimes: those which cannot be prosecuted de officio; those which require that the
offended party file a complaint for the criminal case to be instituted. These are exclusively the crimes
against chastity and the crimes of adultery and concubinage, but not rape.
2. Public: those which do not require the intervention of the offended party and which may be
instituted, investigated and prosecuted on complaint of any member of the public or law enforcement
agency.
K. According to whether the crime produces civil liability.
1. Victimless crimes: those which do not result to any injury to a private person such that no civil
liability may be imposed on the accused.
2. Crimes with Private Victims or Offended Parties: those where the injury or damage to a person is
the essence of the crime and where a civil liability may be imposed upon the accused.
L. According to Motive and Goal.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. Ordinary or common Crimes: those committed for personal or private reasons

2. Political Crimes: those which involve the use of force, violence, terror, fraud, deception, economic
pressure, or any other illegal means, to create, maintain, or enhance the power, interest, or ideology
of a group, organization, or institution, to the detriment of, or destruction of other rival groups, often
causing fear in and victimization of innocent persons.
a). Kinds:
i). Political crimes of domination and oppression or state crimes- those committed by powerful
institutions of the state. Examples: domestic espionage, human rights violations, restriction of
political rights, and enforced disappearance.
Enforced disappearance as a state practice has been banned by the international community so
that the ban on it is now a generally accepted principle of international law which is part of the law
of the Philippines even if the Philippines did not sign the Declaration on the Protection of All
Persons From Enforced Disappearance. Its elements are: (i) arrest, detention, abduction or any
form of deprivation of of liberty (ii) carried out by agents of the state or persons or group of persons
acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the state (iii) followed by a refusal to
acknowledge the detention, or concealment of the fate of the disappeared persons and (iv)
placement of the disappeared person outside the protection of the law (Razon Jr.vs. Tagitis, 606
SCRA 598, December 3, 2009)
ii). Group or hate or bias crimes- those committed by rival groups against one another. Example:
crimes based on racism.
iii). Political crimes of rebellion, sedition, coup d‘etat- those committed by groups against the
existing social and political order.
b). Principles involved:

i). “Political Offense Doctrine‖. Ordinary crimes committed in furtherance of the political crimes
are divested of their character as ―common‖ and assume political complexion of the main crime of
which they are mere ingredients, and consequently, cannot be punished separately from the
principal offense, or complexed with the same. Any ordinary act assumes a different nature by
being absorbed in the rime of rebellion. ( Satur Ocampo vs. Abando 715 SCRA 673, Feb. 11,
2014 affirming the Hernandez and the Enrile vs. Salazar rulings ). They are often loosely referred
to as “Crimes with political coloration‖. A political crime is one directly against the political order
as well as such common crimes committed to achieve the political purpose. Common crimes
committed in furtherance of a political crime are absorbed‖ ( Gonzales vs. Abaya, 449
SCRA 445).
ii). What differentiates political from common crimes is the motive and goal of the offender. The
burden of proving political motivation must be discharged by the defense, since motive is a state
of mind only the accused knows ( Ocampo vs. Abando).
(a). If an accused is charged with a common crime, such as murder, but if during trial he is
able to show that the common crime was indeed committed in furtherance of rebellion, then the
remedy is to amend the Information to conform to the evidence ( Ocampo vs. Abando)
iii). Political crimes maybe continuing and transitory.
M. According to their magnitude.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. Crimes Against the Law Of Nations: those which, on account of their magnitude, are deemed to
be a crime against all nations and may therefore be prosecuted and tried by any state.
2. Crimes Against A particular State (State Crimes): those which are defined as crimes and
penalized as such by the laws of a particular state and may only be tried and prosecuted by the said
state
N. According to whether the accused are adults or minors
1. Status Offenses: those which are considered as crimes if committed by minors but are not
punished if committed by adults.
O. Other Classifications: White Collar Crimes vs. Street Crimes; Cyber crimes
III. COMPONENT ELEMENTS OF A CRIME.
For one to be criminally liable for a felony by dolo, there must be a confluence of both an evil act and
an evil intent. ―Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea” ( PP vs. Manuel 476 SCRA 461)
A. The Actus Reus
1. This is the physical element consisting of an overt or observable physical activity or bodily
movement capable of producing an effect on the outside world. This may be in the form of: (a). a
physical positive conduct such as the act of throwing a stone, firing a gun (b). an omission such
failure to file the appropriate charges within the period prescribed by law, or (c). a negligent act
such as driving fast in a crowded street, or (d) written such as falsification or (e). oral act as in
defamation.
2. Mental acts are not included such as ideas, beliefs, thoughts. Status of a person is not also
included such as being poor, destitute or unemployed ( how about vagrancy?) being a female or
being of a certain age, or being in a certain state of health or intelligence.
3. The act/omission must be penalized by law
4. The act/omission must be voluntary. There must be freedom of action or choice. The actus reus
must be the result of a conscious choice and deliberate will of the accused. The following are
examples of acts not considered as voluntary:
i). Acts resulting from force or threat
ii). Acts resulting from reflexes, convulsive bodily movements, spasms
iii). Acts done while a person is asleep, unconscious or in a state of hypnosis
iv). Any movement which is not the product of the conscious effort or determination of a
person
B. The Mens Rea (meaning guilty mind)
1. This is the mental component of the crime. It refers specifically to the state of mind required in
order that a person will be criminally liable. It is often associated with the evil, bad or criminal mind.
An act must proceed from a criminal or evil mind. The following maxims are based on this
requirement: (i). actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea ( an act done without criminal intent is not
a crime) (ii). ―I am not a criminal unless my intention/mind is criminal‖.
2. The mens rea is either the malice in intentional felonies or the negligent or uncaring or
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
indifferent attitude, recklessness or willful blindness, in culpable felonies. ( I DON‘T GIVE A DAMN
ATTITUDE)
3. Mens Rea in intentional felonies may either be:
a). The general criminal intent- the evil or bad purpose which is presumed whenever a person
commits a wrongful act.The offender is said to have intended the act. The reason for the
commission of the act is to harm or injure or cause damage to another as to his/her person,
property, reputation, security, or to the public at large.
b) The specific criminal intent- this refers to the specific purpose or result to be achieved. It is the
use of a specific means to achieve a specific result.
i).Whenever a crime requires a specific intent, such intent becomes an element of the crime
and must therefore be proved directly or by inference. Examples: the intent to kill in
attempted/frustrated homicide; the intent of gain in theft; the intent to have sex in attempted
rape; lewed design in abduction.
ii). Specific intent may be proved by proof of the scienter or knowledge of a particular fact or
illegality which will result in criminal liability. This scienter may be actual or constructive.
Thus adultery/concubinage requires knowledge of the married state of the co-accused; direct
assault requires the accused to know the victim is a person in authority; the accessory must
know of the commission of the crime by the principal. The fence must know the article is the
subject of theft or robbery.
c). There are crimes where malice or criminal intent need not be proved:
i). Crimes Mala Prohibita where the sole issues is whether the law was violated so long as
there was intent to perpetrate the act
ii). Strict Liability Crimes where it is enough to show that the act prohibited was committed
without regard to the mental state of the accused. Example: statutory rape and technical
malversation.
iii). Culpable felony where the malice is replaced by negligence.
d). Doctrine of Transferred Intent: If the accused intends an injury upon a particular person or
upon an intended victim but the injury befalls upon another, the original intent is transferred from
the intended victim to the actual victim, though not intended.
This principle applies in complex crimes proper ( delito complejo). Example: A man shoots at
X intending to kill him but he missed and the bullet hits and injures Y. The shooter is liable for
the complex crime of Attempted Homicide (for shooting at X) with Attempted/frustrated
Homicide for the injury of Y. If he killed X but the bullet exited and slightly injured Y, the crime
is Homicide with Attempted Homicide and not merely physical injuries. The original intention to
kill X is transferred and applied also to Y.
e). Defenses Against Malice or Intent

i). Proof of Good Faith: the state of mind consisting of honesty in belief, intention or purpose,
or absence of any bad or illegal intention
ii) Proof of Mistake of Fact (misapprehension of facts) which exempts a person from criminal
liability. It is expressed in the adage‖ Ignorantia facti excusat‖. It requires the following
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
elements:
(a). that the act would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believed them
to be
(b). the intention of the accused is lawful
©. There was no negligence on the part of the accused
Example: Petronius, the South African Olympic hero was convicted for shooting his girlfriend
who was inside the toilet whom he thought was an intruder. There was negligence.
In PP.vs. Oanis, Mistake of Fact was not appreciated in favor of policemen who shot death a
sleeping person whom they believed was the dangerous criminal they were ordered to arrest.
They had all the time to ascertain his identity.
iii). Mistake of fact applies only to intentional felonies and has no application to culpable
felonies. It does not also apply to strict liability crimes. The legal terminology of this defense is
―mistake of fact amounting to any of the justifying or exempting circumstance e.g. self
defense, defense of relative or stranger, performance of duty, obedience to superior order.
iv), The mistake refers to the situation and not to the identity of the victim. Thus; a husband
who shoots a woman engaged in sexual intercourse mistakenly believing her to his wife is not
entitled to this defense. What is involved is a mistake in identity.
v). This is different from Mistake of law where a person is not liable if he relied upon a law or
decision which was subsequently found to be invalid or erroneous.
5. According to the American Model Penal Code there are four kinds of intent:
a). Purposeful- where the accused had the desire to cause he result. This is synonymous to
our concept of specific intent.
b). Knowing- where the accused knew what he was doing and understood the probable results
thereof though he did not intend the result. This is similar to general intent.
c). Reckless- where the accused is indifferent to the results of his acts
d). Negligent- the failure of the accused to do something a reasonable man would do, it is
inattentiveness.
6. MOTIVE.
a). This is the personal or private reasons why an offender commits a crime. It is the moving
power which impels a person to do an act for a definitive result. Examples: profit or gain, anger,
jealousy, love, revenge, hatred, pride or ego.
b). By itself motive is not necessary for conviction and need not be proved. There are crimes
considered as senseless, in the same manner that proof of lack of motive is not a defense. The
exceptions are as follows:
i). when it is an essential element of the crime as in libel, malicious mischief, direct assault and
in political crimes.
ii). When the evidence against the accused is purely circumstantial
iii). When there is doubt as to the identity of the accused
iv). When the act produces several crimes as the act of entering the estate of another, proof
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
of motive is necessary to determine whether the offense is that of trespass, attempted theft, or
plain vagrancy.
v). When the accused sets up Defense of Stranger
c). Distinguished from intent
i). Motive is the moving power or personal reasons which impel a person to do an act for a
definite result. Intent is the purpose of using a particular means to bring about a desired result.
Thus the motive is revenge and the choice of the means to achieve it, which is by killing, is the
intent.
ii). Motive is as a rule, not an element whereas intent is an element of intentional felonies
iii). Motive, if attending a crime, always precedes intent; intent necessarily follows motive
iv). Motive is a matter of procedure while intent is a matter of criminal law.
d). Motive may indicate criminal intent. Thus heavy business losses and a desire to obtain cash
( motive) may indicate the intention to commit arson to collect on the insurance.
HOW CRIMINAL LIABILITY IS INCURRED
Article 4 provides. Criminal liability is incurred: (a) By committing a felony even if the wrong
done be different from that intended.(b) By committing an impossible crime.
I. The First Mode: By committing a felony.
A. The act or omission must be a felony. If the act is not a felony, the offender incurs no criminal
liability for the resulting injury. The following are illustrations:
1. A pregnant woman who, in order to commit suicide, drinks poison, but does not die, but suffers
an abortion, is not liable for abortion. Committing suicide is not a felony.
2. A man who points a gun at his head, fires but the bullet grazes his head and hits another killing
the latter, is not liable for the death, unless he could have foreseen that other people would be
placed in danger by his acts. In the latter case he would be liable for the death as a culpable
felony.
3. A man who wrests his bolo from one who took it, with such force that the point pierces another
who dies, is not liable for the death as taking back one‘s property is not a felony.
4. One who inflicts an injury upon another under any of the justifying circumstances is not liable
for the resulting injury. His act is not a felony but is considered as lawful. Example: In order to
save himself, a person shot at his five attackers. He missed and the bullet hit and killed an innocent
bystander. The person is not liable for the death.
Although the article refers to a felony, it was applied to carnapping which, while punished under
a special law, was held to be similar to theft or robbery, and hence is a felony within the meaning of
Article 4. Thus a carnapper was held liable for the death which occurred during the commission of
carnaping.
B. The offender is liable even if the felony does not produce any actual injury such as:
1. In the case of impossible crimes where it is not the result which is considered but the fact that
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
the offender is a potential danger to society.

2. In cases of victimless crimes such as gambling, vagrancy, or prostitution
3. When the desired result is not achieved as in the crime of false testimony/perjury where the
testimony is not believed.
C. Where an injury results, the Doctrine of Causation applies, i.e. the actor is liable for any and all
injuries or result if his act was the cause of said injuries/result. For what result or injury is the actor
liable?
1. For the actual result which is the intended result. The act is the Factual Cause.
2. For the actual result even if it is not the intended result if it is the direct, natural and logical
consequence of the felonious act. The act is the Proximate or legal Cause.
D. The Doctrine of Proximate or Legal Cause: that cause which in its natural and continuous
sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, without which the injury
would not have resulted . “El que es causa de la causa es el causa del mal causado‖. He who
is the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil caused‖.
1. The act may immediately produce an injury as when a man fires a gun and hits his victim who
dies instantly, or the injury is not produced instantly but the act sets in motion a series of events
constituting a natural and continuous chain of events which finally ends in the injury as the natural
and probable result.
2. The acts may either be of the following:

a). the performance of a positive act upon the person of the victim or upon his honor, security, or
rights For example: as stabbing him, which eventually results to his death; or uttering slanderous
words which bring him into disrepute; or sending threatening letters to cause him mental torture.
b). an act performed upon his property which may result to the destruction of his property, its loss
or diminution in value. The act on the property may also result in physical harm to the victim, such
as tampering with the brakes of his car causing it to be unmanageable till it falls down on a ravine
killing the victim, or burning another person‘s house not knowing a person is sleeping inside.
c). or an imprudent act, such as firing a gun in the air and the bullet hits a person in its descent;
or throwing a stone in a busy street. In a case the driver was negligent causing the bus to turn
turtle, the gas to spill which ignited when rescuers came with lighted torch resulting to the death
of several passengers. The driver was held liable as his negligent act was the proximate cause of
the death.
d). Or where fear is instilled in the mind of a person, or an immediate sense of danger, causing
the person to act to try to escape but in so doing, he injures himself or dies. ( Instilling a Sense of
Danger Principle)
i) the man who ran amuck in bus causing the passengers to jump outside and one is ran over
by a passing truck
ii) the man who shouted ―fire‖ or ―bomb‖ inside a packed movie house causing people to
panic and in the ensuing dash for the exit, some are trampled to death
iii) the man who threatened to stab another whereby by the latter jumped into the water and
drowned as he does not know how to swim
iv) The man who threatened to stone the boys who climbed a mango tree, prompting the
boys to climb down fast and one fell and broke his foot
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
v). making motions to box the victim who jumps back and falls into an open manhole
E. Rule In Crimes Against Persons Who were injured and died. He who inflicted the injury is liable
for the death.
1. Death must befall the same person injured and not another
2.The injury inflicted must be capable of producing death
3. Where the victim is suffering form an internal ailment, the accused is still liable if his act is the
actual cause of the death, it accelerated the death, or is the proximate cause of the death
F. Doctrine of the Supervening Cause
1. Concept: that cause which intrudes between the act of the accused and the expected injury of the
victim, breaking the connection between the act and the injury, and itself becoming the proximate
cause of the injury. It is an outside factor unrelated to the act of the accused. It may be due any of
the following:
a). The act of the victim, as when he committed suicide
b). The act of a third person, as when the man who was stabbed and being rushed to the
hospital on board a car, died because the car was rammed by a truck
c). An external factor such as (i) in the case of a wounded boy who died due to a breakout of
measles (ii) the victim, while being chased, was hit by a falling brick (iii) the application of the
wrong medicine by first aiders (iv). an infection which developed 22 days after a hacking wound,
not tetanus because the incubation period of severe tetanus is less than 14 days.
II. Rule when the Actual Result is Different i.e. the actual result was not intended. The act is still a
felony and the accused remains liable. The different injury may be under any of the following juridical
situations:
A. Aberratio Ictus: (Mistake in the Blow) also known as “Equivocacion en el golpe”. A person
who is not the intended victim was also injured by the blow. This is based on the Principle of
Transferred Intent i.e the intent behind the act upon a predetermined particular person is transferred
or carried over to a third person who was harmed or injured by the same act. Hence two
injuries/crimes are committed (i) the crime on the intended victim and (ii) the crime on the unintended
victim. The legal consequence is that the two crimes give rise to a complex crime if both are grave
or less grave, or are separate crimes if both or one is a slight offense. This is because there are three
persons at the crime scene: the accused, the intended victim and the unintended victim.
B. Error en personae or mistake in the victim. The actual victim is a different person as the accused
mistook him to be the intended victim. There are only two persons at the crime scene: (i) the accused
and (ii) the actual victim who turned out to be a different person. The accused will be liable for the
actual crime committed but his penalty will be pursuant to Article 49.
C. Praeter Intentionem: the harm or injury was inflicted upon the intended victim but is greater
than that intended. The legal effect is that the accused will be liable for the crime actually committed
but he is entitled to the mitigating circumstance of lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong as that
committed, provided there is a great disparity between the means employed and the resulting injury.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
This is illustrated in the case of the accused who boxed the victim, the latter fell down and his head
hit the pavement resulting to his death. The accused was held liable for homicide. In Calimutan vs.
People ( Feb. 9, 2006) the accused threw a stone at the victim rupturing the spleen and resulting to
his death. He was convicted of homicide. On appeal the Court held: ―It can not in good conscience
attribute to the accused any malicious intent to injure, mush less to kill, and in the absence of such
intent,… the Court finds the accused guilty of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide‖.
(Personal view: the decision is not sound).
ARTICLE 5. DUTY OF THE COURT
1. The first paragraph embodies the Principle of Legality. Hence the duty of the court, where the act
or omission imputed to the accused is not punished by any law, are : (a) to acquit the accused and
(b) recommend to the Chief Executive, through the DOJ, that the act done or omission incurred, be
the subject of a penal legislation and stating his reasons why.
2. The second paragraph covers a situation where the penalty to be imposed, in view of the
circumstances, appears excessive. The court must impose the impossible penalty and then
recommend that the accused be granted executive clemency. It should not allow personal views to
affect the imposition of the penalty. This is Justice tempered with mercy.
a). In Tulfo vs. People (Sept. 16, 2008) the Court, considering the importance of the freedom of
the press, found Tulfo guilty of libel but said ― the punishment must still be tempered with justice‖
and the ‖necessity of a free press balanced with the necessity of a responsible press‖ the court
imposed merely a fine as penalty instead of imprisonment.
ARTICLE 6. STAGES IN THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME
I. Introduction: Generation of a Crime
A. The first is the Mental Stage
General Rule: Mental acts such as thoughts, ideas, opinions and beliefs, are not subject of penal
legislations. One may express an idea which is contrary to law, morals or is unconventional, but as
long as he does not act on them or induce others to act on them, such mental matters are outside
the realm of penal law and the person may not be subjected to criminal prosecution.
B. The Second: The External Stage which is where the accused performs acts which are observable.
1). The Preparatory Acts: Acts which may or may not lead to the commission of a concrete crime.
Being equivocal they are not as rule punishable except when there is an express provision of law
punishing specific preparatory acts.
Example: (i) the general rule: buying of a gun, bolo or poison, even if the purpose is to use these to
kill a person; so also with conspiracies and proposals. (ii) the exception: possession of picklocks and
false keys is punished; as with conspiracies to commit treason, rebellion, sedition and coup d‘etat
2) The Acts of execution: the attempted, frustrated and consumated stages. Their concept is as
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
defined under Article 6.
II. Application of Article 6: Only to intentional felonies by positive acts known as material crimes i.e.
those with at least two stages as opposed to formal crimes or those which are produced and have only
the consummated stage, and not to: (i). Felonies by omission (ii) Culpable felonies and (iii) Violations
of special laws, unless the special law provides for an attempted or frustrated stage. Examples of the
exception are The Dangerous Drugs Law which penalizes an attempt to violate some of its provisions,
and The Human Security Act of 2007
III. The attempted stage: “the accused commences the commission of a felony directly by overt
acts but does not perform all the acts of execution…. due to some cause or accident other than
his own spontaneous desistance”
A).(1). The act which the Penal Code punishes as an attempt is that which has a connection to a
particular concrete offense, that which is the beginning of the execution of the offense, leading
directly to its realization and commission (2) The act must not be equivocal but indicates a clear
intention to commit a particular and specific felony. Thus the act of a notorious criminal in following
a woman cannot be the attempted stage of any felony.
B). Overt or external act is some physical deed or activity, indicating the intention to commit a
particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried out to is complete
termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the
voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete offense. It
is overt in the sense that the act is observable by the senses.
C). Examples:
1. The accused pressed a chemically -soaked cloth on the mouth of the woman to induce her to
sleep, while he lay on top of her and pressed his body to her. The act is not the overt act that will
logically and necessarily ripen into rape. They constitute unjust vexation. ( Note: it would be
attempted rape if he tried to undress the victim or touch her private parts) ( Balleros vs. People,
Feb, 22, 2006)
2. One found inside a house but no article was found on him, is liable for trespass and not for
attempted theft or robbery even if he is a notorious robber
3. One found removing the glass window panes or making a hole in the wall is not liable for
attempted robbery but for attempted trespass
4. Examples: (a) Attempted theft: one caught while putting his hand inside the bag or pointing a
gun at a taxi driver and getting the earnings when caught is attempted robbery (b) firing a gun
with intent to kill and missing; stabbing at the victim who evaded and ran away is attempted
homicide
D) The accused has not yet passed the subjective phase or that phase encompassed from the time
an act is executed which begins the commission of the crime until the time of the performance of the
last act necessary to produce the crime, but where the accused has still control over his actions and
their results.
.
E).The accused was not able to continue performing the acts to produce the crime. He was prevented
by external forces and not because he himself chose not to continue. Such as when his
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
weapon was snatched, or his intended victim managed to escape, or he was overpowered or
arrested.
F). If the accused voluntarily desisted i.e he himself decided not to continue with his criminal
purpose, then he is not liable.
1. Reason: This is an absolutory cause by way of reward to those who, having set one foot on the
verge of crimes, heed the call of their conscience and return to the path of righteousness.
2. The reason for the desistance is immaterial
3. Exceptions: when the accused is liable despite his desistance
a). when the act performed prior to the desistance already constituted the attempted stage of
the intended felony. For example: the accused, with intent to kill, shot at the victim but missed
after which he ―desisted‖, his acts already constituted attempted homicide
b). When the acts performed already gave rise to the intended felony. The decision not to
continue is not a legal but factual desistance. As in the case of a thief who returned what he
stole.
c). When the acts performed constitute a separate offense. Pointing a gun at another and
threatening to kill, and then desisting gives rise to grave threats.
IV. The Frustrated Stage: the accused has performed all the acts of execution necessary to
produce the felony but the crime is not produced by reason of causes independent of the will
of the accused.
A. The accused has passed the subjective phase and is now in the objective phase, or that portion
in the commission of the crime where the accused has performed the last act necessary to produce
the intended crime and where he has no more control over the results of his acts.
B. The non-production of the crime should not be due to the acts of the accused himself, for if it were
he would be liable not for the frustrated stage of the intended crime, but possibly for another offense.
Thus: where the accused shot the victim mortally wounding him, but he himself saved the life of his
victim, his liability is that for serious physical injuries as the intent to kill is absent.
C. Attempted vs. Frustrated Homicide/murder. Where the accused, with intent to kill, injured the
victim but the latter did not die, when is the crime attempted or frustrated?
1. First View: ―The subjective phase doctrine”. If at that point where the accused has still
control over the results of his actions but is stopped by reason outside of his own desistance and
the subjective phase has not been passed, the offense is attempted.
2. Second View: The Mortal Wound or Life Threatening Injury Doctrine: If a mortal wound or
life threatening injury had been inflicted, the offense is frustrated, else it is attempted ( Palaganas
vs. PP., Sept. 12, 2006).
3. Third View: The belief of the accused should be considered in that if the accused believed he
has done all which is necessary to produce death, then it is frustrated.
V. Consumated. When all the elements of the crime are present whether it be the intended crime or a
different crime.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
VI. Factors to Consider in determining the proper stage.
A. The manner of the commission of the crime and how it is defined by the RPC.
(i). Some crimes have only the consumated stage (Formal crimes) such as threats, coercion, alarms
and scandal, slander, acts of lasciviousness, the political crimes of rebellion, sedition and coup d
etat.
(ii).In rape the gravamen is whether there is penetration or not, no matter how slight, hence rape is
either attempted or consummated.
(iii). Some crimes are consummated by mere attempt, such as attempting to flee to an enemy
country is already consummated crime of Flight to Enemy country; some by mere proposal as in
Corruption of Minors and Abuse of chastity
(iv) Impossible crimes and culpable felonies have no stages of execution
B. The elements of the felony.
1. Theft: it is consummated once the article is in the material physical possession of the accused,
whether actual or constructive. His ability to dispose off the thing his immaterial and does not
constitute an element.
N.B. Decisions of the CA as to bulky items where the accused must have the opportunity dispose
off or appropriate the articles have already been reversed. The doctrine now is that theft has no
frustrated stage ( Valenzuela vs. PP. June 21, 2007)
2. Estafa: It is not the material possession but the existence of damage which consumates the
crime.
3. Robbery with Force Upon Things: The thing must be brought out of the building to consumate
the crime.
C. The Nature of the Felony Itself
1. Crimes which require the participation of two persons have no frustrated stage. They are
consummated by mere agreement as in corruption of a public official, or when the consensual act
is done as in Adultery and concubinage.
2. There are crimes which are punished according to their results and not the intention of the
accused such as physical injuries.
3. As to Arson: it is consumated once a part of the building is burned. It has been ruled that if the
accused lit certain materials which is applied to the building but no part of the building was burned,
the crime is in its frustrated stage and if there was no material which was as yet lit, then arson is
still in its attempted. Thus one who places sacks soaked in gasoline near the post and lit it but no
part of the building was burned, or one who threw a lighted torch on the roof but the torch rolled
down such that no part of the house was burned, was said to have committed frustrated arson.
(Personal Opinion: there can be no frustrated stage, but only attempted stage if the fire was not
yet applied to the building. But if fire was applied to the building or a part thereof but no part of the
building was burned, then it is attempted. The only consideration is whether or not the
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
accused succeeded in burning a part of the building. If no part of the building was burned, it is
still attempted arson no matter how far gone were the acts of the accused).
4. Example of Felonies with no frustrated stage:

a). Arson
b). Bribery
c). Theft and Robbery with Violence
d). Adultery and Concubinage
e). Rape
f). Corruption of a Public Official
g). Falsification of Documents
h). political crimes of rebellion, sedition and coup d etat
ARTICLE 8: PROPOSAL AND CONSPIRACY
I. Concepts: There is proposal when one has decided to commit a felony but proposes its execution to
another. The proponent must be determined to commit the crime and he did not just express a wish or
advice, or that his words are not equivocal. There is conspiracy when two or more persons come into
an agreement concerning the commission of a crime and decide to commit it.
II. General Rule: These are still preparatory acts and therefore, are not, as a rule, punishable.
Exception: when there is a specific provision or law punishing a specific kind of proposal or conspiracy.
For example: proposal to commit treason, rebellion. As to Conspiracies, the following are punished
under the RPC: to commit treason, rebellion, sedition, coup d‘etat, highway robbery,espionage, direct
bribery and arson. Special Penal Laws may also punish conspiracies such as the Dangerous Drugs
Law.
III. Kinds of conspiracy
A. Conspiracy as a crime: when the mere agreement is already punished by a specific provision of
the RPC or of a special law.
B Conspiracy as a mode or manner of incurring criminal liability. This presupposes that a crime was
actually committed by two or more persons who agreed to its commission and who performed acts
to bring about the crime. This agreement and cooperation is the conspiracy which serves as the
basis to make all equally liable under the principle that the act of one is the act of all.
C. In case of conspiracy as a crime where the conspirators actually committed the crime agreed
upon, their liability is for the crime actually committed and they will not be punished again for the act
of conspiring. The prior agreement (conspiracy) will be absorbed and becomes conspiracy as a
mode of incurring criminal liability.
ARTICLE 9. CLASSIFICATION AS TO GRAVITY
I. The basis is the penalty prescribed by the RPC and not the actual penalty imposed by the court. If
both imprisonment and fine are prescribed as penalties, it is the penalty of imprisonment which is used
as basis.
II. The classifications are:
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. Light- the penalty is imprisonment of one day to thirty days or fine of not more than P200.00
1. They are punished only in their consumated stages except with respect to light felonies against
persons or property. The reason is because they produced such light or insignificant results that
society is satisfied if they are punished even if only in their consummated stage. But as to crimes
against persons and property, the accused has shown moral depravity.
2. Only principals and accomplices
B Less Grave: by imprisonment of more than one month but not more than 6 years or fine of
P200.00 but not more than P6,000.00
C. Grave: the imprisonment is more than 6 years or fine of more than P6,000.00. They are either 1.
Heinous- the penalty is reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua or 2. Non heinous.
II. The Importance of the classification is in relation to (a) prescription of crimes (b) complexing of crimes
(c) imposition of subsidiary penalty (d) determination of who are liable for the offense (e) determination
as to what stage of execution is punishable and (f) determination of the period of detention of persons
lawfully arrested without warrant.
ART. 10. SPECIAL LAWS vis-avis THE RPC
I. Provision: ―Offenses which are or in the future may be punished under special laws are not
subject to the provisions of this code. This Code shall be supplementary to such laws, unless
the latter should specially provide the contrary”.
A. The first sentence states the rule that when an act/omission is punished by a special law, then it
is the special law which shall be applied and the RPC is not to supplant or replace or supply lapses
in the special law. The second sentence directs that the RPC shall only be suppletory unless the
special law provides the contrary.
II. The following provisions of the RPC do not, as a rule, apply to violations of special laws:
1. Article 3 on criminal intent unless the violation is mala in se

2. Article 6 on the stages of execution unless the special law punishes an attempted or frustrated
violation of its provisions
3. Article 11 on the justifying circumstances
4. Articles 13, 14, 15, on the mitigating, aggravating and alternative circumstances
5. Articles 17, 18 and 19 on the degree of participation
6. Accessory penalties
7. Article 48 on complexing of crimes
8. Graduation of penalties
III. Instances when the provisions or principles of the RPC may be applied
A. The general principles of generality, territoriality and prospectivity
B. The principle of Pro Reo
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
C. To prevent an injustice to a party

1) Article 100 ( Every person criminally liable is also civilly liable) may be applied if there is a
private person whose rights or property may have been injured, as in Violation of B.P. 22
2) The principle of conspiracy as a mode of incurring liability may be applied whenever it is
necessary to charge two or more persons who may have participated in the violation of the special
law
D. Whenever the special law adopts the scheme of penalties under the RPC both as to the
nomenclature and range of the penalty
1. In such cases the following may now be applied: ( a) the effects of modifying circumstances
(b) the graduation of penalties and (c) the imposition of the accessory penalties
2. In Gallardo vs. Tamayo ( June 2, 1994) it was held that the penalty of 6 years and one day to
12 years is not the same as prision mayor
E. When the act is in truth an act mala in se in which case the presence or absence of criminal intent
is material so that the defenses of good faith and mistake of fact are allowed
F. When the offense punished by the special law is in truth a derivative of an act punished under
the Revised Penal Code. As for instance: carnapping and cattle rustling are derivatives of robbery
and theft.
G. The exempting circumstances under Article 12 apply to Violations of Special Law.
H. The provision on preventive imprisonment.
IV. Approaches if the act is punished both by the RPC and a special law
A. The constitutional provision on double jeopardy may be applied so that the accused may only be
prosecuted for one offense.
B. The felony will absorb the offense as in the case of political crimes absorbing violations of the
Dangerous Drugs Law, carnapping or cattle rustling and illegal possession of firearms
C. The violation of the special law may be used as an aggravating circumstance to the felony.
Example: Section 29 of R.A. 10591‖ The Comprehensive Firearm and Ammunitions Regulatory
Act‖ provides that the use of a loose firearm if inherent in the commission of a crime under the
Revised Penal Code or other special laws shall be considered an aggravating circumstance.
D. The felony may be appreciated as a qualifying aggravating circumstance. Examples: A killing,
rape, physical injuries and other crimes qualify Piracy in Philippine Waters as well as Violation of the
Anti Hijacking Law.
E. The act may give rise to two separate charges under the RPC and the special law. Examples:
(i) the issuance of bad check may be punished as estafa and as Violation of B.P. 22 (ii) one maybe
convicted both for estafa and for illegal recruitment (iii) a public officer may be charged both under
the Revised Penal Code and under the Anti Graft Law.
F.The special Law may provide that a felony is absorbed by it.
F. The offenses may be punished as a Special Complex or Composite Crime either under the
Revised Penal Code or under the special Law
CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING CRIMINAL LIABILITY
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
I. Classification: In general the circumstances are either (i) defenses or (ii) modifying circumstances
II. Defenses: those which if proven may result to an acquittal of the offender from the crime charged
or lead to non-criminal liability. They are the reasons advanced by the accused why he may not be held
criminally liable.
They are classified into the following:
A. As to form:
1. Positive or Affirmative- They are often called defenses in the nature of ―Admission and
Avoidance‖. The accused admits authorship of the act or omission charged and imputed to him but
he puts up matters to avoid criminally liability or which will result to his acquittal.
a). Basic Rules on Affirmative Defenses
i). The Affirmative Defenses are the Justifying Circumstances, Exempting Circumstances, and
Absolutory Causes.
ii). Since the accused has admitted authorship of the act or omission, it‘s not anymore
necessary for the prosecution to prove his participation in the commission of the crime or his
identity, hence there may be a reverse order of trial in that it will be the accused who will be the
first to present his evidence. The presumption of innocence is waived.
iii). It is incumbent upon the accused to prove his defense by‖ clear, positive and convincing
evidence‖ and his conviction is not that the prosecution failed to prove his guilt but that he
was unable to prove his defense.
2. Negative- the accused denies authorship or having performed the act or omission imputed to him.
Examples are denial, alibi or physical impossibility, mistaken identity.
B. As to Effect:
1. Total or Perfect- those the effect of which will totally exonerate the accused. Example: a complete
justifying circumstance, amnesty
2. Partial- those which are intended to lessen the liability of the accused. They include proof the
offense is a lesser offenses, or that it is of a lower stage of execution, that the accused has a lower
participation and is not the principal
C. As to source:
1. Legal- those provided for by statutes or by the constitution. For example: prescription of crimes,
marriage of the offender and offended; pardon, double jeopardy, amnesty.
2. Factual- those based on the circumstances of the commission of the crime relating to the time,
place, manner of commission; identification of the accused; reasons for the commission. For
example: alibi, self defense; insanity, mistaken identity.
III. Modifying Circumstances- those which will either increase or decrease the penalty. They are
called mitigating or aggravating circumstances
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
IV. Circumstances Recognized in the Philippines.
They are found either in the Revised Penal Code, Special Laws or in jurisprudence. The defenses
and modifying circumstances governed by the RPC include the following:
A. Justifying Circumstances- These are the defenses in which the accused is deemed to have
acted in accordance with the law and therefore the act is lawful. Since the act is lawful, it follows that
there is no criminal, no criminal liability and no civil liability, save in paragraph 4.
1. There is no mens rea or criminal intent

2. The circumstances pertain to the act and not to the actor. Hence all who participated in the act
will be benefited. Thus if the principal is acquitted there will be no accomplices and accessories.
3. These apply only to intentional felonies, not to acts by omissions or to culpable felonies or to
violations of special laws
4. They are limited to the 6 enumerated in Article 11.
B. Exempting Circumstances- These are defenses where the accused performed an act which is
a crime but the act is not voluntary. There is a crime, and there is civil liability but there is no criminal.
1. The basis is the lack of any of the elements which makes the act/omission voluntary, i.e. freedom,
intelligence, intent or due care.
2. These defenses pertain to the actor and not the act. They are personal to the accused in whom
they are present and the effects do not extend to the other participants. Thus if a principal is
acquitted, the other principals, accessories and accomplices are still liable.
3. They apply to both intentional and culpable felonies and they may be available in violations of
special laws.
4. They are limited to the 7 enumerated in Article 12.
C. Absolutory Causes- These are defenses which have the same effects as the exempting
circumstances but they are not among those enumerated in Article 12. They are found in certain
Articles of the Revised Penal Code or are developed by jurisprudence.
1. They are based on public policy

2. Examples of those in the RPC include: non-liability for an attempted felony due to voluntary
desistance; Death/Physical Injuries Under Exceptional Circumstances.
3. Those recognized and developed by jurisprudence include: mistake of fact, set-up/frame up,
instigation
D. Mitigating Circumstances- Those which when present results either to: (i) the penalty being
reduced by at least one degree or (ii) the penalty shall be imposed in its minimum period. They are
those enumerated in Article 13.
E. Extenuating Circumstances- .Those which have the same effect as mitigating circumstances
but are not among those enumerated in Article 13 but are provided for in certain articles of the RPC
and apply only to certain felonies. They are called ―Special Mitigating Circumstances‖.
1. Examples: Abandonment in case of adultery; Release of the victim within 3 days with the
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
purpose not attained, in the felony of Slight Illegal Detention
F. Aggravating Circumstances- Those which when present will result either to: (i) a change in the
nature of the offense as to make it more serious and result to the imposition of a higher penalty (ii)
the penalty being imposed in its maximum period. They are provided for by the Revised Penal Code
as well as by special laws.
G. Alternative Circumstances- those which may either be appreciated as mitigating or

aggravating. They are enumerated in Article 15 of the RPC.
-o0o-
CONSTITUTIONAL DEFENSES
I. Defenses based on a Violation of the Due Process Clause
A. The Statute is VOID-FOR- VAGUENESS PRINCIPLE
1. Due Process requires that the terms of a penal statute must be sufficiently explicit to inform those
who are subject to it what conduct on their part will render them liable to its penalties.
2. The Doctrine that a penal statute is unconstitutional if it does not reasonably put a person on
notice as to what the person may not do, or what the person is required to do. As a rule a statue
maybe said to be vague when it lacks comprehensible standards that ―men of common intelligence
must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application‖ It is repugnant to the
constitution in two aspects: (a) it violates due process for failure to accord persons, especially the
parties targeted by it, fair notice of the conduct to avoid and (b) it leaves law enforcers unbridled
discretion in carrying out its provisions and become an arbitrary flexing of the government muscle.
3. However an act will be declared void and inoperative on the ground of vagueness and
uncertainty, only upon a showing that the defect is such that the courts are unable to determine,
within any reasonable degree of certainty, what the legislature intended
Example: An ordinance of the City of Cincinnati that made it illegal for : ―three or more persons to
assemble on any sidewalk and there conduct themselves in a manner annoying to persons passing
by‖
B. VOID FOR OVERBREADTH ( Overbroad) PRINCIPLE
1. A penal statue is unconstitutional if its language is so broad that it unnecessary interferes with
the exercise of constitutional rights, even though the purpose is to prohibit activities that the
government may constitutionally prohibit.
2. A statute is overbroad where it operates to inhibit the exercise of individual freedoms guaranteed
by the constitution, such as the freedom of religion or speech. When it includes within its coverage
not only unprotected activity but also activity protected by the constitution.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
3. This principle applies more to felonies or offenses which conflict with the freedom of expression
and association such as prosecution for libel, inciting to rebellion or sedition, and violation of the
Election Code.
Example: In Adiong vs. COMELEC ( 207 SCRA 712) the court declared as void that portion of the
Election Code prohibiting the posting of election propaganda in any place-including private vehicles-
other than in the designated common poster area.
C. VOID FOR LACK OF PUBLICITY
1. The Penal Statue was not publicized in the manner provided for by the Constitution, such as
publication in a newspaper of general circulation or in the Official Gazette. Hence there is no
constructive note to the public and the principle that ―Ignorantia legis nemenem excusat‖ will not
apply.
II. Defenses Based on the Equal Protection Clause
A. DISCRIMINATORY AND SELECTIVE APPLICATION
1. A Penal Law must apply to all persons who are in the same or similar situation
2. A statute nondiscriminatory on its face maybe grossly discriminatory in its operation. Though the
law itself be fair on its face and impartial in appearance, yet, if it is applied and administered by public
authority with an evil eye and unequal; hand, so as to make unjust and illegal
discriminations between persons in similar circumstances, material to their rights, there is denial of
equal justice and is prohibited.
3. However, the prosecution of one guilty person while others equally guilty are not prosecuted, is
not, by itself, a denial of the equal protection of the laws. There must be present an element of
‖clear and intentional or purposeful discrimination:” on the part of the prosecuting officials.
III. Defense of Double Jeopardy
Art. 11. JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
Introduction:
1. Concept of Justifying: those which when proven makes the act lawful such that there is no crime,
no criminal and no civil liability. The accused is said to be acting in accordance with the law. The
accused incurs no criminal liability and civil liability because what he did is lawful.
2. The Use of Force Defenses: These are the justifying circumstances where the accused is allowed
to use force i.e to inflict injury upon the victim or to destroy property. The force may either be (i)
Deadly Force or that which can result to serious physical injuries or even to the death of the victim
and (ii) Non-Deadly but reasonable force.
The Use- of-Force-Defenses include (i) Self-Defense (ii) Defense of Relative and (iii) Defense of
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Stranger.
Par. 1. SELF DEFENSE
I. Concept: When a person uses force and causes injury to another or destroys the property, honor
or reputation of another, in order to defend his own person, rights, property or honor against an
aggression/attack coming from the victim.
The elements: It requires proof of the existence of: (i) an unlawful aggression, (ii) the reasonable
necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the attack and (iii) the lack of sufficient
provocation on the part of the accused. The first two are common to the three Use-of- Force-
Defenses.
II. First element: There must be present an unlawful aggression coming from the victim.
A. This refers to an act or conduct on the part of the victim intended to injure/harm the life, security,
property, honor or rights of the accused. The act is either :
1. Real or Material Aggression or an attack that has broken out or has actually materialized.
Examples; the act of shooting another with a gun; hitting another with or without a weapon;
trespass to another‘s property; running away with another‘s property; uttering slanderous
words; publicizing or broadcast of libelous matters.
2. Imminent or one which is at the point of happening. They refer to acts of the victim which
show a clear and positively strong intention to cause harm to the accused, which can only be
prevented through the use of force.
These are more than mere threatening attitudes, or oral threats or threatening stance or
postures. Threats of a future harm are not unlawful aggressions.
B. An aggression is more serious that an act of simple provocation by the victim.
C. This element is the foundation of the Use of Force Defenses. It has to be proven otherwise
there is nothing to defend against
D. Principles:
1. The aggression must be ―unlawful‖ i.e the victim was not acting in accordance with laws, or
under color of right. Thus the following do not constitute ―unlawful‖ aggression: (i) the act of a
property owner in pushing out an intruder from his property for refusing to leave peacefully (ii) the
act of a policeman in handcuffing a law violator (iii) the scolding by a teacher of an unruly student.
2. The aggression must come from the victim. ― He started it‖.
3. At the time of the defense, the aggression must still be continuing and in existence. In the
following instances there is no more aggression and if the accused still uses forces, he becomes
the aggressor:
a). When the attacker desists, or is prevented or restrained by third persons; or is divested of
his weapon, or is overpowered
b). When the attacker retreats unless it is to secure a more vantage position
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
4. Question: When the person attacked was able to wrest the weapon or has disarmed his
attacker, may he use the weapon against the attacker? Answer: No because the aggression has
ceased unless the attacker persist to grab back the weapon for in such case, there is still imminent
danger tot his life or limb.
5. Thus: there must be no appreciable lapse of time between the unlawful aggression and the act
done to repel or prevent it.
6. Presumption as to the Aggressor: Where there is no direct evidence as to who was the
aggressor, it may be presumed that the one who was deeply offended by the insult was the one
who had a right to demand an explanation from the perpetrator of the insult and he must have
been the one who struck first if the proffered explanation was unsatisfactory ( PP. vs. Ramos, 77
Phil. 4)
E. At what point may a person attacked put up a defense?
1. Retreat-to-the-Wall Principle. –The doctrine which states that before a person is entitled to
use force in self defense he must first attempt to withdraw from the encounter by giving as much
ground as possible and it is only when there is no more place to retreat that he may now use force
to defend himself.
This doctrine is impractical and has been abandoned
2. Stand-Your-Ground-When-In-The-Right Principle.- The doctrine which holds that when a

person is attacked in the place where he has a right to be, he need not retreat but he may
immediately use force to defend himself.
a). This is the prevailing doctrine followed. It applies to all especially to law enforcement
agents who are expected to stand their ground and to subdue, overcome and arrest
criminals.
b) A related doctrine is the Castle Doctrine.-When a person is attacked in his dwelling (a
man‘s house is his castle) he is not expected to retreat but he may immediately use force to
defend himself and his dwelling. This is availed of where armed persons intrude into a
dwelling as it is natural to expect that the armed persons would use their weapons at any
time and upon any occupant of the dwelling.
F. May the attacker claim self defense?

1. As a rule one who initiates an attack can not claim self defense being himself the aggressor.
2. However he is entitled to an incomplete self defense: (a) if he is met with excessive force in
return and is forced to defend himself or (b) When he withdraws or retreats from the attack but is pursued
by the intended victim and he had to defend himself.
G. Rule when there is an agreement to a fight or when one accepts a challenge to a fight. Neither
one can put up self defense because each is an aggressor to the other and both anticipate the
aggression coming from the other. The law leaves them where they are. Except when one is
attacked by the other in violation of the terms and conditions of the fight, such as to the time, place
and choice of weapons agreed upon, then the person attacked may claim self defense.
III. Second element: There must be reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
repel the attack.
A. The question is whether the defense is appropriate and commensurate to the type, degree, and
intensity of the aggression taking into consideration the place, occasion and surrounding
circumstances of the aggression.
B. The reasonableness of the means include two aspects: (1). Reasonableness of the Mode of
Defense and (2) Reasonableness of the Choice of Weapon. A person under attack has the right to
defend, but as it proper for him to use a weapon and if so, whether the weapon chosen is
commensurate to the attack.
C. The law requires Rational Necessity and Rational Equivalence of Weapons and not Factual
Equality, to be determined by considering both the subjective and objective aspects of the situation.
They include the following:
1. The imminence of the danger as it appeared to the accused coupled by the instinct for self-
preservation
2. When the attacker is armed, consider the instrument of aggression and the means of defense
most readily and immediately available to the person attacked
3. Consider the physique, size, age, sex, knowledge of martial arts ( the hands and feet of boxers,
martial artists, wrestlers, are considered deadly weapons) of the attacker and the person attacked,
including the reputation of the attacker as a person of violence
4. Consider whether under the time and place of the attack, the person attacked can call for
immediate assistance
5. Consider the number of the attackers
D. When can Deadly Force be used?
1. When there is an attack on a person‘s life or limbs i.e he may either be killed or seriously injured
2. In case of an attack upon one‘s property, it must be coupled with an attack on the person‘s life
or limb which promises death or serious bodily harm, otherwise only reasonable force must be
used.
If there is no attack on the person‘s life or limb, reasonable force may still be used as is
necessary to protect the property from being seized, destroyed or interfered with under the
Doctrine of Self Help provided for In Article 429 of the New Civil Code.
3. In case of an attack on chastity, deadly force is allowed if there is a clear intent to rape, which
intent maybe negated by the circumstances of time and place; if there is no clear intent to rape
only reasonable force must be used
4. In case of attack on one‘s honor or reputation, the use of physical force is never justified. When
one is libeled or defamed, he may fight back with a similar libel or defamation provided it is only
to the extent which is necessary to free himself from the effects of the libel/defamation.
This is called the “ Doctrine of Justified Libel” or
“ The Privilege of a Reply Doctrine”.
5. The Principle of Self defense and Use of Deadly Force does not apply to situations where a
person is injured or killed as a result of the installation of Protective Devises/Methods such as by
the installation of live electric wires on a fence, or by attack dogs let loose in one‘s yard. They do
not discriminate who might be injured.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
IV. The third element: Lack of Sufficient Provocation on the part of the Person Claiming Self
Defense.
A. Concept: The person attacked must not have given sufficient reason for the victim to attack him.
B. Provocation: This includes any conduct which excites, incites or induces a person to re-act, it is
conduct which vexes or annoys, irritates or angers another.
C. This third element is present in any of the following situations:
1. When no provocation at all was given by the accused.

Example: When a property owner angrily demands why the victim built a fence on his land, which
in turn angered the victim to attack the accused, such conduct on the part of the accuse is not
provocation.
2. When there was provocation but it was not sufficient i.e. it may have vexed or annoyed but was
not sufficient for the victim to make the kind of attack he employed upon the accused. The
sufficiency must be measured in relation to the reaction of the victim.
3. When sufficiency provocation was given but it was not immediate to the attack.
D. Examples of sufficient provocation:

1. Imputing to the victim the utterance of vulgar language
2. Trespassing into the property of the victim
3. Jokes made in poor taste or bad mouthing the victim
4. Destroying the victim‘s property
5. Boxing, kicking or slapping another
6. Molesting the girlfriend of the accused
DEFENSE OF RELATIVE
I. Relatives: They refer exclusively to a person‘s spouse, ascendant, descendant, brothers or sisters;
relatives by affinity in the same degree; and by consanguinity within the 4th civil degree.
II. The third element: If the relative gave provocation, The One Defending Had No part in the
Provocation.
A. This is present in the following instances:

1. The relative defended did not give any provocation at all
2. If the relative gave provocation, the one defending was not aware of it
3. If the relative gave provocation, the one defending did not participate either actually or
morally, as by encouragement
B. Even if the person defending acted out of evil motive, such as revenge, this defense is still
available
DEFENSE OF A STRANGER
I. Stranger is any person not a relative.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
II. The third element: The Person Defending Should Not Be actuated by Revenge, Resentment,
or Other Evil Motive
A. The accused must prove he acted out of an honest desire to save the life or limb or property of
the stranger and not because his true intention was to harm the victim. If otherwise he is deemed to
be committing a crime there being present the elements of actus reus and mens rea.
B. QUESTION: Suppose it was the stranger who gave provocation? Answer: The accused is still
entitled to this defense.
RELATED PRINCIPLES TO THE

USE OF FORCE DEFENSES
I. Rationale behind these defenses:

A. For self defense: 1. It is the natural and inherent right of every person to defend himself 2. The
state can not protect its citizens at all times hence it gives them the right to defend themselves
B. For Defense of Relative: It is in recognition of the strong ties of blood i.e blood is thicker than
water.
C. For Defense of Strangers: What a man can do in his defense, another can do for him.
II. Cases in which the Principle of Self Defense Applies

A. Defense of Life and Limb
B. Defense of Property
C. Defense of Honor/Reputation
D. Defense of Chastity
E. Defense of Civil, Political and Natural Rights
III. Factors Affecting the Credibility of the Defenses
A. The claim of self defense, ( as well as of relative and stranger) are inherently weak, self-serving
and easily fabricated, and must be corroborated by independent evidence
B. The location, number and nature of the wounds of the victim must be considered and may
disprove the claim of self-defense
C. The lack of wounds of the accused may disprove self defense and proof the lack of aggression
on the part of the victim
D. A refusal to give a statement upon surrendering, or non-assertion thereof, is inconsistent with a
claim of self defense. A claim of self-defense, if true, must be asserted promptly.
Par. 4. Avoidance of a greater evil or State of Necessity
1. Concept: When, in order to avoid an evil, the accused does an act which results to an injury/evil
which is not greater than or at most is equal to the evil sough to be avoided. This is a situation where
there is a clash between two rights and the lesser must give way to the greater. There is an imminent
danger or harm to the accused and the only way to avoid or prevent it is to do an act which however
causes injury to a third person. The damage or injury was thus deliberately caused. The accused is
caught between ―the devil and the deep blue sea‖.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a). Like in self-defense, there is an evil, injury or harm to the accused to the accused and the accused
inflicts harm or injury to a person. But unlike in self-defense the source of the harm, injury or evil, is
not the victim.
2. It is important that the injury or damage to be avoided must be greater than the damage or
injury inflicted to avoid the former.
3. There is no other way to avoid the incoming danger if not to cause harm or injury to the victim
4. The state of necessity should not have been brought about by the act of the accused himself.
Thus the accused swerved his car to avoid a headlong collision with an oncoming vehicle. In the
process he sideswiped a pedestrian. He cannot claim this defense if the accused was either : (a)
driving on a one way road (b) driving without a license (c) was intoxicated (d) was on the wrong lane
or (e) carnapper.
4. There is civil liability but only if a person was benefited from the acts of accused who may be the
accused himself or a third person. All who were benefited shall bear the cost of the damage or injury
pro rata.
5. Examples:
a). Jettisoning of cargo save the ship and passengers

b). Demolition of houses to prevent the spread of fire provided the house demolished are not of
greater value than that to be saved.
c). Eloping to avoid a loveless marriage
d). Hitting a road side house to avoid falling down a precipice
e). Therapeutic abortion to save a mother‘s life
f). QUESTION: May human life be sacrificed to save your own life or those of others?
Par. 5 Any Person Who Acts in Fulfillment of a Duty

Or In Lawful Exercise of a Right or Office
( Trabaho lang walang personalan)
I. Requirements/Elements
A. The accused was in the actual performance of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office
B. He caused harm or injury to another as a necessary consequence of the performance of his duty
or exercise of a right or office
C. He was not negligent or that there was no abuse, or excess or oppression on the part of the
accused
II. The term ―office or duty‖ does not necessarily refer to a public office or public duty as it is to be
understood in its generic sense. It includes private office or employment or duty as well as the exercise
of a calling or a profession or occupation.
III. Illustrations:
1. When injuries are inflicted on a suspect who resists a valid arrest

2. Shooting an escaping prisoner in order to immobilize and prevent his escape, even if the
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
shooting resulted to his death. But not shooting him again after he was already immobilized, or he
gives up
3. Killing of rebels by soldiers is not homicide or murder; or destruction of private property in a
firefight between rebels/criminals and soldiers/law enforcers
4. Amputation of patients by physicians in order to save their lives
5. Lawyers calling witnesses as liars are not liable for defamation or unjust vexation. A Judge who
in his decision, describes a witness/party as a liar is not liable for libel
6. Scolding lazy students by teachers is not defamation or sending out of unruly students is not
coercion
7. Executioners are not criminally liable
8. A lawyer who writes a reply-letter describing the adverse party as untruthful and hypocrite
IV. Application in Relation to Law Enforcers Who Used Force and kill or Injure Suspects/accused
1. Cabanlig vs. Sandiganbayan ( July 28, 2005)
FACTS: A suspect who was onboard a police vehicle, suddenly grabbed the armalite rifle of one of
the policemen and jumped from the vehicle. One of the policemen shouted ―hoy‖ and the accused
policeman simultaneously shot the suspect three times resulting to the death of the suspect. Is he
policeman liable for the death of the victim?
.
HELD: No. He acted in lawful performance of duty.
A policeman in the performance of duty is justified in using force as is reasonably necessary to

secure and detain the offender, overcome his resistance, prevent escape, recapture him if necessary
and protect himself form bodily injury. In case injury or death results from the policeman‘s exercise
of such force, the policeman could be justified… if the policeman had used necessary force. Since
the policeman‘s duty requires him to overcome the offender, the force exerted … may therefore differ
from that which ordinarily may be offered in self-defense. However, a policeman is never justified in
using unnecessary force or in treating the offender with wanton violence, or in resorting to dangerous
means when the arrest could be effected otherwise. ( Cabanlig vs. Sandiganbayan ( July 28, 2005).
2. Re: Duty to Issue Warning.
The duty to issue a warning is not absolutely mandated at all times and at all cost, to the detriment
of the life of law enforcers. The directive to issue a warning contemplates a situation where several
options are still available to the law enforcers. In exceptional circumstances… where the threat to
the life of a law enforcer is already imminent, and there is no other option but to use force to subdue
the offender, the law enforcer‘s failure to issue a warning is excusable. ( Cabanlig vs. Sandiganbayan
case)
Par. 6. Obedience to a Lawful Order of a Superior
I. Concept and Elements: Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for
some lawful purpose. This presupposes that a person or subordinate carried out the order of his
superior but in so doing he caused harm or injury to another. He is not liable provided the following
elements are present:
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. An order was issued by a superior acting within the sphere of his lawful rights
B. The order is for some lawful purpose
C. The means to carry out the order is lawful
II. The term ―superior‖ includes any person higher in rank to the accused and who is entitled to
demand obedience from the accused. Such rank is not necessarily the ranks in the AFP or PNP but
includes both public and private employment and extends even to rank in social standing or in personal
relations.
a). Thus the dean/professor is the superior to the student; an ascendant to the descendant; an
older sibling to the younger; a priest/minister/pastor to a member of his flock;
III. The order must not be patently illegal. If the illegality is not apparent, the accused must have acted
in good faith.
IV. Examples:
1. ―Shoot to kill Orders‖, ―Wanted Dead or Alive‖ are not lawful orders from a superior as they are
patently illegal.
2. The order to arrest or detain when it is without a warrant or is not a valid warrantless arrest,
even if given by the Chief of the Police, is not a lawful order
3. A janitor who padlocks the door of an employee‘s office on order of the company president not
knowing the intention is to oust the employee, can claim this defense.
4. A person who, in obedience to the order or request of his elders, takes a property not knowing
it belongs to a neighbor.
The Battered Woman Syndrome
1. Legal Provision: Created under R.A. 9262 known as the “Anti Violence Against Women and
their Children Act of 2004”
Section 26: Battered Woman Syndrome as a Defense: Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to
be suffering from battered woman syndrome do not incur any criminal and civil liability notwithstanding
the absence of any of the elements for justifying circumstances of self-defense under the Revised Penal
code.
In the determination of the state of mind of the woman who was suffering from battered woman
syndrome at the time of the commission of the crime, the courts shall be assisted by expert
psychologists.
2. Concept
a). It is a psychological condition in which a woman commits physical violence against her husband or
mate as a result of the continued physical or mental abuse to which he has subjected her resulting to
an irresistible impulse to defend herself . This must be medically proven by experts.
b). Under this defense a woman who is constantly abused by her husband may be justified in using
force at a time when there is not strictly ―immediate danger‖. The theory is that women in such
circumstances have two choices: either wait for their husband to kill them or strike first in a form of
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
offensive self-defense/pre-emptive self-defense.
c). Development in the Philippines
1. The Case in which it was first recognized was People vs. Marivic Genosa, Jan 15, 2004, 419
SCRA 537) involving a wife who was convicted of Parricide for killing her husband who was sleeping.
a). Battered woman: a woman who is repeatedly subjected to any forceful physical or psychological
behavior by a man in order to coerce her to do something he wants her to do without concern for her
rights.. (they) include wives or women in any form of intimate relationship with men. Furthermore, in
order to be classified as a battered woman, the couple must go through the cycle at least twice‖
b) Battered women exhibit common personality traits, such as low self esteem, traditional beliefs
about home, the family and the female sex role; emotional dependence upon the dominant male; the
tendency to accept responsibility for the batterer‘s action; and false hopes that the relationship will
improve.
c) The syndrome is characterized by the so called ―Cycle of Violence‖ which has three phases:
(i) The Tension Building Phase: minor battering occurs: it could be verbal or slight
physical abuse or other form of hostile behavior. The woman tries to pacify the man
through a show of kind, nurturing behavior; or by simply staying out of his way. What
actually happens is that she allows herself to be abused in way that to her fare minor.
Alls he wants is to prevent the escalation of the violence. But her placatory and passive
behavior legitimizes his belief that he has the right to abuse her.
(ii). The Acute Battering Phase: this is characterized by brutality, destructiveness

and, sometimes death. The woman deems this incident as unpredictable yet also
inevitable. She has no control: only the man can put an end to the violence, she realizes
that she can not reason with him and that resistance would only exacerbate her
condition. She has a sense of detachment although she may later clearly remember
the details. Her apparent passivity is because the man is stronger physically and it is
useless to fight back
(iii). The Tranquil, Loving or Non-Violent Phase. The couple experience profound
relief. On one hand the man shows a tender and nurturing behavior and he knows he
has been viciously cruel and tries to make up for it begging her forgiveness and
promising never to beat her again. The woman also tries to convince herself that the
battery will never happen again; that her partner will change for the better; that this
good, gentle and caring man is the real person she loves.
d). The foregoing cycle happens because: (i) the woman believes that the violence was her fault (ii)
the woman fears for her life and her children‘s lives (iii) the woman has an irrational belief that the
abuser is all powerful and that she is better off with him than without him for financial reasons and (iv)
Love: inspite of constant assault, after a little cajoling, the woman is convinced that the man still loves
her.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
QUESTION: Must there be unlawful aggression at the time of the killing?
In The Genosa case, it was ruled that the accused was not entitled to complete exoneration because
there was no unlawful aggression- no immediate and unexpected attack on her at the time she shot
him. But the severe beatings repeatedly inflicted constituted a form of cumulative psychological
paralysis: diminished her will power, thereby entitling her to the mitigating factor under paragraphs 9
and 10 of Article 13.
However, RA 9262 has liberalized it in view of the provision which reads: ―… notwithstanding the
absence of the elements of self defense…‖
ARTICLE 12. EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES
CONCEPT: These are circumstances which negate the element of voluntariness in that there is absent
any of the elements of voluntariness such as malice, freedom, intelligence or that there was negligence
or imprudence. They may be appreciated in all kinds of felonies and in violations of special laws.
1. INSANITY AND IMBECILITY
1. This is a mens rea defense and a defense to negate intelligence.
II. Tests of Insanity

1. The common tests adopted by various states involve a Test of Cognition ( Knowledge) and a
Test of Volition (Freedom of will)
2. The M‘NAGHTEN TEST. The test formulated by English Courts in 1894 and was eventually
adopted in the United States. The Philippine Supreme Court took note of this test in one of its
decision.
A. This test set certain standards for acquittal on the ground of insanity and they are:
1). At the time the act was committed
ii) The defendant was suffering from a defect of reason, from a disease of the mind, which
caused
iii). The defendant to not know: (a) the nature and quality of the act taken or (b) that the act was
wrong.
B. This is known also as The right or Wrong Test and is a Test of Cognition because the accused,
to be insane, must prove he does not know two things: the nature and quality of the act and that
the act is wrong.
3. The test in the Philippines. The test is more stringent because courts require that there be both
(i) a‖ Complete deprivation of Intelligence‖ in committing the act, i.e. the accused is deprived of
reason; he acted without the least discernment because there is a complete absence of the
power to discern(Cognition) and *ii) there is a total deprivation of the will ( Test of Volition). Mere
abnormality of mental faculties is not enough. Hence the test is both a Test of Cognition and
Volition.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
If the deprivation of the intelligence or will is not total but partial, the condition gives rise merely
to a mitigating circumstance.
a. Hence the defense known as ―Temporary Insanity‖ is not recognized in the Philippines.
b. The insanity must relate to the period immediately before or at the precise moment of doing
the act. It is different from insanity at the time of arrest, arraignment, trial, promulgation and service
of sentence.
c. Insanity must be proven because sanity is presumed. Proof includes expert testimony,
psychiatric evaluation report, and psychological findings regarding mental conditions at the time
of the commission of the offense, and opinions of an intimate acquaintance.
d. The insane include: those medically insane and those who are medically sane but legally
insane, such as the following:
i). mental aberrations caused by malignant fever

ii). Dementia praecox or schizophrenia
iii) lack of controlled consciousness such as acts done while dreaming
iv). Somnambulism of sleep walking
v). acts done in fits of epilepsy
vi). Being a violent maniac
e). But the following are not included:

i). amnesia caused by frequent intoxication
ii). The Twinkie Defense: large consumption of white sugar, through snack foods, caused him to
have diminished mental capacity
iii). Premenstrual syndrome
iv). Involuntary sublimal TV intoxication
vi). Brainwashing syndrome
vii). Hypnosis: there is as yet no judicial pronouncement or scientific proof thereof
viii). Drug induced mental conditions
ix). Acts resulting from passion such as the so called ―temporary insanity‖, or eccentricity,
mental weakness or depression from some physical ailment
x). acts due to feeblemindedness, amnesia, pedophillia
f). If the accused acted during a state of lucid interval, he is liable
IMBECILITY
I. CONCEPT: this is a diminished capacity defense. The accused, who is an adult, is not medically
insane but is suffering from a defect in reason or mental retardation such that his capacity to discern
has been diminished to such an extent that he is deprived of intelligence and is in the same category
as an insane person. It is the mental age which is considered.
2. The mental age corresponds to those of the idiot ( whose mental age is that of a 2 year old child),
and imbecile( whose mental age is that of a seven year old).
A moron ( 12 year old) therefore is not an imbecile as well as those with border line intelligence and
are not exempt but entitled merely to a mitigating circumstance of mental illness. Personal opinion:
morons should be included because the age of criminal responsibility is 15 years. It is illogical that a
person below 15 years of age and with the mental age corresponding to his biological age is exempt
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
but not an adult whose mental age is between 12 to 15 of a child. Due to being mentally challenged,
he is a child in the eyes of the law.
3. It is a permanent condition.
III. MINORITY
I. CONCEPT: Minimum age of criminal responsibility referring to the biological age.
A. Pursuant to R.A 9344 ( The Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006) the following are exempt by
reason of age and referred to as CHILDREN (CHILD) IN CONFLICT WITH THE LAW (CICL):
1. those 15 years and below at the time of the commission of the crime
2. those who are over 15 years but below 18 who did not act with discernment
B. Children in Conflict with the Law ( CICL) who are over 15 but below 18, who acted with discernment,
enjoy special exemption from certain crimes such as: (i) status crimes or those which can only be
committed by minors but not crimes if committed by adults, such as Violation of the Curfew Ordinance
(2) Vagrancy (3) Mendicancy (4) Use/Possession of Rugby and (5) Prostitution
C. Disposition of Minors who are exempt

1. The CICLs shall be subject to an intervention program
2. They are not however exempt from civil liability
II. Discernment: the mental capacity to know and understand one‘s acts and their consequences; to
distinguish between what is right from what is wrong. Proof is based on the acts, utterances and conduct
or behaviour of the minor, including his educational level and his family background.
A. CICILs who acted with discernment shall undergo diversion program i.e. an alternative child
appropriate process of determining responsibility and treatment on the basis of the CICL‘s social,
cultural, economic, psychological and educational background.
1. These include: mediation, family conference, rehabilitation programs which may be

determined by the SWDO or the Court.
B. If found guilty the CICL is entitled to an automatic suspension of

Suspension until he reaches the age of 21. This suspension applies even if the accused is
above 18 at the time of conviction but is still below 21.
IV. ACCIDENT
I. Legal Provision: Any person who, while performing a lawful act, with due care, causes injury
to another, without fault or intention of causing it.
a). It is an occurrence beyond human control and although its occurrence involved some form of
human intervention, it cannot be foreseen. It is similar to the civil law concept of a fortuitous event.
b). This defense negates intent and negligence.
c). In cases involving intentional death, the accused should not have acted with intent to kill.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
II. The act performed must be lawful because if it is not, this defense cannot be set up because the
accused is committing a crime. If there is absent due care, the accused becomes liable for a culpable
felony.
III. Illustrations:
A. Hunting Accidents: of bullets richochetting and hitting another; a hunter stumbling and his gun
going off; mistaking a person as a monkey. But where the hunting is carried out in places where
people congregate then this defense may not be available.
QUESTION: If a person goes to hunt but uses an unlicensed firearm can he claim this defense?
B. Death or Injury in contact sports unless the accused violated the rules of the game
C. Dropping of a gun which was properly holstered while chasing of a criminal.
D. The act of the owner who wrested back his bolo and hit a man behind him.
E. Hitting a person who suddenly darted in front of a vehicle, or a running over a pebble which flies
and hits a person.
F. Traffic accidents due to mechanical defects are not accidents because the defect can be
detected and repaired.
G. Flower pots placed in the window fell and hit a person: is it an accident?
V. IRRESSISTIBLE FORCE
I. Legal Provision and concept: “Any person who acted under the compulsion of an irresistible
force”. Connotes that actual physical force was employed upon the accused, a physical contact of an
object with the body of the accused which promises death or serious physical injury which is so strong,
so powerful, that despite his attempts, he cannot overcome it and the only way to escape or stop it is
to commit the crime. It is coercion applied for the purpose of compelling a person to do or refrain from
doing some act.
a). He is reduced to a mere robot and is said to be acting without or
against his will.
b). This is available in crimes by omission
c). The harm or injury to the accused must be equal or more serious than the crime he was forced
to commit.
d). The force is applied by a third person and not the victim of the crime
e). Examples: (i). a security guard is continuously beaten by the butt of guns until he finally opened
the door of a department store which was then robbed (ii) a student is boxed repeatedly to compel
him to get the phone of a classmate and give to the one boxing him (iii) or a cashier is boxed and
kicked until she gives the sales in the casher‘s box (iv) the driver is forced to drive away a vehicle
VI. DURESS OR UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR
1. Legal Provision: ―Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an
equal or greater injury‖. The duress refers to a threat of an evil to the accused, his family or
someone close to him, or even to third persons, which cannot be prevented except by the accused
doing what he is asked to do which act turns out to be a crime. The threat must be real, serious and
imminent, not some future harm or injury. The threat is that of a bodily harm or injury, or even destruction
of property so long as in the latter, the act done is not more serious in nature.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a. The fear must be reasonable and of a serious bodily harm or injury

b. The harm must be immediate and imminent
c. The harm feared must be greater than or equal to the harm done
d. The accused cannot avoid the evil or escape from it
II. Illustrations
a). The accused had to open the bank vault otherwise , a co employee or a hostage will be killed. If
charged for robbery, this defense may be availed of
b). A clerk is told to falsify a document under pain of death.
c). Where the accused stabbed another otherwise his expedition will be burned, this defense is not
available to him
d). A student was forced to break the windows of the canteen otherwise the accused will burn the
university. Is this defense available?
d). The accused was charged with theft which he committed for fear it will be publicized that he
had sex with the wife of a prominent politician. Is this defense available to him?
VII. LAWFUL OR INSUPERABLE CAUSE
1. This is a defense to crimes by omission. The accused failed to perform a duty enjoined by law due
to:
A). a lawful cause: such as: (i) refusal to name the identity of a suspect by a lawyer, priest or
minister, does not make them an accessory, if such is covered by the privileged communication rule
(ii). Refusal to help a person in danger of dying because to do so would endanger his own life.
B). Insuperable cause: a cause which cannot be overcome or remedied. Such as the police who
failed to file the appropriate charge within the period prescribed by law because of the distance to
the town where the court is located, or because he himself was wounded and had to first bring
himself to the hospital for treatment of his own wounds, or a typhoon destroyed the road or bridge
leading to the offices.
ABSOLUTORY CAUSES
I. CONCEPT: Those where the accused committed a crime; he acted with freedom, intelligence, intent,
but he is not criminally liable because of public policy. There are considerations involved which are
more paramount and which out-weight the need to punish the accused. The accused may however be
civilly liable to a person injured.
II. They may be provided for by certain specific articles of the Revised Penal Code or as developed by
jurisprudence.
III. Those provided by the Revised Penal Code include the following:
1. Voluntary Desistance during the attempted stage

2. As to light felonies: they are not punished if they are merely in their attempted or frustrated
stages; and only as to principals and accomplices
3. Persons who perform an act of an accessory if the principal they assisted is a relative
4. Pardon by the offended party in private offenses as well as the Marriage between the offender
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
and the offended party in private crimes

5. There is no criminal liability in case of less serious physical injuries inflicted under exceptional
circumstances
6. There is no criminal liability incurred in theft, estafa, malicious mischief committed mutually
between ascendants-descendants, spouses and brothers and sisters who are living together
IV. Those established by jurisprudence: (i) Mistake of Facts (2) Instigation and (3) Frame Up and Set
Up.
1. Instigation: when a law enforcer encourages an innocent person to commit a crime with the
intention of arresting him in flagranti. The accused would not have committed the crime if not
for the inducement of the officer.
A. The elements are : (i) The act of persuasion, trickery or fraud, carried out by the law
enforcer or their agents to induce the accused to commit a crime and (ii) the origin of
the criminal design is in the mind of the officer rather than the innocent accused, such
that the crime is the product of the creativity of the law enforcement officer (PP vs.
Doria, Jan. 27, 1999)
B. Distinguished from Entrapment: In both cases the arresting officer dealt or transacted
with the accused personally or through an agent so that the accused will commit a
crime, and thereafter arrested the accused in flagranti. In entrapment the criminal
intent came from the accused. With or without the participation of the officer, the
accused would still commit the crime. The officer merely finds ways and means to
catch the criminal in the act.
C. Test to determine whether the arrest is an entrapment or instigation:
i). The subjective Test: Examine the predisposition of the accused to commit the crime;
his mental state at the time of the encouragement. This includes looking into his
background, his activities, his previous criminal records, his propensity to commit crimes;
habituality, motives, etc. Whether he is ready to commit the crime and is waiting only for
an opportunity.
i) The Objective Test: the focus is on the conduct of the officer whether by such conduct
there is substantial risk that the crime will be committed by one who is not predisposed
to commit the crime. This also includes looking into the details and circumstances of the
arrest.
D. Entrapment is usually resorted in bribery, and the sale of prohibited articles, delivery
of ransom money. Sting operations or buy-bust operations are recognized as lawful
means of entrapment.
E. In PP. vs. Legazpi (Nov. 23, 20110) reiterating PP. vs. Gonzales ( 2002) it was held
that where the offense is habitually committed, such as selling drugs, the accused
cannot put up the following as a defense to raise instigation:
(i). that facilities for the commission of the crime were intentionally placed in his way
(ii). That the criminal act was done at the solicitation of the decoy or poseur-buyer
seeking to expose his criminality
(iii). That police authorities feigning complicity in the act were present and apparently
assisted in its commission
2. Frame-Up and Set-Up.

A. In frame-up, there is a crime committed by another but the law enforcers create, plant,
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
destroy, suppress or alter evidence in order that an innocent person will be implicated as the
author.
i). The essence is false accusation. It cannot co-exist with instigation in that in instigation
the crime was actually committed by the accused except that the intent originated from the
mind of the arresting officer. In frame up however, the offense was not committed. Precisely
the accused is only framed or set up in a situation leading to a false accusation against him.
B. Set-up: the accused is intentionally placed in a situation where it is made to appear that
he committed a crime.
C. Examples: Planting of Evidence; putting a person‘s effect at the crime scene; inducing
an unsuspecting person to a place where prohibited articles are found; enticing ―bold
shows‖ and then arresting the dancers.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. CONCEPT:
A). Those which if present in the commission of the crime serve to reduce the penalty to be imposed
upon the accused. The reduction may be by one or more degree (i.e a lower penalty is imposed than
that provided by law) or the penalty provided by law is imposed in is minimum period.
B). The basis is the presumed diminution of the elements which make the felony voluntary i.e
freedom, intelligence intent or due care; or due to the lesser perversity of the accused.
C). If there are several mitigating circumstances, all will be appreciated if they are based on separate
and distinct facts but if they arise from the same facts the principle of absorption will apply in that
there will only one circumstances to be appreciated and the rest will be deemed absorbed.
D). Except for voluntary surrender and plea of guilty, they must be present prior to or simultaneously
with the commission of the offense.
II. CLASSIFICATION.
A). As to whether they can be offsetted:
1). Ordinary: those which can be offset by an aggravating circumstance. If not off-setted, it has
the effect of causing the penalty to be imposed in its minimum period.
2) Privilege: those which cannot be offset by any aggravating circumstances but must be
appreciated as a matter of course. Its effect is to cause the penalty prescribed to be lowered by
one or more degrees.
If both ordinary and privileged mitigating are present, it will be the privileged which will first be
appreciated before the ordinary i.e. the degree of the penalty is first determined before its period.
B). As to their applicability
1). Generic or those which can be applied to all crimes

2). Specific or particular, often called Extenuating circumstances also, or those which are to be
appreciated only with respect to certain felonies as specified by the RPC. Examples:
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
abandonment by the husband in case of adultery, concealment of dishonor in case of abortion by

the mother, or release of the victim within 3 days in case of Slight Illegal Detention, killing of
inflicting serious physical injuries on the spouse or paramour caught in flagranti delicto.
3). Special or those which are to be appreciated only under special situations. They are: error en
personae as it is the penalty for the lesser offense which will be imposed in its maximum and
when there are two or more mitigating with no aggravating in which case the penalty is reduced
by one degree.
1. Incomplete Justifying or Exempting Circumstances
A. Concept:
1. This is present when a particular justifying or an exempting circumstance cannot be appreciated

to acquit the accused as only some of its elements are present but it will be considered to reduce
the penalty of the accused.
2. The rule as to its effect:
a). If there be more than 2 elements which are present, it will be considered as a privileged
mitigating
b) If there be only two elements the presence of one suffices for it to be a privileged mitigating
c) In the use of force defenses, the element of unlawful aggression must always be present: (i)
if only unlawful aggression is present, it is an ordinary mitigating (ii) if in addition there is one
more element it is privileged migrating and the penalty may be reduced by one or two degrees
B. As to incomplete avoidance of greater evil or injury, what is absent is either that the injury feared be
greater than that done to avoid it or that there be no other practical and less harmful means to prevent
or repeal the evil.
1. Example: swerving the car to the right and hitting people in order to avoid hitting bumping a
herd of carabaos, for he could have simply stopped and let the herd go instead of swerving.
C. As to incomplete justifying circumstance of performance of duty, one element suffices to make it

privilege there being only two elements . Example: The case of PP. vs. Oanis where the police did not
first ascertain the identify of the man they shot .
D. As to incomplete justifying circumstance of obedience to the order of a superior, it is indispensable

that the order is lawful but it is the means used which is not lawful.
E. There is no incomplete exempting circumstance of insanity, imbecility or minority.
F. As the exempting circumstance of state of accident, it is indispensable that the act is lawful. if there
is absent the element of due care, the accused becomes liable for a culpable felony the penalty of
which is lower than that of an intentional felony. If the act is not lawful and there is an intent to cause
the injury or harm there is no mitigating circumstance to be appreciated as the result is an intentional
felony.
2. MINORITY OR BEING OVER 70 YEARS OF AGE
A). Minority: refers to the fact that the accused was over 15 years but under 18 at the time he committed
the offense and who acted with discernment i.e he was found guilty.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. The accuses shall be referred to as a Child In Conflict with the Law

2. This is a privilege mitigating circumstance hence the penalty will be lowered by one degree. The
maximum penalty that can therefore be imposed is reclusion temporal. If the offense is penalized
by Life Imprisonment, said penalty will be understood as equivalent to reclusion perpetua and will
be reduced by one degree to reclusion temporal to give effect to the policy of the law on CICLs.
3.The effect will be applied even if the accused is already an adult at the time of conviction.
4. If at the time of sentencing the accused is still below 18, the provisions of R.A. 9344 will apply.
The sentence shall be suspended and the child shall be placed under the custody and supervision
of the DSWD.
B. Being over 70 years of age at the time of commission not at the time of sentencing.
C. Effects of age:
1. 15 years and below: age of irrresponsibility
2. Over 15 to 18: age of conditional responsibility in that the CICIL is not liable if he did not act with
discernment. If he did, he is entitled to a privileged mitigating circumstance and the provisions of RA
9344 shall apply to him.
3. Over 18 to 70: Full responsibility
4. Over 70: ordinary mitigating
3. LACK OF INTENT TO COMMIT SO GRAVE A WRONG

(Prater Intentionem)
A. This is appreciated in crimes against persons. The intent involved is either : (i) Intent to kill where it
is necessary to determine whether the crime is merely physical injuries or attempted/frustrated homicide
as well as where death occurred to find out if the accused intended the death and (ii) intent to injure to
determine whether the actual injury of the victim was the intended injury. The intent of the actor is to be
determined from the following:
1. The weapon used
2. The number, location and nature of the wounds of the victim
3. The time, place and occasion of the attack
4. The mode of the attack
5. The persistence of the attack
6. The utterances of the accused
7. The distance between the accused and victim
B. It must be shown there is a clear disproportion between the means employed and the resulting
injury.
C. This does not apply to culpable felonies and not to crimes where there is no material or physical
harm. It does not apply to sex crimes and to crimes against property. Its application is more to crimes
against persons.
1. In crimes against persons where the victim does not die, the lack of intent to kill reduces the
penalty to physical injuries. The lack of intent to kill will not again be appreciated as mitigating.
D. The intent is at the time the crime was committed and not during the planning stage.
CIRCUMSTANCES INVOLVING
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
DIMINUTION OF WILL POWER

(At the time the accused committed the crime he was not in his normal senses)
4. PROVOCATION OR THREAT
A. The victim provoked or threatened the accused which was why the accused committed the crime.
1. Provocation is any unjust or improper act, conduct or behavior of the victim which vexed,
annoyed, irritated, angered, or incited the accused. It may be directed to his person, honor or
reputation, or property.
2. The provocation must come from the victim and not from third persons. The person attacked was
the person who gave provocation.
3. It must be sufficient i.e. adequate enough to stir the accused to commit the crime
4. It must immediately precede the act or that there was no interval of time between the provocation
and the attack, otherwise the accused would have had time to reflect and to cool down. Note however
that the Supreme Court appreciated this even when there was a lapse of time when the accused
attacked the victim but the effect i.e. humiliation, embarrassment, anger, of the provocation was still
present when the attack occurred.
B. Examples:
1. Calling a person names, a liar, criminal, touching his ears, destroying his property
2. Booing or laughing or smirking at his singing (too much kantiawan)
3. Winking or making a pass at his girlfriend is not provocation
4. QUESTION: A girl winked, smiled and made a pass at a man who then embraced and kissed
her. Is there provocation?
C. The threats must not be serious as to amount to an unlawful aggression else it will be the use of
force defense which may apply.
5. VINDICATION OF A GRAVE OFFENSE
A. This presupposes that the victim committed an unjust or improper act, which may or may not amount
to a crime, upon the accused personally, his property, his honor, or that of his spouse, ascendants,
descendants, brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same degree.
1. Question: suppose the grave offense was committed against one who is not a relative but
someone close to the accused as his girlfriend?
2. The law allows a lapse of time between the offense and the crime so long as the accused was
still under the influence of the offense when he committed the crime.
B. Examples
1. The accused arrives home and learns his sister was molested the day before by the victim whom
he then sought and stabbed.
2. The accused was informed the victim was spreading news that the family of the accused is a
bunch of thieves
3. The accused saw his car was damaged and was told it was caused by the victim while the
accused was in the classroom.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
6. PASSION OR OBFUSCATION
A. At the time of commission of the crime the accused lost his reasoning and self control or was too
emotional.
1. The passion must arise from an unlawful or unjust or improper act of the victim. The act must be
sufficiently strong as to affect the feelings and mind of the accused and impel him to commit the
crime. It must not be far removed from the commission of the crime.
a) where the act of the victim is lawful, or when he is exercising a right or performing a duty, the
passion, anger, humiliation caused by it is not mitigating. Thus the humiliation of a man who was
served a warrant of arrest on his wedding day is not mitigating. Or the humiliation of a guard
man who was scolded by his superior for sleeping on his post.
2. The act of the victim may result either to the following

a). Anger and humiliation: the accused saw his partner in their house necking with another and
injures both
b). Jealousy as when the victim is openly courting a sweetheart
c). despair: a woman who killed her live partner for 20 years for wanting to leave her
d). love or affection which may lessen the offense as for example, the act of kissing from acts of
lasciviousness to unjust vexation
3. The feeling must arise from lawful sentiments hence it does not include the following:
a). sexual arousal directed at the victim
b). despair based on an immoral relationship
c). feelings of anger which was formented
d). religious bigotry
e). feelings generated by the excitement of a fight
4. It is incompatible when the crime was premeditated or preplanned or there was treachery, or
when the accused is intoxicated.
7. VOLUNTARY SURRENDER AND PLEA OF GUILT
A. These are two separate circumstances. They are indicative of the lesser perversity of the accused
by reason of his repentance.
B. Surrender means the accused give himself up knowing that he will be placed in custody or jailed.
The requirements are:
1. The accused has not been arrested.
2. It be voluntary in that the accused gives himself up either because he acknowledges his guilt or
that he wishes to save the government from the expense and effort of locating him.
a). If he surrenders due to hunger, fear for his safety, health or similar reasons, the surrender is
not mitigating
b). Surrender of the weapon is not surrender of person
c). where the accused went to the police station police to make inquiries and was arrested, there
is no surrender
d). where the accused asked that he be accompanied to post bail, there is no surrender
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
3. It must be to a person in authority or his agent

a). It may be made personally or through the intercession of third persons
b) It need not be at the place where the crime was committed
4.Situations when surrender is mitigating

a). when after commission of the crime the accused reports it to the authorities and gives
himself up even before the authorities or agents came to know of the crime
b). when the accused does not leave the crime scene or its vicinity and waits for the authorities
to arrive and take him though he could have escaped into hiding
c). where the accused went into hiding but gives himself up before the authorities learn where
he is
d). when he learns the authorities are looking for him and he gives himself up instead of
escaping and hiding
.
5. It does not matter whether a warrant of arrest has been issued or not.
C. Plea of Guilt during arraignment
1. It must be to the charge/offense described in the Information

a).where the accused is allowed to plead guilty to a lesser offense, the plea is not mitigating
unless the Information is amended to charge the lesser offense
2. It must be unconditional in that the accused does not demand something in return for his plea,
such as that he be not sentenced to pay civil liability, or that he be given a certain penalty, or that
certain circumstances be taken in his favor
a). the accused may ask that the aggravating circumstances be deleted before he pleads
b). he may also ask that he be allowed to prove mitigating circumstances
3. It must be made before the prosecution presents evidence

a). to discourage accused who waits if the evidence against them is strong before pleading
guilty
b). where the accused originally pleaded not guilty, he may move that his plea be withdrawn
and that the be allowed to plead anew to the Information so long as the prosecution has not yet
started presenting evidence
c). where the prosecution presented evidence and thereafter the accused offered to plead guilty
to a lesser offense which was accepted and the Information was amended accordingly, such
plea is mitigating since the amended Information is a new accusation.
4. Where the accused offered to plead guilty to a lesser offense which offer was rejected by the
prosecution, but it is the lesser offense which was eventually proven, the rejected offer is mitigating.
5. A plea is an admission of all the factual allegations of the Information save those which are
conclusions of law.
8. BEING DEAF AND DUMB, BLIND OR ACCUSED IS

SUFFERING FROM A PHYSCIAL DEFECT
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. The physical defects must restrict his freedom of action, defense or understanding. The physical
defect must have a relation or connection to the crime which was committed. Thus:
1. The blindness must be of both eyes: is mitigating in crimes against persons, falsification, rape,
robbery, but not in estafa by deceit
2. Being lame is mitigating in physical injuries but not in estafa or oral defamation.
3. QUESTION: If despite his defects the accused persist in committing the offense, should not his
defect be disregarded?
9. ILLNESS WHICH DIMINISHES THE WILL POWER
A. This is limited to such illness which affects the mind or will power of the accused which however do
not amount to legal insanity or deprive the offender of consciousness of his acts. They must also have
a relation to the crime.
B. Examples
1. Being a kleptomaniac in theft
2. A pyromaniac in case of arson
3. Obsession for money (monomania of wealth) in estafa
4. Belief in witch craft where death results
5. Nymphomania or satyriasis in crimes against chastity but not being a sexual pervert
6. Eccentricity
7. Acute neurosis
C. Those which are due to the effects of drugs or alcohol are not mitigating, or self induced diminution
of will power as in the case of those who go berserk.
10. SIMILAR AND ANALOGOUS CIRCUMSTANCES
A. Article 10 grants the court wide discretion to consider as mitigating any circumstances which shows
lesser perversity on the part of the accused, remorse or a disposition to reform.
B. Examples.
1. Extreme poverty is similar to state of necessity in crimes against property
2. outrage feelings of an unpaid seller or creditor is similar to obfuscation
3. Voluntary restitution in estafa/malversation is similar to surrender
4. Reenactment with counsel is similar to plea of guilt
5. Testifying for the prosecution without being discharged is similar to plea of guilt
6. Advanced age with failing eyesight is similar to being over 70 in falsification
7. Appeal to esprit de corps is similar to passion
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. CONCEPT:
a). They are modifying circumstances which when present will produce the effect of the divisible
penalty being imposed in its maximum period, or which will change the nature of the crime as to make
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
it more serious as to call for the imposition of a higher penalty.

b). They indicate a greater perversity on the part of the accused, an unusual criminality and
dangerousness as shown by his motives, or in his personal circumstances, his choice of the time and
place of the commission of the crime, or in the manner of its commission, or in the choice of the victim.
c). They arise either prior to or simultaneous with the commission of the crime.
II. CLASSIFICATION
A. Generic or those applicable to all crimes such as habituality

B). Specific or those applicable only to certain crimes such as cruelty, ignominy and treachery which
apply only to crimes against persons
C). Ordinary or those which may be offset by a mitigating circumstance and which if not offset, will
result to the divisible penalty being imposed in its maximum period
D). Qualifying or those which will change the nature of the offense by making it more serious such
as treachery in a killing raises the crime from homicide to murder
E). Inherent: those which must of necessity accompany the commission of the crime and therefore
has no effect, such as evident premeditation in estafa, theft, robbery, adultery and concubinage;
abuse of official positioning crimes committed by public officers such as malversation; unlawful entry
in trespass
F). Special: those which arise under special conditions and cannot be offset by a mitigating
circumstance such that it is mandatory that the penalty is to be imposed in the maximum period or
that a distinct penalty will be imposed.
1. If there be a Mitigating circumstance it will affect the range of the maximum period
2. They are as follows:

a) That the act resulted to a complex crime (Art. 48)
b).That there was error in personae or mistake in the identity of the victim (Article 49)
c). That the accused took advantage of his official position( Article 62)
d). That the crime was committed by an organized syndicated crime group i.e by at least 2
persons organized to commit a crime for profit (Article 62)
e). That the accused is a quasi-recidivist under Art. 160.
f). That a loose firearm was used in a crime
g). that the victim is a child
III. SOURCES
A). The revised Penal Code

1. The basic source is Article 14 which enumerates the ordinary and generic aggravating
circumstances
2. As to the qualifying, special or specific aggravating, they are found in certain specific articles in
Book II under the respective titles covering the crimes to which they apply.
For example: (i). In Art. 125 as to those which qualify piracy, (ii) Art. 248 as to those which qualify
homicide to murder,(iii) Art. 310 as to those which qualify theft (iv) article 338 as to those which
qualify seduction
B). Special Laws
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
i). The Dangerous Drugs Law of 2002 provides the circumstance of having been found positive
for the use of dangerous drugs
ii). The Heinous Crime Law such that Reclusion Perpetua (death) shall be imposed in the crime
of carnapping if murder, homicide or physical injuries were committed; or in the crime of
Kidnapping or arson
iii). RA 8294 which provides the circumstance of ―use of unlicensed firearm in the
commission of murder or homicide”
iv). The Anti Rape Law enumerates several qualifying circumstances of rape
v). R.A. 7610 ― The Special Protection of children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination
Act‖ ( 1992) which provides that if the victim is below 12 years of age, the penalty for the crimes
of murder, homicide, intentional mutilation, and serious physical injuries shall be reclusion
perpetua ; and in case of qualified seduction, acts of lasciviousness, corruption of minors and
white slave trade, the penalty shall be one degree higher than that imposed by the Revised Penal
Code.
vi). Killing, rape and physical injuries qualify piracy
IV. PRINCIPLES IN THE APPRECIATION
A. The followi ng will not be appreciated:

1. Those which are inherent in the crime i.e those which must of necessity accompany the crime
have no effect, such as dwelling in trespass, disregard of respect due to the sex in crimes against
chastity
2. Those which are already punished as offenses such as the use of fire in the crime of arson
B. All aggravating must be alleged in the Information in such a manner including a statement of the
facts which support their existence. A general allegation is not sufficient.
C. Rule if there are several aggravating circumstances present:
1. If they are based on separate and distinct facts, all will be appreciated.
2. If they are based on the same circumstance or set of facts, then the Principle of Absorption
applies such that only one will be appreciated. In crimes against persons for example, treachery
is preferred and it will absorb the other circumstances relating to the mode of the commission, but
it will not absorb the circumstance that the crime was committed in consideration of a price,
promise or reward.
3. In case of qualifying circumstances, those which are not absorbed will be considered as
ordinary aggravating
Those under Article 14
Introduction: As a rule the circumstances are personal to the accused. However there are certain
circumstances which require that there be at least two persons who actively participated or were
involved in the execution of acts resulting to the crime. They include:
1. Band
2. With the Aid of Armed Men or persons who afford impunity
3. In consideration of a price promise, or reward
4. With the aid of a minor
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
5. Abuse of superior strength
1. That the accused took advantage of his official position
1. This is now a special aggravating under R.A. 7659 ( Heinous Crime Law) amending Article 62. If the
crime is Violation of the Child Abuse Law, the penalty shall be in the maximum.
2. Applies only to an offender who is a public officer who used the influence, prestige, or ascendancy
of his office as a means to realize his purposes or to commit the crime. Did he abuse his office to
commit the crime?
3. Does not apply where being a public officer is inherent in the crime like those under the Title
―Crimes By Public Officers‖
4. Examples: (a) A Jail Warden who orders the guard to beat up an inmate (b) A Police officer who
orders his subordinates to steal or rob or maul (c) a Judge who detained his debtor for contempt of
Court for refusing to obey the Judge Order for the debtor to appear in the sala of the Judge
2. In Contempt of, or with Insult to Public Authorities
1. Public Authorities refer to persons in authorities and not to their agents. Note that teachers and
lawyers are persons in authority for purposes of direct assault but not under this article. What about
Chiefs of Police? Yes, in places where they are allowed to prosecute in the absence of a public
prosecutor.
2. The public authorities are not the victims of the crime but that the crime was committed in the
presence, view or hearing of the public authorities, and the accused knows them to be such.
3. Disregard of Respect due the offended party by reason of

(a) Rank (b) Age (c) Sex or that the crime was committed in the
(d) Dwelling of the offended party
1. There must be a conscious or deliberate disregard of the respect due to the offended party so that
these are incompatible when offender acted under passion, vindication or diminished will power, or was
intoxicated.
2. Age, sex and rank apply only to crimes against persons or honor
a). Age: the victim is either advanced in age or is relatively young, in relation to the accused.
i).There must be a disparity in their age, not when both are in the same age level
ii). This is inherent if the accused is charged with Child Abuse under R.A. 7610 but in cases
where the victim of death is a child below 12 years, the penalty shall be in the maximum, or
one degree higher in cases of qualified seduction, acts of lasciviousness with the consent of
the minor, corruption of minors and white slave trade
(iii). Under R.A. 7610 and RA 9262, there is an aggravating circumstance consisting of the fact
that the victim is a “Child‖ who is either (i). below 18 years of age, or (ii). is over 18 but is
unable to fully take care of himself or protect himself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation
or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition.‖
b). Sex. The victim is a female and the accused is a male but this does not apply to crimes where
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
sex is inherent as in abuses against women under R.A. 9262 or in crimes against chastity.
c). Rank: the victim is entitled to respect due to his social standing, high position or station in life, or
employment, from one who is aware thereof and is lower in rank or position. There is a disparity in
the position of the victim and the accused. Examples:
i). Assault on the Company President by an employee thereof
ii). Attacking the head of a church by a member
N.B.: Should there be not be abuse of rank on the part of the accused if he is higher in station and
he uses this to commit a crime against one lower in rank?
3. Dwelling: refers to any enclosed structure habitually used by a person as his place of rest, comfort,
privacy and peace of mind. It may be man-made or a natural habitat, as a cave used as residence.
What is emphasized is not the appearance but the purpose or use thereof.
a) This includes the basic structure and the dependencies which are either (i) those so connected
with it as to be considered integral parts thereof such as the roof, stairways, balcony or (ii) any
structure attached to the main structure with a connecting door. Example: store, garage, restaurant,
internet –café
b) A person may have several dwellings such as (i) residential dwellings (ii) business dwellings (iii)
social dwellings (iv) dwellings for educational purposes (v) recreational dwellings. For example: the
dwelling of a mistress; hotel rooms or suites reserved for business or social functions; dormitories
and boarding houses of students; a vacation cottage
c). The victim may be the owner, the lessee, a boarder, a stay-in employee, or a temporary visitor
d). This is present in the following:

i). when the accused actually entered the dwelling and committed a crime therein, whether the
commission was previously intended or not
ii). When the accused was outside, the act was committed outside but the effect or crime was
produced inside the dwelling
iii). When the crime was started outside but it continued and was consumated inside the
dwelling
iv). When the crime started in the dwelling even if continued and consumated outside the
dwelling.
v). When the victim was taken from inside the dwelling and then brought outside where the
crime was committed on his person
e) This is not present when :

i). The victim gave sufficient provocation
ii).The accused is also an occupant of the same dwelling
iii). Dwelling is inherent in the crime as in robbery with force upon things, trespass to dwelling,
violation of domicile
4. With Abuse of Confidence or Obvious Ungratefulness
1. Abuse of confidence requires the existence of a relationship between the accused and victim by
reason of which the victim reposed trust and had confidence on the accused, but which the accused
abused or took advantage of in order to commit the crime.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
2. The relationship which involves trust may be:
a). Created by contract such as employment: as in the case of a body guard, baby sitter,
secretary, house help and domestic helps, a lawyer
b). Created by law as an appointed Guardian, an adoptive parent
c). By Blood, such as between close relatives
d) By Affinity as between in-laws
e) By close association and membership in some common organization or group as fraternal
group, teacher-pupil, church leaders-members,
f) By Human relationships such as between lovers, friends, roommates
3. It one of the qualifying circumstances of theft and is one mode of committing estafa through
misappropriation of property received
4. Obvious ungratefulness or ingratitude presupposes that the accused was the recipient of some
gratuitous act or benevolence or liberality from the victim for which he ought to have been grateful, but
instead he committed a crime against the said victim.
Examples: the accused pick pocketed the doctor who saved his life; a guest attacked his host; the
accused stole from one who loaned money to pay off a debt; boxing the finder of one‘s lost property or
who protected a missing relative.
5. Commission of a Crime in Certain Places
1. The specified places are : (a) palace of the chief executive even if absent, i.e malacanang and the
mansion. These represent the seat of sovereign authority and must therefore be respected (b) any
other place where the president is present, provided that the crime was committed within his view or
hearing or so near as to disrupt or disturb the president; like when the president is making the rounds
in the market to check on prices ,or where he goes to cut ribbons, or even play golf (c) where public
authorities are in the actual performance of their functions, as in their offices, (d) in a place dedicated
to religious worship, even if no religious ceremony is going on, but not if the place is also used for non-
religious activities.
2. Any of these places must have been purposely sought for or they were deliberately chosen.
Example: a thief who plies his trade inside the church while victims are busy with their prayers.
6. (a) Nocturnity (b) Uninhabited place and (c) band
1. Nocturnity or nighttime: refers to the period of darkness between sunset and sunrise or from dawn
to dusk
a). The crime must be wholly committed at night and not when it started at daytime and ended at
night time or that it began at night time and was consummated at daytime. In short it began and
ended at night.
b). The emphasis is the absence of day light hence night time is not appreciated if the place is well
lighted or illuminated, or it takes place inside a public establishment, even if dimly lighted as in night
clubs
c). That the crime was at night time should not be an accidental fact.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
d). The two test to determine its presence :

(i) The Subjective Test: that the accused purposely sought the night. He could have
committed the crime during day time but he waited for night time
(ii) The Objective Test: the accused took advantage of it in order to (a) facilitate the
commission of the crime (b) hide his identity (c) prevent aid from coming to the victim (d) minimize
the defenses of the victim or (e) facilitate his escape
e). Maybe absorbed in treachery if it forms part of the attack.
2. Uninhabited Place or Solitude (despoblador): may mean either:
(a) Uninhabited in that there are no persons habitually staying thereat such as the sea, a forest or
the stretch of the beach
(b) Isolated in that it is far from where people reside, or if there are houses, they are few and distant
to one another. Thus help to the victims difficult to come by. Examples: athletic bowl; the road from
the gate of Club John Hay to EPZA; Kennon Road; long stretches of highway; the farms in the
provinces
© As in night time the place must have been purposely sought for
3. Band (cuadrilla) it exist when more than three armed malefactors (bad elements) shall have acted
together in the commission of the crime
(a) Armed means all of the accused, not just some, are provided with weapons or means of violence
or instruments or tools capable of causing injury to a person. E.g. bladed weapons, stones, sticks
(b) This is considered in crimes against persons, chastity and even property. But this is inherent in
Robbery By a Band and in Brigandage
© It is distinguished from Organized Syndicated Crime Group which was a creation of R.A. 7659 and
placed under Article 62. The latter refers to a group of two or more persons collaborating,
confederating or mutually helping one another for purposes of gain in the commission of the crime
7. On the Occasion of a Calamity or Misfortune
1. The calamity or misfortune must be serious such as conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic,
tsunami, volcanic eruption, resulting to widespread panic, chaos, confusion and a break down of
discipline due to actual or impending danger to lives or to property.
2. May be due to an action of nature or to the action of man. Example: looting stores abandoned due
to flood or eruption of a volcano
8. With the Aid of Armed Men or

Persons Who Insure or Afford Impunity
1. There is no conspiracy between the accused and the armed men. He merely calls upon them to
intimidate, threaten cow or break the resistance of the victim. The armed men participate in some minor
capacity.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
(REPETITION OF CRIMES)
These are circumstances which consist of the fact that the accused had a prior conviction. It is the
prior conviction which is the aggravating circumstance. The four forms of repetition of crimes, or
those which involve at least two convictions, are:
1. Recidivism: this is ordinary or generic aggravating and is treated under Paragraph 9 of Article 14
2. Habituality: this is also ordinary or generic and is treated under paragraph 10 of article 14
3. Habitual Delinquency: this is an extraordinary aggravating circumstance and is covered under
Article 62. An additional penalty is added to the penalty for the crime committed
4. Quasi Recidivism: a special aggravating in that it cannot be offset by mitigating circumstances
and is covered under Article 160
9. Recidivism
1. A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one offense, shall have been previously convicted
by final judgment of another crime embraced under the same title of the Revised Penal Code. Service
of the first conviction is not required.
2. It is important that: (a) there be two separate convictions so that it cannot be considered in
contemporaneous convictions (b) both be felonies and are found in the same title i.e. Crimes against
persons, against property, against chastity and (c) the convictions must follow the chronology of the
commission of the crimes
3. It does not prescribe no matter how far ago was the first conviction
4. The accused need not serve the penalty of his first conviction as he may have been pardoned or
placed under probation because what matters is the fact of conviction and not service of sentence. The
first penalty may be a fine.
5. Once alleged and proven the court must appreciate it
6. The purpose is to prevent specialization of crimes
10. Habituality or reiteracion
1. Concept: the accused has previously been punished for an offense to which the law attaches an
equal or greater penalty, or for two or more offenses to which the law attaches a lighter penalty.
2. The accused must have served sentence on his previous penalties
3. The prior offenses may be violations of special laws
4. Its appreciation is discretionary with the court
(NOTE: THE CIRCUMSTANCES COVERED UNDER PARAGRAPHS 11 TO 18 ARE LIKEWISE

THE QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES OF MURDER UNDER ARTICLE 148)
11. In consideration of a Price, Promise or Reward
1. This deals with the motive. It involves the giver of the price, promise or reward known as the
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Principal by Inducement and the actor-recipient as Principal by Direct Participation.

2. ―In consideration‖ means the PPR was the sole reason for the commission of the crime. Had it not
been for the PPR the accused would not have committed the crime. The actor should not have his own
reasons for committing the crime. Thus motive is essential.
3. The PPR may be in any form: money, chattels, material services. The recipient may be the actor
himself or a person closely associated with him such as: promise of a promotion or employment of a
family member.
12. By Means of Innundation, Fire, Poison, Explosion etc
1. These artifices used involve great waste, destruction and ruin

2. These may be (a) inherent in the crime as in Crimes Involving Destruction under Article 323 or (b)
they constitute the crimes in themselves, as in Arson
3. In cases where both burning and death occurs, in order to determine what crime/crimes was/were
perpetrated- whether arson, murder, or arson and homicide/murder, it is de rigueur to ascertain the
main objective of the malefactor, thus:
a). If the main objective is the burning of the building or edifice, ( or enclosure for that matter) but
death results by reason or on the occasion of arson, the crime is simply arson, and the resulting
homicide is absorbed. The crime is the special complex crime of Arson Resulting to, or accompanied
by, Homicide
b). if the main objective is to kill a particular person who may be in a building or edifice ( or enclosure)
when fire is resorted to as a means to accomplish such goal, the use of fire becomes a qualifying
aggravating circumstance and the crime is murder only even if a property is burned
c). if the objective is to kill particular person, and in fact the offender has already done so, but fire is
resorted as a means to cover up the killing, then there are two separate and distinct crimes
committed- homicide/murder and arson ( PP. vs. Malngan 503 SCRA 294, Sept. 26, 2006)
d) If a person is killed, then the corpse is burned, the burning constitutes the qualifying circumstance
of scoffing or ignominy and the crime would be murder
4. Examples: opening the irrigation canal to flood the crops or to drown animals; placing a bomb under
a bus; parricide/infanticide by poison
13. With Evident Premeditation
1. Concept (pre is prior, meditate is to think or to reflect) this means the commission of the crime was
the result of cool thought and reflection. The accused carefully planned and deliberated on the crime.
The commission is not the result of a reflex action or an-on-the-spur of the moment decision.
2. It must however be shown that the crime was intentionally planned hence there must be clear,
positive and convincing evidence on the following elements:
a) the time when the accused decided to commit the crime
b). an act manifestly indicting the accused clung to his determination
c) the lapse of a sufficient time between the decision and the actual commission of the crime,
such that the accused could have desisted from continuing with his plan but he did not
3. This is however inherent in crimes against property, such as in theft, robbery and estafa. But in
Robbery with Homicide, the premeditation must be to cause death in the course of the robbery
4. In cases of aberration ictus, it does not apply unless the accused determined to kill not only the
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
intended victim but others who might help or interpose a resistance

5. Examples: Assassinations, ambuscades, assaults due to a desire for vengeance
14. Craft, Fraud or Disguises
1. These are referred to as the intellectual means of committing a crime because they involve cunning,
deception and the use of the intellect
2. Both craft (trickery) and fraud (deception, misrepresentation, lies) are intended to catch the victim
unaware and to throw him off guard
3. Examples of craft: luring the victim to the killing place; pretending to be relatives or employees of the
Post Office to gain entry; pretending to be collecting agents; pretending to be legitimate passengers of
taxicabs and thereafter the driver is robbed and killed; pretending a person needs help and thereby
vehicles are stopped in the highway only to be robbed; the modus operandi of carnappers of telling the
driver to stop due to a defect and then taking over the car when the driver stops
4. Examples of fraud: inducing a victim to sleep in one‘s house; sending a letter purportedly written by
a friend of the victim to lure the victim to come to the place where he is robbed. Telling a maid to give
money and valuables as his employer met an accident and needs money for hospitalization; courting
a lady and pretending to be an ardent suitor
5. Fraud is inherent in estafa by means of deceit
6. Disguise includes all attempt to hide one‘s identity in the commission of a crime. It is not limited to
wearing mask, moustaches, false glasses but also hiding one‘s identity in crimes of libel as hiding under
the name‖ concerned citizen‖ ;or muffling one‘s voice.
7. Disguise is not aggravating if the accused was nevertheless identified.
15. Taking Advantage of Superior Strength
1. Concept: the use of excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense available to the victim.
It connotes inequality of forces based on factors such as: (a) superiority in numbers (b) weapons used
(c) physique, body built, age, sex (d) others such as the weakened condition of the victim on account
of illness, physical defect ort diminished reasoning (e) skill of the accused in unarmed combat or martial
arts.
2. Aggravating circumstances based on the number of the accused: (a) band (b) aid of armed men (c)
abuse of superior strength and (d) organized syndicated crime group (e) with the aid of a minor (f) In
consideration of a price, promise or reward. They are distinguished from one another as follows:
a). According to the number: band requires at least four participants; organized syndicated crime group
requires at least two; there is no required number as to aid of armed men and abuse of superior strength
b). As to their participation in the crime: in band, syndicate, abuse of superior strength, all are
principals; but in aid of armed men, they merely participated in a minor capacity with a principal
c). As to the requirement of arms: in band all must be armed or provided with means of violence; this
also true in aid of armed men; this is not required in syndicated crime group and abuse of superior
strength
d). As to the crimes involved: band, aid of armed men and superior strength are usually appreciated in
crimes against persons, kidnapping and robbery whereas syndicated crime group is appreciated in
crimes where the purpose of gain is realized such as in crimes against property, kidnapping, white slave
trade, malversation, gambling, prostitution.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
16. Means Used to Weaken Defense
1. Example: Throwing sand in the face of the victim; covering him with sack; pulling down his pants;
putting a sleeping pill to get him drowsy, inducing victim to get drunk
17. Treachery
1. Concept: When the offender commits any of the crimes against persons employing means,
methods, or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to ensure the execution
thereof without risk to himself arising from the defenses which the victim might make.
The attack comes without warning and in a swift, deliberate and unexpected manner, affording the
hapless, unarmed, and unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or escape.
However the swiftness and unexpectedness of the attack are not the only factors to be considered but
whether the victim was intentionally rendered helpless/defenseless when the fatal wound was inflicted.
2. The elements to be proved are
a) that the means, methods or forms of execution are such (sneaky)that the victim was rendered
defenseless or was in no position to make a defense and
b). that the method of attack was consciously or deliberately adopted and not an on- the spur-of- the-
moment decision
3. This is the qualifying circumstance of murder which is preferred over the others and it usually
absorbs the other circumstances which have relation to the means or method of attack such as
nighttime, uninhabited place, use of poison or explosion, fire or evident premeditation. If they are not
absorbed they are appreciated as ordinary aggravating.
a). However if the mode of attack was by an explosive, the use of an explosive becomes the
qualifying circumstance and treachery will be a generic aggravating ( PP. vs. Barde: Sept. 22, 2010)
4. Applies even if the crime against persons is complexed with other crimes, such as direct assault
5. Killing a child is always treacherous
6. Rule as to Frontal Attacks: generally there is no treachery as the victim cannot be said to be unaware
as he is face-to-face with his attacker. But not (a) if the attack was so sudden, deliberate and
unexpected and consciously adopted or (b) if the victim was forced into a position where he is
defenseless, as in the Teehankee case where the victims were made to sit down and to place their
hands behind their head, whereupon they were shot.
7. In case the attack was preceded by a quarrel: there is no treachery. But ― even if the victim is warned
of the danger to her person, treachery may still be appreciated as long as the execution of the attack
made it impossible for the victim to defend herself or to retaliate‖ ( PP. vs. de la Cruz, 523 SCRA
433) or placed in defenseless position when the fatal wound was inflicted such as when the victim was
held by others then stabbed. (PP vs. Tabarnero, Feb. 24, 2010)
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
8. In case of Attack from Behind: Generally considered as treacherous if this mode was consciously
adopted.
9. Rule in case of a continuous attack or if there was a break in the attack. Applies to situations
where, at the time of the infliction of the wound, the victim was defenseless.
a). In case of a continuous attack, there is no treachery if there was no treachery at the inception of
the attack.
b) Even if there be no treachery at the inception of the attack but there was a break in the attack,
then treachery is to be appreciated if it was present at the time the injury or harm was inflicted.
10. Other situations where victim is said to be defenseless:

a) where he was preoccupied: as when he was busy studying or eating or watching an ongoing
activity or was answering the call of nature, or was working
b) victim was asleep or resting or has just wakened from sleep
c) where the body was found with hands tied, treachery is presumed even if there were no eye
witnesses.
11. In case of several accused, treachery affects only those who had prior knowledge of or were
aware of it
18. Ignominy
1. Concept: adding mental torture or insult to the injury. The time, place, and other circumstances in
the commission of the crime are such that they caused unnecessary humiliation or embarrassment
either to the victim or to the surviving relatives.
2. This is appreciated in crimes against persons, chastity, honor, coercion, unjust vexation
3. Examples: kissing a girl in public; hanging the victim in a tree; throwing the body in a urinal or
garbage pit; removing the pants; boxing the priest who is saying mass; committing rape dog style
4. This is the only aggravating which may arise after the commission of the crime; as chopping off the
arms and legs or sex organ of the victim after killing him.
19. Unlawful Entry
1. The entrance was effected by a way not intended for entrance into a dwelling or in an uninhabited
place. The passage is other than the door.
2. The entry must be to commit a crime and not just to violate the dwelling else the unlawful entry
becomes trespass
3. This is inherent in crimes of trespass to dwelling, robbery with force upon things
20. Breaking of a Wall, Roof, Floor, Window
1. These pertain to the wall, roof, floor of a dwelling and the breaking is for the purpose of gaining
entry in order to commit a crime inside. Else it is attempted trespass or malicious mischief
2. It is inherent in Robbery With Force Upon Things
21. (a) With the Aid of a Minor and (b) Use of a Motor Vehicle
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. The minor is one below 15.

a). Suppose the accused is a minor over 15 but below 18?
b). The purpose is to prevent the corruption of minors
3. Motor vehicle refers to modes of transporting people and goods ran by motor energy not muscle
effort. A bicycle to which is attached a motor is a motor vehicle
a) Must be used to commit, or to facilitate the commission of the crime
b) If used to kill a person as by hitting running over him, this may qualify the killing to murder
c). Examples: (i) transporting the victim on board a car as in abduction or kidnapping (ii)
widespread robbery using a vehicle to go around the neighborhood
22. By Inflicting Another Wrong Not Necessary

to the Commission
1. May refer either to:
a). Cruelty: making the victim suffer slowly and deliberately. It is synonymous to torture or slow death
or acts of sadism. It is usually done by inflicting wounds on the victim while the victim is still alive and
at intervals of time to cause maximum pain. Or that the method of killing involves lingering pain or
suffering. Example: death by skinning him alive, or by slow fire. ( Memory Aid: Pinikpikan, ―Rubbing
Salt to the Injury‖)
b). Other crimes such as rape, unnecessary deaths or physical injuries are appreciated as
aggravating in the crimes of robbery with homicide; the other rapes are aggravating in Rape with
Homicide.
ARTICLE 15. ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Concept: Those which may be considered either as mitigating or aggravating according to the
nature and effects of the crime and other conditions attendant to the crime. They must affect the
commission of the crime. They are: (i) relationship (2) intoxication and (3) degree of instruction.
2. Relationship: This is taken into account when the offended party is the spouse, ascendant,
descendant, legitimate or natural, or adopted brother or sister, or relative by affinity in the same degree
of the offender.
A. Effect of Relationship In general:

i). As basis for a justifying circumstance
ii).As an absolutory cause under Articles 20, 247 and 332
iii). As an alternative circumstance under Article 15
B. Under Article 15, relatives by consanguinity within the 4th civil degree are not included. However
step parents and step children are included.
C. When relationship is appreciated as Aggravating:

i). Where the offense is a grave felony
ii). In crimes against chastity
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
ii) If the offense is a less grave or light felony, it is aggravating if the victim is a relative of an
equal or higher degree
D. When it is mitigating
i) In less grave or light offenses where the victim is a relative of a lower degree
ii) In crimes against property as in case by a mother- in- law who stole from his son-in -law
3. Intoxication: Presupposes that when the accused committed the crime, he had taken in alcohol in
such quantity as to have affected his mental faculties, blurred his reasoning and diminished his self
control.
A. There is no fixed rule as to the minimum quantity of alcohol in- take required before it is said that
a person‘s mental faculties had been affected. This is dependent on several factors such as the type
or kind of liquor taken in i.e. hard vs. soft liquor or wine, brandy vs. gin vs. scotch vs. beer; manner
of in-take e.g. straight or on the rocks or food is taken; as well as the personal factors such as sex,
age, state of health and other factors affecting the alcohol tolerance of a person.
B. Test: (i) external conduct of a person (ii) breathalyzer to determine if a person was driving under
the influence of liquor (iii) Rhomberg test and tandem gait, etc
C. It is Mitigating if intoxication is not habitual or intentional such that the crime is said to be the result
of an impulse or urge or delusion due to the effects of alcohol.
D. It is aggravating when the intoxication is intentional i.e. to strengthen the resolve or to use as
shield or excuse or is habitual i.e the accused is used to taking in alcohol as to be alcoholic. However
the drinking of wine as an appetizer is not included.
E. When it is proven that the accused was intoxicated when he committed the crime, the
presumption is in favor of mitigation and it is for the prosecution to prove it was intentional or habitual.
4. Degree of Instruction and Education.

A. What is involved is whether or not the accused finished formal education or schooling. However
what is considered is not so much the illiteracy but the level of intelligence. The emphasis is the lack
of sufficient intelligence and knowledge of the full significance of one‘s actions
i) Some are naturally intelligent and mentally alert though illiterate while some literates are
densely ignorant
ii). Note that the rule does not apply to persons 15 years of age or below even if naturally intelligent
or gifted in secondary school because they are presumed to be incapable of forming criminal
intent.
B. Lack or Low Degree of Education is generally mitigating, especially to crimes mala prohibita, but
not to crimes universally condemned as evil or those which are mala in se.
C. Aggravating: when the accused has a high degree of education which he used or availed of to
commit or facilitate the commission of the crime. Examples:
i) A law student who used his knowledge to defraud another
ii) A Physician who kills his patients
iii) A handwriting expert who falsifies using his knowledge
iv). A Financial Analyst defrauding a business entity
v). Computer expert who engages in hacking and spreading computer virus
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE
I. Who Are Criminally Liable
A. According to Article 16: For Grave and Less Grave Felonies they are the principals, accomplices
and accessories. For light felonies they are the principals and accomplices only. Accessories are not
liable.
B. The classification into principals, accomplices and accessories is based on the Degree of
Participation in the commission of a crime where at least two persons participated.
1. This classification does not apply to violations of special laws where the violators are referred
to plainly as offenders, violators, culprits or criminals.
2. The classification applies whenever there are at least two persons who were involved in the
commission of the crime. But the classification into the three major classes does not apply if the
several offenders acted in conspiracy as all will be considered as principals.
3. The purposes of the classification is to determine the proper penalty to be imposed upon the
accused. This is one of the factors in determining the proper penalty to be actually imposed.
II. Principles of Criminal Liability (0bligation to serve the penalty or suffer the penalty)
A. To be guilty of a crime, one must commit the crime himself (principal) or if committed by another,
he must, in some manner, participate either in its commission ( accomplice) or in the fruits thereof (
accessory).
B. There are two subjects of a crime:

1). The passive subject or the person whose right, honor, property, interest was injured and it
may be the state/society, a natural person whether dead or alive, or a juridical person.
2) The active subject or the actor or violator or offender
C. As a rule only natural persons who are alive can be considered as active subjects and be held
criminally liable. The reasons are: (i) The element of mens rea can only be found in natural persons:
malice in intentional felonies and indifference in culpable felonies are attributes of natural persons
(ii) procedurally juridical persons cannot be arrested (iii) the principal penalties consisting of
deprivation of life or of liberty, restriction of liberty, deprivation of rights, and the accessory penalties
of disqualification, cannot be served by juridical persons.
D. When may a juridical entity be held criminally liable? A juridical entity may be prosecuted and
held liable if the offense is punishable by a fine, revocation, cancellation suspension of a license,
permit, authority, franchise or similar privileges granted by law.
E. For what acts may a juridical person be held liable?
1. For acts committed by its responsible officers, policy makers or those having charge of the
management and operation of the entity.
2. A corporation also incurs criminal liability for the acts of its employees or agents if (i) the
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
employee or agent committed the offense while acting within the scope of his employment and
(ii) the offense was committed with at least an intent to benefit the employer ( PP. vs.
Chowderry, 235 SCRA 572)
F. A person cannot escape punishment when he participates in the commission of a crime on the
ground that he simply acted as an agent or representative of a party. The defense of agency in civil
law is not applicable.
G. As a rule, criminally liability is purely personal and is limited to the acts/omissions of an accused
and not for the acts or omissions of third persons ( res inter alios acta rule).
The exceptions when a person is liable for the acts/omissions of others include the following:
(i) violations by Juridical entities
(ii) when there exists a conspiracy between two or more persons where the act of one becomes
the act of all resulting to a joint criminal responsibility or collective liability
(iii) under the principle of ―Command Responsibility‖ if so provided by the law violated.
Two types: Command Responsibility for Acts of a Juridical Entity and Command Responsibility of a
Superior for Acts of a Subordinate
I. Command Responsibility of a Superior: Command Responsibility is an omission mode of

individual criminal liability whereby the superior is made responsible for crimes committed by the
subordinate by the failure of the superior to prevent or punish the perpetrator.
(i). Under RA 9851 (An Act Defining and Penalizing Crimes Against International Humanitarian
Law, Genocide and Other Crimes Against Humanity) section 10 thereof provides for liability based
on Command Responsibility for superiors thus: ― a superior shall be held criminally responsible as
a principal for such crimes committed by subordinates under his/her effective command and control,
or effective authority as the case may be, as a result of his/her failure to properly exercise control
over such subordinate where the superior knew or ought to have known the subordinate were
committing or about to commit crimes; failure to take all necessary and reasonable measures to
prevent or suppress or to submit the matter to competent authority for investigation and prosecution‖.
(ii). Under RA 9745: The Anti Torture Act of 2009

Section 13: on who are criminally liable‖x x x the immediate commanding officer of the unit
concerned of the AFP or the immediate senior public official or the PNP and other law enforcement
agencies…who has knowledge but failed to prevent the commission of the crime….or fails to take
all reasonable measures to prevent, suppress the crime or to report to competent authority…
QUESTION: How high in the official hierarchy does the responsibility extend: The liability is limited
to the officer with direct, immediate, effective command or control or authority over the subordinate.
He must also have knowledge- whether actual or constructive.
(iii). Under the Rule on the Writ of Amparo
J. Command Responsibility for Corporate/Juridical Acts. Who are liable if the violation was made
by a juridical entity? Per Ching vs. Secretary of Justice ( Feb. 06, 2006) the principles maybe
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
summarized as follows
1. The juridical entity itself where the penalty is one which can properly be imposed on it, such as
fine or revocation of license
2. The officers, employees or agents who actually executed the prohibited act or incurred the
omission.
a). Example: LLamado vs. CA ( 270 SCRA 423) it was held that even if the officer of the
corporation had no involvement in the negotiation of the transaction for which he, as treasurer
of the corporation, issued a postdated check which bounced, he is liable for Violation of B.P.
22. But in PP. vs. Bautista (Aug. 2010), the accused who issued the check was acquitted on
the ground that the act pertained to that of the corporation which has a distinct and separate
personality.
b). but in Mitra vs. PP (July 2010(13?) the conviction of the officer who drew, signed or issued
a corporate check was upheld in that BP 22 expressly provides that if the check is drawn by a
corporation or entity, the person or persons who actually signed the check in behalf of such
corporation is liable. This provision does not have any condition, qualification, or limitation.
c). RA 10364 ( The Expanded Anti Trafficking in Persons Act of 2012) provides that in case of
its violation by a juridical person, the penalty shall be imposed upon the owner, president,
partner, manager, and/or responsible officer who participated in the commission of the crime.
3. The person specifically mentioned by the law violated to be held liable. Examples:
a). Section 8 of R.A. 8042 (Migrant and Overseas Filipino Act of hl995) provides: ―In cases of
juridical persons the officers having control, management, and direction of their business shall
be held liable‖
b). P.D. 1612 (Anti Gambling Law) provides that the President shall be liable if gambling is
carried on by a juridical entity
c). In case of libel under Art. 360 the persons liable shall be the editor of a book or pamphlet,
business manager of a daily newspaper, magazine or serial publication
d). Under the Dangerous Drugs Law ( RA 9165) they are the partners, president, director,
manager, trustee, estate, administrator or officer who consents or knowingly tolerates such
violation such shall be liable as a co-principal
e). Under BP 22 the person or persons who actually signed the check
f). R.A. 10364 :‖ The Expanded Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2012‖ provides that ―if the
offender is a juridical person, the penalty shall be imposed upon the owner, president, partner,
manager, and/or responsible officer who participated in the commission of the crime or who
shall have knowingly permitted or failed to prevents its commission‖
g). RA 9995 ―The Anti Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009‖ provides the persons liable to
be the officers of the juridical person, including the editor and reporter in case of print media
and the station manager, editor and broadcaster in the case of broadcast media
4. a). An employee or officer even if not among those enumerated by the law violated, if, with
knowledge of the illegal act/business, he consciously contributes his efforts to its conduct or
promotion ( PP. vs. Chowderry)
b). The culpability of the employee hinges… on his knowledge of the offense and his active
participation on its commission. Where it is shown that the employee was merely acting under the
direction of his superiors and was unaware that his acts constituted a crime, he may not be held
criminally liable for an act done for and in behalf of his employer ( PP. vs. Corpuz, October
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1, 2003)
5. Those who, by virtue of their managerial position or similar relations to the corporation could
be deemed responsible for its commission, if by virtue of their relations to the corporation, they
knowingly permitted, or had the power to prevent the act but failed to prevent its commission (
Command Responsibility for Corporate Violations)
G. Where the act is a violation by a juridical entity, the officers or employee cannot put up the
following defenses:
1. It is no defense that he did not benefit from the act
2. The accused cannot hide behind the principle of separate corporate personality of the juridical
entity in order to escape liability. However, in a case involving a prosecution for BP 22 (PP. vs.
Bautista, August 2010) the Supreme Court acquitted the accused on the ground that the act
pertained to that of the corporation which has a separate and distinct personality.
ART. 17. PRINCIPALS
There are three kinds of principals depending on the nature of their participation in the commission of
the crime. However, irrespective of what type of principal they belong, their penalty will be the same.
They are the following:
A. Principal by Direct Participation

B. Principal by Indispensable Cooperation
C. Principal by Inducement
.
A. BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION (PDP)
I. INTRODUCTION :
A. This refers to those who actually and directly take part in the execution of the act ( The Actors).
In all crimes there must always be those who actually perform the act which brings about the crime.
They may be only one person or more. Whenever there are two or more involved in a crime, it
becomes necessary to find out those who actually executed the act so that all may be held equally
liable.
B. To hold two or more persons as principals by direct participation, it must be shown that there
exists a conspiracy between and among them. This is not the conspiracy punished as a crime but
the conspiracy as a mode or manner of incurring criminally or that legal relationship whereby, in the
eyes of the law, it may be said that the act of any one is the act of all.
II. For conspiracy to exist, there be an intentional felony, not a culpable felony, and it must be proved
that all those to be considered as PDPs performed the following:
A. ( Unity of Intention) They participated, agreed, or concurred in the common criminal design,
intent or purposes or resolution.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. This participation may be prior to the actual execution of the acts which produced the crime (
Anterior Conspiracy ) or it may be at the very moment the acts are actually being executed and
carried out ( Instant Conspiracy).
2. Hence it is not necessary to prove that before the commission of the crime, the several accused
actually came and met together to plan or discuss the commission of the crime.
3. ―Spontaneous agreement or active cooperation by all perpetrators at the moment of the
commission of the crime is sufficient to create a joint criminal responsibility‖ ( Sim Jr. vs. CA,
428 SCRA 459)
B. (Unity of Action ). All participated in the execution or carrying out of the common intent, design,
purpose or objective by acts intended to bring about the common objective.
1. Each must have performed an act, no matter how small or insignificant so long as it was
intended to contribute to the realization of the crime conspired upon. This requires that the
principal by direct participation must be at the crime scene, except in the following instances:
a). When he is the mastermind

b). When he orchestrates or directs the actions of the others from some other place (Hub and
Poke Conspiracy)
c). His participation or contribution was already accomplished prior to the actual carrying out of
the crime conspired such: his role was to conduct surveillance or to obtain data or information
about the place or the victims; to purchase the tools or weapons, or the get away vehicle, or to
find a safe house
d). His role/participation is to be executed simultaneously but elsewhere, such as by creating a
diversion or in setting up a blocking force
e). His role/participation is after the execution of the main acts such as guarding the victim; looking
for a buyer of the loot; ―laundering‖ the proceeds of the crime
III. Participation in both ( Intention and Action) is necessary because:
A. Mere knowledge, acquiescence or agreement to cooperate, is not enough to constitute one as a

party to a conspiracy, absent any active participation in the commission of the crime, with a view
to the furtherance of the criminal design and purpose. Conspiracy transcends companionship.
B. ―Except for the mastermind, it is necessary that a co-conspirator should have performed some
overt act (i) active commission of the crime itself (ii) active participation as a direct or indirect
contribution of the execution of the crime (iii) moral assistance to his co-conspirators by being
present in the commission of the crime or (iv) by exerting moral ascendancy over the other
conspirators ― ( Mangangey vs. Sandiganbayan, Feb. 18, 2008)
C. He who commits the same or similar acts on the victim but is a stranger to the conspiracy is
separately liable. Simultaneous acts by several persons do not automatically give rise to conspiracy.
Examples:
1. X joined in the planning of the crime but was unable to join his companions on the day of the
crime because he was hospitalized. He is not liable.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
2. X is the common enemy of A and B who are strangers to one another. Both A and B chanced
upon X. A stabbed X while B shot him. A and B will have individual liabilities.
D. Exception: When a person joins a conspiracy after its formation, he thereby adopts the previous
acts of the conspirators which are admissible against him. This is under the Principle of Conspiracy
by Adoption.
IV. Proof of Conspiracy

A. Direct proof of conspiracy is not necessary. The existence thereof maybe inferred under the
Doctrine of Implied Conspiracy which directs that if two or more persons:
(i). Aimed by their acts towards the accomplishment of the same unlawful object
(ii). Each doing a part so that their acts, though apparently independent, were in fact connected
and cooperative
(iii). Indicating a closeness of personal association and a concurrence of sentiment
(iv).A conspiracy maybe inferred though no actual meeting among them to concert is proved.
V. Effect of Conspiracy. There will be a joint or common or collective criminal liability, otherwise each
will be liable only to the extent of the act done by him.
A. A person may be convicted based on conspiracy even if his alleged co-conspirators either died,
have been acquitted or were not charged so long as the acquittal or death does not remove the basis
of a charge of conspiracy. For example: in PP. vs. Dumlao,(580 SCRA 409) the accused was found
guilty of Violation of the Anti Graft Law in conspiracy with other members of the GSIS Board of
Directors. Of the seven members 2 died, 2 were acquitted and 12 were not charged.
VI. For what crime will the co-conspirators be liable?
A. For the crime actually committed if it was the crime agreed upon
B. For any other crime even if not agreed upon, provided it was the direct, natural, logical
consequence of, or related to, or was necessary to effect, the crime agreed upon. Otherwise only
the person who committed the different crime will be held liable.
VII. When is a co-conspirator freed from liability?
A. Only if he has performed an overt act either to:

1. Disassociate or detach himself from the plan
2. Prevent the commission of the second or different or related crime
B. Likewise, if for any reason not attributable to the law enforcement agents, he was not able to
proceed to the crime scene and/or execute an act to help realize the common objective, then he can
not be held liable as a co-conspirator. Thus he is not liable if he got sick, overslept, or forgot about
it, or he was invited to a drinking session and he forgot the plan, or his vehicle broke down while on
his way or he met with an accident along the way, but not when law agents took him into custody to
prevent him from doing his part of the agreement.
Thus in Robbery with Homicide, all who conspired in the robbery will be liable for the homicide unless
one of the conspirators proved he tried to prevent the homicide.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
B. PRINCIPALS BY INDUCEMENT (PI)
I. Concept: Those who directly induce (PDP) to commit a crime either by: (a) force (b). inducement.
They are the persons who conceived of the crime unless it was the PDP convinced them to agree to
the crime by giving an inducement to the PDP.
II. The use of force involves the application of either:
A. Active force or material force upon the person of the PDP, resulting to serious bodily injury, to
such a degree that the PDP is left with no choice but to do as ordered or
B. Instilling fear of the commission or infliction of an equal or greater injury or evil either to the PDP
or the latter‘s family or even to a third person.
The PDP may set up the exempting circumstances of compulsion of irresistible force or
uncontrollable fear in his favor.
III. Inducement connotes that there was an agreement or conspiracy between the PI and the PDP
unless it was by the use of force. Generally the idea of committing the crime came from the PI and he
merely induced another to do the execution. The inducement assumes several forms such as the
following:
A. By the giving of a price, promise or reward. This must be made with the intention of procuring the
commission of the crime and not as an expression of appreciation. The same must be the sole reason
for the commission of the crime.
i). This also serves as an aggravating circumstance which will affect both the giver and the
recipient.
ii). Must the inducement be given in a face-to-face agreement between the PDP and the person
sought to be charged as PI?
a). X sent his agent or an intermediary to tell B to kill C and a reward of P1million be given. B
agreed. Is X a PI?
b). X let it be known that he will pay P1million to whoever will kill C. B killed C. Is X liable as a
PI?
c). X gave P1million for him to kill Y. A gave P9 hundred thou to B and B gave 5 hundred thou to
C. It was C who killed Y. Is X a principal by inducement?
B. By giving Words of Command.( The PI commanded or ordered the PDP to commit the crime)
1. The utterer must have an ascendancy or influence over the PDP, or is one entitled to obedience
from the PDP. Example: one‘s superior in the PNP or AFP or employer.
2. The words must be so direct, so efficacious, so powerful and persistently made, as to amount to
physical or moral force
3. Must be made directly with the intention of procuring the commission of the crime and is
therefore the determining cause and it thus precedes the crime
4. They do not include thoughtless or imprudent utterances. Mere advises, counsel or suggestions
or exhortations are not sufficient.
5. May the words be written or non-verbal? No unless the two are face-to-face such that the
presence of the PI in itself constituted moral force
C. By the use of Inciting Words. These are words uttered while a crime is going on by one who is
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
present and are directed to a participant in the crime, such as the words ― sige pa, kick him, kill him,
bugbugin mo‖. The following must however be considered:
1. Whether the words were uttered by one with moral ascendancy over the accused and to whom
obedience is due from the accused
2. Whether the utterances were the result of the excitement generated by the situation or that the
utterer was caught up in his own excitement or emotion, or whether the utterer was coolly and
deliberately uttering such words with the intention that they be acted upon
3. Whether the crime would be committed anyway even without the utterances, or if such utterances
were the moving cause of the crime
D.By earnest and persistent solicitation or cajoling amounting to moral force made by one with authority
or influence over the accused.
Note: If the inducement is through the modes under B, C, or D, the inducement is given directly,
immediately and personally to the PDP.
C. PRINCIPALS BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION ( PIC)
I. Refers to those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it would
not have been accomplished. There must be a community of design or common purpose between the
PIC and the PDP, but not a conspiracy. The PIC knows or is aware of the intention or purpose of the
PDP and he cooperates or concurs in its realization by performing an act without which the offense
would not have been accomplished.
II. The cooperation may be:
A. By moral cooperation such as (i) providing technical advice or expertise on how to execute the
crime such as on how to avoid security arrangements (ii) revealing the combination numbers of a
bank vault, or the location of warning devices (iii) revealing the whereabouts of a victim, or where
the victim is most vulnerable to attack.
B. By Physical external acts such as:

1. Providing the weapon or tools, or the key to open the building
2. Providing the mode of transportation to enable the accused to reach the place of the scene of
the crime
3. Dragging the victim to the place of execution
4. Leaving open the doors or giving the key to open the building
5. Holding on to a victim to prevent him victim from resisting or drawing a weapon
6. Holding back a person from going to the assistance of a victim
C. Through Negligent Acts such as

1. The bank employee who failed to ascertain the identity of the presenter of a check and who
initials it
2. The guarantor who failed to ascertain the identity of the holder of a check presented for
encashment
3. A security guard whose laxity enabled a killer to enter the compound and kill an occupant
therein
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
ART. 18. ACCOMPLICES
I. Concept: Those persons who, not being included in article 17, cooperate in the execution of the
offense by previous or simultaneous acts. They are also referred to as the” Accessories Before the
Fact”.
II. There is no conspiracy between the accomplice and the PDP but there is community of design
between them i.e the accomplice knows and is aware of the intent, purpose or design of the PDP. He
then concurs, or approves of the intent of the PDP by cooperating in the accomplishment of the purpose
through an assistance given the PDP.
III. The cooperation of the accomplice is not indispensable in that the crime would still be accomplished
even without his cooperation. His cooperation or assistance may facilitate or make easier the
commission the crime but the crime would still be accomplished anyway. The acts of the accomplice
must however be related to the acts of the PDP but they merely show that the accomplice agrees,
approves or concurs with what the PDP intends to do or what he has done.
IV. The cooperation may be in the following forms:
A. Moral as by words of encouragement or advises. Thus the advise does not make one a principal
by inducement but is basis to make him liable as an accomplice.
B. Through external acts which are either previous or simultaneous to the execution of the criminal
acts, such as :
1. Giving of additional weapons or ammunition or a faster mode of transportation, or food to the
accused.
a). The weapon need not be actually used upon the victim but if used on another person, the
weapon giver is not liable as an accomplice. Thus if A gave a gun to B who was seeking to kill C,
but B did not use the gun but used a knife, A is an accomplice. If B used the gun to kill D, A has
no liability for said killing.
2. Blocking, or tripping a person who intends to assist the victim

3. Throwing stones, spitting, kicking, or delivering a blow, at the victim
4. Continuing to choke the victim after seeing that a deadly or fatal blow had been inflicted on
the victim
5. One maybe an accomplice to Homicide while the principal is liable for Murder.
6. One who provides his house for the commission of rape and murder and does nothing to
help the victim and who thereafter helps hide the evidence of the crime is an accomplice.
V. The act of the accomplice should not be more fatal or more deadly or mortal than that delivered by
the PDP.
Example: (PP. vs. Cual, Mach 9, 2000). X and the victim Y were fighting and grappling for the
possession of a steel pipe. B arrived and hacked at Y who ran away. X stood by while B pursued Y
and killed him. Is X an accomplice?
VI. Distinction between an Accomplice and a Principal By Indispensable Cooperation.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. The acts of an accomplice are not indispensable to the consummation of the offense in that the
crime would still be consumated even without his cooperation, whereas the cooperation of the PIC
is one without which the offense would not have been accomplished
B. There is no conspiracy between the accomplice and the PDP but which exist between the PIC
and the PDP
C. Example: PP. vs. Roland Garcia: Jan. 15, 2002
FACTS: In a case of kidnapping for ransom, the police arrested the accused who received the
money from the wife of the victim. They learned the victim was kept in a house. The police
proceeded to the house where they surprised X and Y who were seated and who tried to enter a
room to get guns. The two were not among the four who actually kidnapped the victim. The victim
was found in a room handcuffed and blindfolded.
QUESTION: What is the criminal liability of X and Y?
HELD: At the time X and Y were caught, the victim had already been rendered immobile, his eyes
blindfolded and his hands handcuffed. He could not have gone elsewhere and escaped. It is clear
X and Y were merely guarding the house for purpose of either helping the other accused in
facilitating the successful denoument of the crime or repelling any attempt to rescue the victim.
They thus cooperated in the execution of the offense by previous and/or simultaneous acts by
means of which they aided or facilitated the execution of the crime but without indispensable act
for its accomplishment. They are merely accomplices.
A co-conspirator is distinguished from an accomplice, thus:

Conspirators and accomplices have one thing in common: they know and agree with the criminal
design. Conspirators, however, know the criminal intention because they themselves have
decided upon such course of action. Accomplices come to know about it after the principal
reached the decision and only then do they agree to cooperate in its execution. Conspirators
decided that a crime should be committed; accomplices merely concur in it. Accomplices do not
decide whether the crime should be committed; they merely assent to the plan and cooperate in
its accomplishment. Conspirators are the authors of a crime; accomplices are merely their
instruments who perform acts not essential to the perpetration of the offense.
Further, the crime could have been accomplished even without the participation of X and Y. ― In
some exceptional cases, having community of design with the principal does not prevent a
malefactor from being regarded as an accomplice if his role in the perpetration of the crime
was…of minor character‖.
NOTE: Had it been that the victim was not immobilized and could still escape, then X and Y would
be considered as principals as they would still be considered as detaining and preventing the
escape of the victim.
C. Example: X went to where kidnappers were keeping a hostage. He ate and slept with them. Before
he left, he advised the victim not to try to ran away but to obey what kidnappers tell him. The
liability of X is that of an accomplice. But if he agreed and actually watched over the victim and
prevented him from escaping while the kidnappers were away, his liability is that of a principal by
direct participation.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
ART. 19 ACCESSORIES
I. Introduction:
A. They are referred to as the Accessories Proper or the Accessories- After- the-Fact. This is
because their participation in the crime comes only after the crime has been committed by others. It
is only then that they enter into the picture.
B. Requirement of Scienter: All 3 kinds of accessories require that they must have knowledge of the
commission of the crime otherwise they are not liable even if they did `an act described in Article 19.
II. The First Kind: By profiting themselves or assisting the offender profit by the effects of the
crime.
A. The effects of the crime include the property taken as well as the price, promise or reward given
as the determining cause of the crime.
B. ―Profiting themselves” include any act of dealing with the property including accepting as a
gift, donation, security or purchasing it at a lower price. He obtained some of pecuniary or material
benefit from the property. The transaction involving the property however must be mutual and
voluntary with whosoever the accessory dealt with otherwise he is liable as the principal in theft or
robbery.
Example: X pick-pocketed the money stolen by Z from another. X is not an accessory even if he
profited himself but is liable for theft. Or if X poked a gun at Z and took the money, he would be
liable for robbery. If Z dropped some of the money he stole which X picked up, X is liable for theft
not as an accessory.
C. ―Assisting the offender profit” includes acts of looking for a buyer, though no commission is
received, or of secreting it away or joining in its disposal.
D. Relation to Pres. Decree No. 1612 or ―The Anti Fencing Law‖
1. If the crimes involve theft or robbery, the acts may be punished as ―FENCING‖ i.e. the act of
any person ― who, with intent to gain for himself or for another, shall buy, receive, possess, etc.
or in any manner deal in any article, item, object, or anything of value which he knows or should
be known to him, to have been derived from the proceeds of robbery or theft‖
The following are the fences: (i) the recipient of the stolen property (ii) the middleman or
agent or he who sells, delivers or gives away the stolen property
QUERRY: May the thief/robber be convicted for fencing if he later disposes off the stolen
property?
2. The knowledge (scienter) may be actual or constructive

3. The venue is where the property is found
4. The prior conviction of the thief/robber is not required to convict the fence. But it be proved the
property came from robbery/theft, not any other offense such as estafa, malversation, kidnapping.
5. If the fence is a juridical person, the president or general manager or any officer who knows
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
or should have known the commission of the offense shall be liable.

6. Creates a presumption of fencing in that mere possession of any good, article, item, object, or
anything of value which has been the subject of robbery or thievery shall be prima facie evidence
of fencing.
7. It requires that all establishments dealing in the buy and sale of anything of value obtained from
an unlicensed dealer or supplier shall secure a clearance or permit from the PNP of the town or
city. The articles of value include used second hand articles. Failure to secure the permit is
punishable.
8. An accessory cannot again be prosecuted for fencing and vise-versa.
E. If the property was the proceeds of Highway Robbery or Piracy, the dealer is not liable as an
accessory but as the principal for Violation of P.D. 532 for the crime of Aiding/Abetting Brigands or
Pirates
III. The Second Act: By concealing or destroying the body of the crime or the effects or
instruments in order to prevent its discovery.
A. To conceal or destroy the body of the crime includes all manner of interfering with, or altering the
original conditions of the crime scene, or of anything therein which may be considered as evidence,
or the corpus delicti, prior to a completion of the evidence gathering by the law enforcers. Examples:
1. Changing the position of the body of the victim
2. Placing a weapon or removing one or replacing a weapon
3. Throwing away pieces of evidence such as cigarettes butts
4. Washing off the blood stains or cleaning the crime scene
5. Placing a suicide note
6. Making unnecessary foot prints at the crime scene
B. The object or purpose must be to prevent the authorities from discovering what truly transpired
such as the number and identity of the assailants; how the crime was committed, and all matters
related to the solution of the crime and prosecution of the offenders.
1. Thus one who help moved the body not knowing the reason why is not an accessory.
2. One who acted out of curiosity or who moved the body for fear of reprisal or of being blamed
as the killer is not an accessory.
IV. The Third Act: By harboring, concealing or assisting in the escape of the principal.
A. There are two kinds of accessories under this mode:

1. A Public Officer- he must abuse his public function and the crime by the principal maybe any
crime. If there was no abuse then he will be considered as a private person.
Example: The Mayor hides a suspect in his office to prevent identification or provides a false
alibi for him.
2. A Private Person- the principal must be guilty of treason, parricide, murder, attempt on the life
of the chief executive, or is habitually guilty of some other crime.
B. Meaning of the term‖ guilty‖. For purposes of charging a person as an accessory, the term does
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
not mean a judicial pronouncement of guilt but that the person is ‖probably guilty of the crime‖. But
where the court later finds that the crime committed by the principal is not any of the enumerated
offenses, then the private person who assisted him to escape is not an accessory.
C. The acts include (i) giving of material help such as food, money or clothing (ii) providing shelter,
a safe house or hideaway (iii) providing a mode of transportation (iv) providing disguises, false
identification papers, as well as by (v) refusing to cooperate with the authorities or to identify the
principal or (vi) giving disinformation or false data(vii) refusal or failure of law enforcement agents to
arrest a suspect or to gather evidence against the suspect.
D. Under Pres. Decree No. 1829, the same act maybe punished as ―Obstruction of Justice‖ - the
crime committed by any person who assist in the escape of a person who committed any crime.
V. May the Accessory be tried and declared guilty ahead of the principal?
A. As a rule the answer is no because of the principle that the liability of the Accessory is
Subordinate to that of the Principal. There must first be a person convicted as a principal before
there can be an accessory.
B. However, the accessory maybe prosecuted ahead of the principal even if the principal has not
yet been identified or arrested or has not yet surrendered if: First; the act of the accessory is under
either paragraph (a) or (b) or Second; even under paragraph C if the principal has not yet been
placed under the jurisdiction of the authorities.
C. In case of an accessory who assists in the escape, once the principal is later tried but the case
against the accessory has not yet been terminated, the trial against the accessory must be
suspended to await the outcome of the trial against the principal. However the two cases maybe
consolidated and tried jointly, if proper.
VI. If the principal is acquitted, should the accessory be also acquitted?
A. If the principal was acquitted by reason of a justifying circumstance, then the accessory must also
be acquitted.
B. If the principal was acquitted due to an exempting circumstance, the accessory may still be
convicted.
C. If the ground is that the guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt, the accessory may still be
convicted if his acts fall under either paragraph (a) or (b) but not under (c).
VII. If the principal dies, may the accessory still be prosecuted?
A. Yes, if the act is under either paragraph (a) or (b)
B. But if his act falls under paragraph © there are two views on the matter. The first view holds that
he cannot be prosecuted for in legal contemplation there was no principal whom he assisted. The
second view holds that the accessory may still be prosecuted because the death merely extinguished
the liability of the principal but the crime remains and the participation of the
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
accessory in it may still be proved.
ART. 20. ACCESSORIES EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY
1. Who are exempt:
A. Those who are accessories under paragraph (b) and (c) if the principal is a relative. This is in
recognition of the ties of blood and is an absolutory cause. The relatives are the same as those
under Article 15 (Relatives by consanguinity within the 4th civil degree are excluded)
Note: A person is not liable for defending his blood relatives within the 4th civil degree. But he is
liable if he helps them escape or if he destroys the evidence against them.
B. Those under paragraph (a) are not exempt because it is presumed what motivated them is greed,
rather than ties of blood.
C. This defense applies to a public officer.
D. Accessories to a light offense
PENALTIES
1. Concept: the suffering imposed upon a person by the court, pursuant to law, after final conviction
for violation of a penal law.
II. JUSTIFICATIONS:
A. As a measure of self defense by the state: the state has the right to protect itself against acts
intended to destroy the political, social and economic order or which undermine its very existence or
the security and peace of its inhabitants.
B. As a measure of prevention: while in prison the accused is prevented from committing a violation
of the law.
C. As a measure of reformation for the accused: to alter his behavior and make it conform to the
norms of society thru educational, religious and vocational programs and treatment, which are
integrated in his sentence of imprisonment.
This objective of integrating the convict back into society is one of the primary objectives of R.A.
9344 as regards CICLS.
D. For exemplarity: to give an example and thereby deter others from committing a violation of the
law
E. For retribution: to avenge the wrong done to society.
F. For Justice: having committed a wrong, it is only proper that the accused must suffer its
consequences i.e punish the guilty, to give satisfaction to the victims .
III. CHARACTERISTICS:
A. Legal: the penalty must be provided for and imposed by law
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. Where the law prescribes a penalty of fine OR imprisonment, the court cannot imposed
BOTH fine and imprisonment
2. The penalty of hard labor cannot be imposed with imprisonment because it is not authorized
by the RPC, although it is a penalty for violation of military laws.
3. There is no penalty of ―five years in the bilibid‖
4. The penalty of imprisonment for violations of the RPC must use the specific nomenclature of
the penalties under the RPC. This is because of the accessory penalties which go with the
principal penalties.
B. Personal- only the guilty must serve the personal penalties
C. Equal- the same penalty for the offense must be imposed upon all who commit the same
offense under the same circumstances
D. Certain and Definite- the penalty must be specified and must have a duration
E. Productive of Suffering- these refer to the moral suffering, the discomfort caused by the restriction
of liberty and deprivation of certain rights, including the enjoyment of luxuries and pleasure and the
usual comfort and amenities of life.
IV. CLASSIFICATION.
A. According to Nature:
1. Deprivation of Life i.e the death penalty
2. Deprivation of Liberty i.e imprisonment
3. Restriction of Liberty i.e destierro
4. Pecuniary i.e. payment of a fine
5. Deprivation of Rights such as civil interdiction, disqualification to hold public office
6. Community Service as those imposed upon CICLs
B. According to Divisibility- this classification is important for purposes of giving effect to the
presence of mitigating and aggravating circumstances.
1. Divisible: those which consist of three equal portions called the minimum, medium and
maximum periods.
2. Indivisible: those without any period and they refer specifically to the penalties of death,
reclusion perpetua, and public censure
C. Principal and Accessory

1. Principal- the penalty specifically prescribed in the law or article violated as penalty for the
violation thereof.
2. Accessory- those deemed imposed even if not expressly stated. They are the following:
a). Civil Interdiction: accessory to Reclusion Temporal and reclusion Perpetua
b). Suspension from Public Office
c). Disqualification to hold public office and from suffrage
d). Payment of the cost
e). Confiscation of the proceeds of the crime
V. When Additional Penalties May Be Imposed
A. Generally the penalties which can be imposed upon a convict are limited to the principal penalty
prescribed by law for the offense and the accessory penalties thereto.
B. In the following cases an additional penalty is imposed:
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. For failure to pay the fine in which case a Subsidiary Penalty is imposed
2. In the case of a Habitual Delinquent
3. In case of failure to put up a Bond for Good Behavior in the crime of threats, the additional
penalty of destierro shall be imposed
4. In case of a public official who used his position to commit estafa, there is the additional
penalty of special disqualification (Art. 214)
5. In case a loose firearm was used to commit another crime the penalty of which is equal to or
higher than the penalty for possession of said firearm, an additional penalty of prision mayor
shall be imposed pursuant to the fire arms law
VI. Principles on the Imposition of Penalties
A. Constitutional Limitations
1. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law.
2. No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as punishment of a crime whereof a
party shall have been duly convicted.
3. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted.
a). Mere severity does not constitute cruel or unusual punishment
b). They refer to: (i). those which are openly and flagrantly oppressive or wholly
disproportionate to the nature of the offense so as to shock the moral sense of the community.
As for example: a thief who steals a chicken and is sentenced to ten years imprisonment. (ii).
Penalties the form of which are considered as barbaric or inhuman such as castration in rape
cases; death by snake bites or by beating or ―quartering‖, cutting off the hands as penalty
for theft.
Note that some form of penalties as practiced in some jurisdictions may be considered as
inhuman in others such as death by stoning for the crime of adultery in Muslim countries; death
by hanging vis-a-vis by beheading, or public caning .
c). As to fines, in order that it will not be considered as excessive, the amount must be within
the limits established by law taking into consideration the presence of modifying circumstances
and the wealth or means of the accused, pursuant to Article 66.
d). Fine is classified under Article 26 as either:
(i). Afflictive- when it is more than P6,000.00
(ii). Correctional when it is from P200.00 to P6,000.00
(iii). Light when it is less than P200.00
The foregoing classification applies only if FINE if it is sole penalty prescribed and is not
involved in a compound penalty. This classification is for purposes of determining the
Prescription of Penalties.
4. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax.

5. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
B. Penalties Are To Be Imposed in the Form and Manner Prescribed By law.
C. Penalties are not to be imposed in the alternative giving the accused the choice of what penalty
to serve.
D. The legal terminology or nomenclature of penalties is to be used in view of the accessory

penalty which corresponds to the specific penalties. The legal terminology is not to be applied to
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
violations of special laws even if the duration is similar to those under the RPC.
E. The penalty to be imposed must be that prescribed by law prior to the commission of the crime
except when it is favorable to the accused who is not a habitual delinquent or unless the law does
not provide for a retroactive effect.
VII. Effect of Pardon
A. By The Offended Party
QUERRY : May the accused be still tried, prosecuted and penalized if he was pardoned/forgiven by
the offended party?
ANSWER : It depends on whether the crime is a private offense or not. If the crime is a public crime,
the criminal action may proceed and the accused penalized. Pardon by the offended party does not
extinguish the criminal action. It may however extinguish the civil liability if the pardon also constitutes
an express waiver of the civil liability. However, in private offenses, the pardon, if given prior to the
institution of the criminal action, the pardon may bar criminal action. Also, under
R.A. 8353 ( The Rape Law) it provides that the subsequent forgiveness by the wife of the legal
husband shall extinguish the criminal action or penalty.
Note however that in criminal cases which are subject to mediation, including barangay proceedings,
there is some kind of a pardon which may be a ground to bar further criminal proceedings if this
pardon was incorporated in a Compromise Agreement submitted to the trial court.
B. By the Chief Executive ( Presidential Pardon). This is given after the accused had been
convicted by final judgment.
1. The accused, if out on bail, is not committed to jail. And if detained, he is to be released which
release may either be absolute or conditional.
2. It will not restore the right to hold public office or of the right to suffrage, except in the following
instances:
a). When these rights are expressly restored
b). The pardon was extended after service of the prison sentence.
3. Pardon does not erase the fact of conviction hence the pardonee may still be considered as a
recidivist if convicted a second time.
4. If the right to hold public office has been restored, the public official cannot claim back his
position as a matter of right. He must go through the process of applying for it because what was
restored is not his office but his eligibility and qualification to hold a pubic office.
5. To be effective, the pardon must be accepted because it is in the nature of a contract between
the convict and the Chief Executive.
ARTICLE 24. MEASURES NOT CONSIDERED AS PENALTIES.
The following are not imposed as a result of a conviction of a crime and are not considered therefore
as penalties proper.
I. Preventive Imprisonment of persons pending investigation or trial due to their inability to post bail or
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
because the offense is non-bailable. It also includes the detention of persons by reason of insanity,
imbecility or illness requiring confinement in a hospital.
2. RA 10592 provides for the effects of preventive detention.
A. The period of detention is credited to the accused if he is convicted, as follows:

1. Full time if the prisoner agrees in writing after having been informed of the effects thereof and with
the assistance of counsel to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners.
2. 4/5 of the time if he does not agree in writing with assistance of counsel.
B. There is no credit whatsoever to:

1. Recidivists or those who have been previously convicted twice or more of any crime
2. Those who, upon being summoned for execution of their sentence, fail to surrender voluntarily.
C. Credit for the penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be deducted from 30 years.
D.When the period is equal to the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense charged and the
case is not yet terminated, the accused shall be released immediately without prejudice to the
continuation of the trial or appeal. But he may be arrested for failure to appear during trial. If the penalty
is destierro, he shall be released after 30 days of preventive imprisonment.
E.Under the Rules on Criminal Procedure, if the period is equal to or more than, the minimum period
of the impossable penalty, the accused may be released on reduced bail or recognizance.
F.This provision applies to violations of Special Laws
2. Commitment of Minors to a responsible person or to a recognized private institution or government

agency. R.A. 9344 allows such commitment under the diversion program.
3. Suspension from employment or public office during the trial or to institute proceedings (
Suspension pendenti lite )
a. This is Preventive Administrative Suspension
b. Not as a penalty after conviction for an offense and
c) Not suspension as an administrative penalty under the Civil Service law.
4. Fines and other administrative disciplinary corrective measures imposed by superiors over their
subordinates, such as a fine equivalent to one week salary for frequent tardiness.
5. Deprivation of rights and the reparation which the civil law may establish in penal form, such as the
loss of parental authority or disinheritance or payment of damages.
Art. 28. Computation of Penalties.
A. If convict is in prison.
1. Temporary penalties like suspension from office: from finality of the decision
2. Others, like imprisonment, is from issuance of the Commitment Order by the court
B. If on bail or has jumped bail
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. Temporary penalties: when he commences to serve sentence

2. Others: on the day he is placed at the disposal of the Judicial Authorities. This means that for
enforcement of the penalty, the computation will begin upon the arrest or surrender of the accused
whereupon the Court then issues a Commitment Order.
A commitment order is an order issued by the court addressed to the Jail Warden directing him to
take custody of the convict so that the latter will serve his penalty of imprisonment.
Nomenclature and Duration of Penalties of Imprisonment
I. Reclusion Perpetua: 20 years and one day to 40 years
A. Distinguished From Life Imprisonment

1. As to duration: Reclusion Perpetua is form 20 years and one day to 40 years. It is still
considered as an indivisible penalty even if it has a duration. Life Imprisonment has no duration
in that it is coterminous with the life of the convict.
2. As to accessory penalties: Life imprisonment has no accessory penalties.
3. As to eligibility for pardon: in reclusion perpetua, the convict is eligible for pardon after serving
30 years, a privilege not granted to those sentenced life imprisonment.
4. As to offenses involved: Life imprisonment applies only to violations of special laws and is not
a penalty provided for by the RPC.
II. The principal prison sentences and their nomenclature are: arresto menor, arrresto mayor, prision
correctional, prision mayor, reclusion temporal and reclusion perpetua. Restriction of liberty is called
destierro. There is no penalty known as cadena perpetua or cadena de amor.
III. When is destierro imposed:

(i). as penalty for inflicting serous physical injuries or a killing under exceptional circumstances
(ii). For failure of the accused to give bond for good behavior in threats
(iii). As penalty for a concubine
(iv). When it results from graduation of penalties
The Accessory Penalties
I. Civil Interdiction: the deprivation of parental authority, guardianship over the ward, marital authority,
and the right to manage and dispose of properties by acts inter vivos.
1. It is a restriction on one‘s capacity to act

2. It is an accessory penalty to reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal.
3. Examples: the convict cannot give or withhold consent to marriage, or execute a SPA involving
his properties. But he can make a will.
II. Bond to Keep the Peace (Art. 35)
1. The undertaking by the accused with 2 sureties not to commit the offense sought to be prevented
otherwise he pays the amount fixed by the court or makes a deposit, if not then he goes to jail.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
2. No crime is punished by this penalty and is a surplusage. It is different from Bond for Good
Behavior which is allowed to be imposed in the crime of Threats.
III. Cost (Art. 37). This refers to the fees and indemnities in the course of the proceedings i.e the
expenses incurred such as the transportation for serving subpoenae or locating witnesses and is
ordered paid only in case of conviction. It is deducted from the cash bond, else it is enforced via a
Motion for Execution against the properties of the accused.
IV. Pecuniary Liabilities : Order of Payment (Art. 38) (similar to the Civil Law concept of Preference of
Credit)
1. Applies only if the accused has properties which are not sufficient to pay all his pecuniary
liabilities and not when he is insolvent or if he has enough property.
2. The order is (RIFC)
a). Reparation of Damage caused
b). Indemnification of consequential damages
c). Fine and
d). Costs
3. The first two are part of the civil liability of the accused in favor of the offended party and may be
enforced through a Motion for Execution.
4. The preference is given to the offended party over the government
ART. 39. SUBSIDIARY PENALTY
1. Concept: this is the additional penalty suffered by the accused who has no money with which to
pay the fine. It may be in the form of imprisonment, destierro or suspension from public office.
2. It is proper only if the property involves a FINE because the non-payment therefore is the basis
for the imposition of an additional penalty. Thus the principal penalty must be any of the following:
a). FINE only- the SP shall not be more than 6 months if the felony is grave or less grave, and
not more that 15 days in case of light felonies
b). Imprisonment and Fine- the duration is not more than 1/3 of the principal penalty but not
more than 0ne year at the rate of one day for each amount equivalent to the highest minimum
wage prevailing in the Philippines at the time of the rendition of the judgment by the trial court.
i). The prison penalty actually imposed must not exceed 6 years (prision correctional or lower
imprisonment)
ii). The computation is whichever is the lowest among three variables: 1/3 of the prison
penalty, the fine divided by highest minimum wage, and one year
c). Destierro and fine- the computation is the same as above but the SP shall be in the form of
destierro.
d). Suspension and Fine- the same computation and the SP is in the form of suspension.
3. The SP is not an accessory penalty but an additional penalty. Hence the decision must
expressly state that the accused shall suffer SP if he does not pay the fine.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
4. The convict cannot choose to go to prison and refuse to pay the fine. If the finances of the
convict improve, he will still be made to pay the fine.
5. If the accused has several penalties, the duration must be determined only after applying the
Three-fold Rule (then go to no. 2)
6. The imposition of SP was made applicable to violations of special penal laws such as B.P. 22
by virtue of the circular and ruling of the Supreme Court; and for violation of R.A. 8294 amending
P.D. 1866 ( Padilla vs. CA, 29 SCRA 402; PP. vs. Simon, 234 SCRA 415)
7. Illustrations for exercise:

a). The penalty is 2 yrs imprisonment and fine of P2,000.00 with subsidiary penalty in case of
insolvency. (The SP is 8 months)
b). The penalty is destierro of 2 years and 4 months and a fine of P1,000.00 (SP is 4 mos 5
days)
ART. 40 to 44. ACCESSORY PENALTIES TO SPECIFIC FELONIES

1. Loss of suffrage: penalty of 1 year and 8 months.
ART. 45. Confiscation of the Proceeds of the Crime
1. The articles must be within the jurisdiction of the court: they had been presented and offered as
evidence in court and identified in its decision. For example: the weapons used; the articles recovered;
the prohibited articles seized, the price or reward given, the consideration received if the article involved
is sold or alienated.
2. Confiscation (to take property belonging to one and give it in ownership to another) is in favor of the
government.
3. The following articles may not be ordered to be confiscated/forfeited:
a). Those belonging to a third person after he has shown that he had nothing whatsoever to do with
the crime. Example: (i). the stolen articles which will be returned to the owner (ii) a van used in the
kidnapping which was hired from car rental agency.
b). However if the article is one the possession of which is required to be covered by a license, the
same will not be returned to the innocent third person unless he shows he has the required permit,
as in the case of unlicensed firearms.
c) Those not subject to lawful commerce or are unlawful articles which are destroyed, as in drugs
or contrabands.
ARTICLE 46. PENALTY FOR PRINCIPALS
1. This article constitutes the basic rule and starting point for the graduation of a penalty by degrees.
2. THUS: when the RPC provides the penalty for a felony in general terms, it is understood that it is
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
the penalty for the principal in the consummated felony. This will be the basis for reducing the penalty
by degrees
a). when referring to accomplices and accessories; and
b). when determining the penalty of the frustrated of attempted stage of the felony.
3. In other words, when the RPC prescribes a certain penalty, it is to be understood as the penalty of
the principal in the consummated stage.
ARTICLE 47. WHEN DEATH PENALTY NOT BE IMPOSED

(repealed)
RA 9346, effective June 30, 2006 prohibited the imposition of the Death Penalty, and also repealed
and amended specific laws imposing the death penalty. Thus, in lieu of the Death Penalty, the proper
penalties shall instead be imposed:
a) Reclusion Perpetua, when the law violated makes use of the nomenclature of penalties in the
RPC
b) Life imprisonment in special laws not using the nomenclature of the RPC
ART. 48. COMPLEX CRIMES
INTRODUCTION: RULE IN CASES OF CONCURRENCE OF CRIMES.

If several acts are committed simultaneously by an accused, including violations of special laws,
resulting to several injuries, how are these several injuries to be treated?
I. Principle of Separate Crimes for Separate Acts/Injuries-each act is a separate and distinct
felony resulting to the imposition of separate and distinct penalties
For example: Several charges for homicide owing to separate acts of the accused of killing
several people; several physical injuries; several estafa charges; several charges for Violation
of B.P. 22 for the issuance of various checks on different occasions to the same victim.
II. Several Violations But One Crime Principle
A.Principle of Absorption
1. Of crimes i.e. one crime absorbs the others.

a)It is usually the more serious offense which absorbs the lesser offense. Thus serious physical
injuries absorbs the lesser injuries inflicted upon the same victim.
b). However the general rule is not strictly followed in political crimes where rebellion absorbs
common crimes of political coloration which may be punished with a higher penalty, such as
kidnapping, multiple murder, violation of the Drug Law.
c). The Principle of Absorption generally applies to a felony absorbing another felony or even a
violation of a special law. It is not applied to a violation of a special law absorbing a felony unless
specifically provided for by the Special Law
2. Of penalties ie, the more severe penalty absorbs the lesser (see complex crimes)
C. Apply the Principle of Complex Crimes under Article 48.
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
D. Apply the Principle of Continuous/Continued Crimes (Delito Continuado).
E. Apply the Principle of Special Complex Crimes
F. Consider the other crimes as Aggravating Circumstances
II. Classification of Crimes According to the Number of Acts/Injuries Involved In the Crime and
as basis for the Penalty to be imposed
A. Singular or Simple Crimes: there is only one juridical act committed resulting to only one injury
and thus to only one crime and punished by one penalty. This is the result of the application of the
Principle of Separate Crime for Separate Act.
B. Plural Crimes: there are several acts resulting to several injuries and several violations but all of
these are considered as only one crime and only one penalty is imposed. This is known as
CONCURSUS DELICTUROM or CONCURSO DE DELITOS (Plurality or concurrence of crimes)
1. Ideal Plurality or Formal Plurality. The actor commits various criminal acts of the same or
different kind, but with the same criminal intent, thus there is only one penalty which is imposed even
if the acts result to two or more crimes. The essence is a single criminal intent. the This is exemplified
in the crimes defined under Article 48:
a). Delito Compuesto (compound crimes)–when one single act results to two or more
grave or less grave felonies
b). Delito Complejo (complex crime proper)– when one offense is a necessary means to
commit another
2. Real or Material Plurality: these refer to the commission of two or more crimes each arising from
different criminal intents resulting to different crimes and calling for the imposition of different and
separate penalties. The essence is the existence of different criminal intents. For example: the
accused fired separate shots at separate persons, these results to separate charges.
3. Composite Crimes/special complex crimes - crimes composed of two or more distinct and
different crimes but are considered by law as only one offense for which a distinct and special penalty
is provided for. E.g.: robbery with homicide, kidnapping with murder, rape with homicide.
4.Continued/continous crimes – the commission of several acts at or about the same time, in or
about the same place, arising from one criminal intent, against the same or two or more persons,
violating the same penal provision, and resulting to only one crime and one penalty. (in theft, the
―single larceny doctrine‖)
II. Penalty for a Complex Crime
A. Article 48 provides two forms of complex crimes:
i). the compound crime or delito compuesto or when a single act results to two or more
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
grave or less grave felonies

ii) the complex crime proper or delito complejo, when one offense is a necessary means to
commit the other
B. The two or more crimes are called the component crimes and since they arose from only one
criminal intent, the accused is imposed only one penalty instead of suffering the total of the aggregate
penalties for the component crimes. The penalty to be imposed is the penalty for the more serious
offense but to be imposed in its maximum period. What is applied is the principle of Absorption
of Penalties.
C. The rationale for the single penalty which is lower, is the presumption that the accused is less
perverse compared to when he commits the component crimes separately. It follows the principle
of pro reo. (favor the accused).
III. The Compound Crime ( Delito Compuesto)
A. Illustrations are:
1. The single act of planting a bomb, throwing a grenade, firing a rocket resulting to several
death or injuries.
2. The act of firing at an intended victim but the bullet also hits a third person
3. Parricide with Unintentional Abortion
3. If however an automatic firearm is used the single act of pressing the trigger is not the
―juridical act‖ contemplated but what is considered are the number of bullets which came out and
which hit the victims. But if it is proven that the same bullet which came out from the automatic
firearm is the same bullet which hit another, then a complex crime arises. (LAWAS case)
B. If a light felony results, it is either absorbed if it befalls the same victim upon whom the
grave/less grave felony was inflicted, or it is a separate offense if it befalls a third person.
C. Where several deaths /injuries result from the separate acts of two or more persons, two
schools of thought contend:
1. That the several deaths/injuries give rise to a complex crime
a). Under the “Single Criminal Impulse Doctrine” as first enunciated in PP. vs. Lawas (97
Phil 975) where there was no proof of conspiracy and due to the impossibility of determining
which of the accused killed which victim and as to how many deaths are imputable to a
particular accused.
Note: the Lawas ruling is more of the exception to the General rule because in compound
crimes, the general rule is the singularity of the act resulting to several grave of less grave
felonies—more in the essence of Article 48.
b). Under the single criminal resolution or purpose, applying the principle of conspiracy
wherein the several acts were for the attainment of a single purpose such that
―when for the attainment of a single purpose which constitute an offense, various acts are
executed, such acts must be considered only as one offense, a complex offense arises.‖
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. Example: The prison riot cases: PP.vs. Abella (93 SCRA 24) involving 1 deaths and 3
injuries; PP. vs. Garcia ( 96 SCRA 497 involving 4 murders and 2 attempted murders) which
held that “when a conspiracy animates several persons with a single purpose, the
individual acts in pursuance of that purpose are treated as a single act, the act of
execution, which gives rise to a complex crime.
2. Example: PP. vs Sanidad (April 30, 2003)

FACTS: four persons waylaid a jeep. All four accused fired their guns at the jeep carrying 10
people. One was killed and the rest escaped unhurt.
HELD: The crime is Murder with Multiple attempted Murder. Although several independent
acts were performed by the accused in firing several shots from their individual firearms, it was
not possible to determine who among them actually killed the deceased. Moreover there is no
evidence that the accused intended to fire at each and everyone at the victims separately and
distinctly from each other. On the contrary, the evidence clearly shows a single criminal
impulse to kill the victim‘s group as a whole. Where a conspiracy animates several person
with a single purpose, their individual acts done in pursuance of that purpose are looked upon
as a single act, the act of execution, giving rise to a single complex crime.
2. The prevailing doctrine is the Separate Crimes from separate acts doctrine: ”when several
victims expire from separate acts, such acts constitute separate and distinct acts”.
a) PP. vs. Valdez ( March 11, 1999)
FACTS: Six persons on board a tricycle were fired upon by two men who shot at them several
times. Four died while two were seriously wounded. Did the shooting result to Multiple Murder
with Frustrated Murder?
HELD: No. The four deaths resulted not from a single act but from several individual and distinct
acts. There being more than one gunman involved, the act of one gunman is distinct from the act
of the other. There was no single act of firing a gun as several shots were fired. Each act of each
gunman pulling the trigger of their respective firearms… constitute distinct and several acts which
cannot give rise to a complex crime.
b). This doctrine has been affirmed in People vs. Wenceslao Nelmida ( 680 SCRA 386; Sept.
11, 2012) and PP. vs. Reneo Jugueta, April 5, 2016.
Facts: Several persons ambushed a jeep carrying 9 persons using high powered firearms. Two
died and the remaining 7 were injured.
Held: The crimes are the two counts of murder and 7 counts of attempted murder as the killing
and the wounding were not the result of a single act discharge of firearm but of several acts
(citing PP. vs. Valdez).
Note: it was held that the Lawas doctrine is not applicable as there was no conspiracy in the
Lawas case and the Abella case is not applicable as Abella applied more to prisoners.
d). The Doctrine of Transferred Intent is applied where an act is directed at a particular victim,
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
the intent behind the act will be applied if an unintended victim is likewise injured.
(i). If the third person is killed, intent to kill is presumed even if the intended victim did not die.
Example: Accused, with intent to kill, shot Y but did not die. The same bullet hit and killed W. The
crime is Attempted/Frustrated Homicide with Homicide.
(ii). If the original intention was not to kill but a third person died , the crime is Serious/Less Serious
physical injuries with Homicide. If the third person did not die, the crime is Serious/Less Serious
Physical Injuries with Serious/Less Serious Physical Injuries.
(iii). If the original intention is to kill an intended victim but the third person did not die, a qualification
must be made:
(a). With intent to kill, X shot at Y killing him. The bullet exited and accidentally wounded Z on
the leg. The crime would be Homicide with Attempted Homicide.
e). Article 48 is not applicable to injuries arising from criminal negligence or imprudence. ( Ivler case)
V. Delito Complejo (Complex Crime Proper): when one crime is necessary to commit other.
1. Necessary does not mean indispensable but the other facilitated or made more possible the
commission of the other.
2. The examples include: Estafa/Malversation thru Falsifciation of a Public or Commercial
Document. Seduction thru Usurpation of Authority, and Abduction with Rape.
3. The other crime must not be committed in order to conceal the other, otherwise, there will be two
separate crimes. Thus when one is possession of money and he thereafter falsifies vouchers,
receipts, or documents to hide or explain why he took or spent or malversed the money, then the
falsification is separate from the estafa or malversation, as the case may be.
4. There must be a direct connection between the two offenses. Thus when the falsification was
committed on a date different or remote from the other, the two are separate, unless the first was
committed precisely or purposely to facilitate the other.
Example: The accused falsified a SPA to convince the victim he has authority to sell a land. But if
the falsified SPA was already in existence and which may be used against any person, then the
estafa and falsification are separate charges.
5. When there is a common element between two or more crimes, there can be no complex crime
but the crime will either be one or the other. Thus there is no complex crime of Estafa thru
Falsification of a Private Document as both have damage as a common element.
In which case, determine: if the falsification was the necessary means of committing the
misappropriation, the proper crime is Falsification; if on the other hand, the falsification was used
merely to conceal a previous misappropriation, then the crime is Estafa only.
VI. Principles Involving Complex Crimes
2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. A component crime must not be a violation of a special law, and neither should it be a light felony.
2. When an accused is charged with a complex crime, he may be convicted of any of the three
crimes, as follows:
a). For the complex crime as charged if proven
b). For all of the component crimes as separate crimes if their character as complex was not
proven
c) For one or any of the component crimes if the complex character or the other component crimes
were not proven. ―When the Information charges a complex crime and the evidence fails to support
one of the component offenses, the defendant is still liable for the other offense supported by the
evidence‖ (PP. vs. Nuguid, 420 SCRA 533)
3. Article 48 shall not apply to complex crimes were a specific penalty is already provided for by the
Revised Penal Code as in the following:
a). Search Warrant Maliciously Obtained/Abuse in the service Through Perjury which is
specifically penalized under Article 129
b). Maltreatment of Prisoners with Serious Physical Injuries under Article 235
c) Bribery with Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners
d). Usurpation of real Rights with Serious Physical Injuries
4. Not applicable to acts arising from criminal negligence or imprudence
5. If a person is supposed to account for a certain sum of money but which he misappropriated on
several dates, there is only one crime of estafa;
6. Where an accused falsified several checks or treasury warrants in one instance and encashed all
of them in one instance, there is only one complex crime of estafa/malversation with falsification. But
where the checks /warrants were encashed on several days, each act of encashment constitutes a
separate complex crime.
ART. 49. PENALTY IN CASE OF ERROR EN PERSONAE
1. The accused will be convicted for the actual crime committed but the penalty to be imposed will be
that for the lesser offense but to be imposed in its maximum period.
2. For Article 49 to be applied the penalties for the intended crime and the actual crime should be
different.
3. In case there are modifying circumstances, and for purposes of applying the Indeterminate
Sentence Law the Gonzales or Gayrama Formulas apply by analogy.
Penalty for Impossible crime: Arresto Mayor or fine from 200 to 500.
Penalty is fixed. Purpose of penalizing impossible crimes are because of the social danger
and degree of criminality of the offender.
IMPOSITION AND SERVICE OF PENALTIES

I. Imposition of Several Penalties i.e the declaration in the decision of the specific penalty to be
suffered:

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. The Material Accumulation of Penalties- all the several penalties will be imposed upon the
accused even if the sum total exceeds the natural span of human life. (PAR. 1, 2, & 3 of Art. 70)
B. The Absorption system: only the penalty for the most serious severe/severe shall be imposed
and the lesser penalties shall be absorbed, as in the case of complex crimes.
II. Rule in the Philippines as to the service of several penalties i.e if an accused is sentenced to
several penalties, how shall the several penalties be served? (refer to article 70)
A. We do not apply the Principle of Absorption in the service of penalties.
This principle holds that the service of the more severe penalties include the service of the lesser
penalties.
B. Simultaneous service if the nature of the penalties, such as imprisonment and fine, destierro
and fine, suspension and imprisonment allow them to be simultaneously served.
C. Successive Service (one after the other). This is also known as the THREE FOLD RULE. If the
accused is sentenced to at least four prison sentences, he shall serve all the penalties according to
the order of their severity provided the total shall not exceed 3 times the most severe and not more
than 40 years.
1. The order of severity is that as provided for in the scale under Article 70 where destierro
follows arresto menor.
2. The rule requires that the accused be meted at least four (4) prison penalties even if they were
imposed on different dates and by different courts, so long as none has not yet become final and
being currently served.
3. This apply only to principal penalties, subsidiary penalties are not included;
4. After serving the principal penalties, the accuse must then serve his accessory penalties
unless they were served simultaneously.
5. For purpose of the rule, reclusion perpetua is computed at 30 years.
6. In effect if the accused is sentenced to at least four prison sentences the total number of
years he stays in jail is the least or lowest among the these variables:
a). the actual sum total
b). 3 times the most severe
c). 40 years
III. Rule as to the Civil Liability, they shall be satisfied in accordance with the chronological order of
the dates of the final judgment against the accused.
IV. Rule as to the Execution and Service of Sentence
1. Death Penalty shall be by lethal injection at the National Penitentiary within one year from
sentence but not more than 18 months. (The imposition of the death penalty is now prohibited).
2. For Prison Sentences:

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a). In the penal establishments or correctional institutions provided by law under the supervision of
the BJMP.
i). Municipal Jail: the prison sentence does not exceed 6 months
ii). City/Provincial Jails: the prison sentence exceeds 6 months but is not more than 3 years
iii). National Penitentiary: sentence exceeds 3 years
b). Exception: Where the penalty is arresto menor, it may be served in the house of the convict if so
provided in the decision, due to health and other reasons which the court may deem satisfactory,
but under the surveillance of the BJMP.
3. Destierro: by complying with the prohibition to enter a designated place and within a radius of not
less than 25 kms but not more than 250 kms.
-o0o-
RULES IN THE APPRECIATION

OF MODIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
I. DEGREE AND PERIOD OF A PENALTY
A. Degree of a Penalty- the proper penalty impossible for a particular felony as determined by the
following factors:
1. The Stage of Execution of the crime which means whether it was consumated, frustrated or
attempted.
a) If consummated the penalty is that provided in the article or provision which was violated
b). If frustrated, it is one degree lower than that for the consummated
c) If attempted it is two degrees
2. The Extent of the Participation of the accused in the commission of the crime, i.e whether as
principal in which case the penalty is that provided for in the article or provision of law violated; if
as an accomplice the penalty is one degree lower and if as an accessory the penalty is two
degrees lower.
3. The Presence of Privilege Mitigating Circumstances

a). Minority lowers the penalty by one degree
b). Incomplete justifying or exempting circumstances, where majority of the elements are
present, lowers the penalty by one degree
c). If in the commission of the crime there were no aggravating circumstances but there are
two or more mitigating circumstances
B. Period of a Penalty – one of the three equal portions of a divisible penalty called the minimum,
medium and maximum, as determined by the presence or absence of modifying circumstances.
II. Graduation of Penalties- the process of lowering or increasing the penalties by degrees following
the scale under Article 71, in accordance with the factors affecting the degree of a penalty.
However the rule on lowering by degrees does not apply when the RPC provides for a specific

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
penalty in case of:

a). A frustrated or attempted felony: as in Article 297 which provides the specific penalty of
reclusion temporal maximum for both attempted and frustrated robbery with homicide, instead of
reclusion temporal
b). An accomplice or accessory as in Article 346 where in some crimes against chastity, the same
penalty is imposed for both the principal and the accomplice if they are relatives of the victim; or
in Article 268 penalizing slight illegal detention where the same penalty is imposed for both the
principal and the accomplice who furnished the place of detention.
c). Under Article 250, the court is allowed to reduce the penalty for parricide, murder or homicide
by another degree.
III. Specific Rules in the appreciation of modifying circumstances pursuant to Article 62.
A. That there are Aggravating Circumstances which are not taken into account:
(i) those which in themselves constitute an offense, such as the use of fire to destroy a
property
(ii) those included as an element of the crime, such as abuse of confidence in qualified theft
and
(iii) those inherent in the commission of a crime, such as disregard of sex in crimes against
chastity.
B. That the following should be considered as Special Aggravating Circumstances in that if present
the penalty shall be in the maximum period and they can not be offset by mitigating circumstances
(these were created by the heinous crime law as amendments to article 62):
1. Advantage was taken by the offender of his public position in the commission of the crime
2. The crime was committed by an Organized Syndicated Crime Group- a group of two or more
persons collaborating, confederating or mutually helping one another for purposes of gain in the
commission of a crime
C. That in case of conspiracy or if there be two or more accused, the following modifying
circumstances shall apply only to those concerned:
1. Personal circumstances
a). Those arising from their moral attributes, such as price, promise or reward; passion or
obfuscation; intoxication
b). Their private relations with the offended party
c). Those arising from any personal cause such as minority, recidivism
2. Aggravating circumstances relating to the material execution, or in the means employed in

the commission of, the crime shall affect the liability only of those who had knowledge of them,
such as treachery.
D. That in case of Habitual Delinquency, an additional penalty shall be imposed upon the accused.
1. Habitual Delinquency or multi recidivism – if within a period of 10 years from the date of his
release or last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft,
estafa, or falsification, is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Habitual delinquency is not a crime but a factual circumstance the presence of which
warrants the imposition of an additional penalty, the imposition being mandatory, and is taken into
account for purposes of determining jurisdiction.
2. Determining Habitual delinquency:

a) presence of at least three of the specified crimes, on the preceding two of which the accused
has been convicted by final judgement;
b) interval between the 1st conviction (or release) and the 2nd conviction must not exceed 10
years, with the same limitation on the interval between the 2nd conviction (or release) and
the third conviction, even if more than 10 years have elapsed between the 1st conviction (or
release) and the third conviction;
c) the second felony must have been committed by the accused after his conviction (or
release) for the first felony, and the third felony must have been committed by the accused
after his conviction or release for the second felony
2. The allegation in the Information must be specific indicating the previous convictions, the date
thereof and of the release, as a general allegation will not do.
3. Distinguished from Recidivism.

a). As to the number of convictions required: HD requires at least a third conviction while R
requires at least 2
b). As to the crimes involved: in HD the crimes are specific whereas in R it is enough that
they are embraced in the same title
c). As to the intervening period: HD requires a conviction within 10 years from the date of last
release or conviction whereas in R the intervening period is immaterial
d). As to effect: HD results to the imposition of an additional penalty whereas R results to the
penalty being imposed in its maximum period
e). As to nature: HD is an extra ordinary aggravating circumstance while R is an ordinary
aggravating which may be off-set by a mitigating circumstance
4. An accused can both a habitual delinquent and a recidivist. The principal penalty will be fixed
in is maximum period to give effect to the recidivism, after which an additional penalty will be
imposed on account of the habitual delinquency.
5. Contemporaneous convictions are considered as one.

Thus: if a person committed several crimes and convictions were handed down
contemporaneously, there is no habitual delinquency, but the convictions shall be
considered as one.
6. The rule applies whether the offenses are merely attempted or frustrated, whether the
accused is a principal, accomplice or accessory.
7. Legal Effects of Habitual Delinquency
a). Favorable penal laws will not be given retroactive effect

b). An additional penalty will be imposed upon the accused
i). 3rd conviction: pris. Correctional medium-maximum
ii). 4th conviction: pris. Mayor minimum-medium

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
iii). 5th conviction: pris. mayor max–rec. temp. minimum

c). The Indeterminate Sentence Law shall not apply
d) He is disqualified from probation
E. The Modifying circumstances shall not be considered in the following cases:

1. In case of indivisible penalties such as Reclusion Perpetua, ordinary mitigating and
aggravating have no effect. But this penalty may be reduced by degrees but only in cases of the
privilege mitigating circumstances of minority and incomplete justifying/exempting circumstances.
Thus if the accused is a CICL and the penalty impossible is reclusion perpetua, the same shall
be reduced to reclusion temporal. If the offense committed is a violation of a special law and the
penalty is life imprisonment, said penalty shall be deemed to be reclusion perpetua such that it
shall then be reduced by one degree to reclusion temporal entitling the CICL to enjoy the benefit
of mitigating circumstances in his favor.
2. Where the penalty is only a fine

3. In case of violation of special laws unless the special law adopts the scheme of penalties
under the RPC
F. Divisible Penalties-penalties which have periods, the determination of the proper period shall be
as follows:
1. The ordinary modifying circumstances shall be allowed to off-set one another
2. If originally there were two or more ordinary mitigating without any aggravating i.e. not due to
off-setting, the penalty shall be reduced by one degree only (privileged mitigating)
3. The actual effects are thus:
a). Minimum: if there is a mitigating without aggravating
b). Medium: if there are neither mitigating and aggravating
c). Maximum: if there is an aggravating without mitigating
4. No matter how many aggravating circumstances there may be, the penalty will not exceed the
penalty prescribed for the offense.
G. In the following instances, the penalty shall be in the maximum period. But modifying
circumstances will be appreciated to determine the minimum, medium, and maximum range
of the Maximum Period.
1. Complex crimes
2. Error en personae
3. Advantage is taken of official position
4. Crime was committed by a syndicated crime group
5. Quasi-recidivism
H. HOW TO COMPUTE PENALTIES which is not in any of the principal penalties in the scale under
Article 71, the penalty shall be divided into three equal portions to form the three periods. The
process is as follows ( Subtract-Add-Divide or S.A.D)

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. Get the duration of the length of the imprisonment encompassed within the penalty by
deducting the start of the penalty from the end of the term of the penalty (Subtraction)
2. Divide the difference by three (Division)
3. Add the quotient to the start of the prison term which will constitute the minimum range: add
the quotient to the end of the minimum plus one day to fix the medium: add the quotient to the
end thereof plus one day to fix the maximum.
I. ILLUSTRATIONS:
A. The Penalty is Prision Mayor Minimum Medium or from 6 years and one day to 8 years.
STEP 1 (Subtraction): 10 years minus 6 years = 4 years
STEP 2 (Division): 4 years divided by 3 = 1 year and 4 months
STEP 3: (Addition)
Minimum: 6 yrs. And one day to (plus 1 yr. 4 months =) 7 yrs. and 4 mos.
Medium: 7 yrs. 4 mos. and one day to (plus 1 yr and 4 mos. =) 8 yrs. 8 mos.
Maximum: 8 yrs. 8 mos. and one day to (plus 1 yr. 4 mos. =) 10 years.
B. The Penalty is Arresto Mayor Maximum to Pris. Correctional Minimum or from 4 mos. And one
day to 2 yrs. 4 mos.
STEP 1: 2 yrs. 4 mos. Minus 4 mos. = 2 yrs.
STEP 2: 2 yrs. Divided by 3 = 8 months
STEP 3:
Minimum : 4 mos. And one day to 1 yr.
Medium: 0ne year one day to 1 yr. 8 mos.
Maximum: 1 yr. 8 mos. And one day to 2 yrs. 4 months.
RULES IN THE IMPOSITION OF PRISON PENALTIES
I. KINDS OF PRISON SENTENCES

A. Fixed Prison Penalty as in the case of an Impossible Crime which is Arresto mayor and a fine
of P500.00
B. Straight Prison Term or a Determinate Sentence: a prison sentence consisting of a definite

and fix term and without a minimum and maximum. It is imposed in the following:
1. For violations of special laws unless the special law adopts the scheme of penalties under the
RPC or when the special law provides a prison penalty with a minimum and maximum range
2. For violations of the RPC if the actual penalty to be imposed is one year or less
3. In case of indivisible penalties
C. A complex penalty under Article 77: a penalty composed of three distinct penalties, each
forming a period, the lightest of which shall be the minimum, the next as the medium and highest as
the maximum periods. Example: Prision Mayor to Reclusion Perpetua.
D. An Indeterminate Penalty/sentence: a penalty of imprisonment without a fixed duration, but

consisting of a Maximum and a Minimum Range as determined pursuant to the Indeterminate
Sentence law.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW
1. Concept of an Indeterminate Sentence/Penalty

It is a penalty of imprisonment imposed pursuant to the Indeterminate Sentence law (ISLAW) which
consists of two portions called the Maximum Range and Minimum Range such that the actual
number of years when the convict shall serve imprisonment is not known as it is dependent upon
the conduct of the convict.
II. Applicabilty
A. MANDATORY APPLICATION
1. To felonies under the RPC if the ACTUAL penalty to be imposed is more than ONE YEAR
2. To crimes punished under special laws if:
a). The special law adopts the nomenclature and scheme of penalties under the RPC provided
that the actual penalty to be imposed is more than one year
b). The special law provides for a penalty with its own maximum and minimum ranges and not
a straight penalty. Example: the penalty is: not less than 5 years but not more than 10 years
A. ISLAW does not apply to:

1. Non-prison penalties such as fine, destierro, death, censure
2. When the penalty is either life imprisonment or reclusion perpetua
3. Those convicted of treason, rebellion, sedition, conspiracy/proposal to commit treason,
rebellion, sedition, espionage, piracy
However, if the accused is a Child below 18 years of age, the penalty of life imprisonment shall
be substituted by reclusion perpetua and this being so, it shall be reduced one degree lower due
to the minority of the accused. This will now be the basis to impose an Indeterminate Sentence
upon the child.
4. Habitual Delinquents
5. Escapees or those who evaded sentence
6. Those who violated their conditional pardon
7. Where the maximum penalty to be imposed does not exceed one year.
8. If the application would extend the service of the penalty. (PP vs. Nang Kay)
In the Nang Kay case, the penalty for the crime committed was 5 years to 10 years. The trial court
sentenced the accused to a straight penalty of 5 years. The Prosecution appealed and asked that
the accused be given an Indeterminate Penalty. The Supreme Court held that the lower court can
not be required anymore to change the original penalty and provide for an indeterminate sentence
because this would result to requiring the accused to serve more than five years. There would be
double jeopardy.
C. The basis is the ACTUAL PENALTY to be imposed and not the penalty prescribed. Thus even
if the penalty prescribed is reclusion perpetua but was graduated to a lesser penalty, then the ISLAW
applies. Conversely if the penalty prescribed is more than one year but due to mitigating
circumstances the actual penalty to be imposed is one year or less, then the ISLAW does not apply.
III. Purposes and why it is beneficial to the convict: (i). to prevent prolonged imprisonment, economic

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
wastage and usefulness (ii) to give the accused a chance to reform
IV. Steps on How to arrive at an Indeterminate Sentence.
1. Determine the proper degree of the Maximum Range pursuant to the rules on Graduation of
Penalties
2. Determine the Minimum Range which is the penalty next lower in degree to that arrived at as the
Maximum Range
3. Fixed the period of the Maximum Range according to the presence of Modifying circumstances
4. Provide a sentence in terms of specific number of years, months and days
V. Graduation of Penalties in cases of Special Aggravating Circumstances
Problem: A complex crime of Homicide with Direct Assault. The penalty for the more serious offense
is Reclusion Temporal. There are two ordinary mitigating circumstances.
Solution No. 1 . The GAYRAMA FORMULA. The basis in lowering by one degree will be the penalty
in its maximum period.
1. The start is Reclusion Temporal Maximum it being a complex crime

2. One degree lower due to the 2 mitigating circumstances is Reclusion Temporal and this the
Maximum Range
3. The Minimum Range is Reclusion Temporal Minimum
The ISLAW is thus Reclusion Temporal Minimum to Reclusion Medium in its minimum period. (Note: if
there are any MC or AG, Reclusion Temporal Medium is to be divided into three equal portions pursuant
to the SDA process).
Solution No. 2. The GONZALES FORMULA. The penalty for the higher offense will not yet be
imposed in its maximum for purpose of lowering by degrees.
1. The start is Reclusion Temporal in its full range.

2. One degree lower is Prision Mayor which is now the Maximum Range
3. The Minimum Range is Prision Correctional being the penalty next lower in degree and this is
the Minimum Range .
4. Reclusion Temporal will now be fixed in its Maximum Period as the crime is a complex crime
The ISLAW IS Prision Correctional to Prision Mayor Maximum in its medium period there being no
modifying circumstances.
RULE AS TO CICLs
1. The general rule is Suspension of the Service of the Sentence in the event the court finds the
CICL has committed the offense. The ICL will be brought to a government owned a duly
recognized privately operated institution for reformation, under the supervision of the DSWD.
The period of suspension will be until the CICL reaches the age of 21 per Sec. 40 of RA 9344,
or earlier depending upon his conduct.
2. Return to the Court: upon reaching 21, or if eh CICIL was found incorrigible or has violated the

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
rules of the institution or escaped therefrom the CICL shall be returned to court.
a). If found incorrigible the sentence shall be pronounced and he shall be ordered to serve his
sentence, but the CICL may still apply for probation. The period of his supervision shall be
deducted from his sentence
b) if otherwise, the case shall be dismissed.
3. Suppose at the time of promulgation the accused is already of legal age:

a). if the accused is over 21, he is entitled to a reduction of his sentence by one degree but is
no longer entitled to a suspension of sentence ( Rosal Hubillal vs. PP, Nov. 26, 2014)
b). if still below 21, he is entitled to a suspension of sentence
4. Instead of suspending the sentence, may the court instead order the detention of the CICIL to
serve his sentence?
Yes. ― Imprisonment of children in conflict with the law is by no means prohibited, While section
5© of RA 9344 bestows on CICL the right not to be unlawfully or arbitrarily deprived of their
liberty, imprisonment as a proper disposition of a case is duly recognized, subject to certain
restrictions on the imposition of imprisonment, namely:
(i). detention or imprisonment is a disposition of last resort
(ii). Shall be for the shortest appropriate period of time
(iii). Per section 51, although he has to serve his sentence, he may serve it in an agricultural
camp or training facilities to be established, maintained, supervised, or controlled by the Bureau
of Correction in coordination with the DSWD, such service will be in lieu of service in the regular
penal institution.
EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
A. Total Extinction
1. Death
2. Service of Sentence
3. Amnesty and Absolute Pardon
4. Prescription of the Crime
5. Prescription of the Penalty
6. Service of Sentence
7. Marriage of the Offender with the Offended in Proper Cases
1. Death
a). If death occurred before the filing of charges, there can be no criminal case which may be
filed as both the criminal and the civil liability based on the crime are totally extinguished.
b). If death occurred during the trial, the case will be dismissed and both criminal liability and the
civil based on the crime are extinguished. The offended party may file a case/claim against the
estate but based on the civil code.
c). If death occurred after conviction by the trial court but during the appeal, the case will be
dismissed and both the criminal and civil based on the crime are extinguished.
d) If death occurred after the conviction became final, the death extinguished only the personal

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
liabilities, i.e, the non-pecuniary penalties such as the imprisonment, destierro, suspension but
the civil liability remains which may be enforced through an appropriate motion for execution or
as a claim against the estate of the accused.
2. Service of the Penalties: the accused ―did time‖ or ―paid his dues‖. This does not include the
period of time when the convict may have escaped.
3. By Grant of Amnesty
a). Concept: it is the act of the sovereign power granting pardon to those who committed political
crimes, in exchange for their promise of loyalty to the government. The object is to abolish and
forget an offense. It destroys the criminal act so that is as if no crime was committee.
b). Amnesty is a general pardon granted in favor of a class of persons who have not yet been
convicted or were already convicted of political offenses, and is an official act of the President with
the concurrence of congress
c). Amnesty obliterates the last vestiges and consequent effect of the penalty, so that in the eyes of
the law, the grantee has not committed any crime at all. The civil liability of the accused however
remains.
d). Basis is Article VII, Sec. 19 of the Philippine constitution which states: ― The President shall also
have the power to grant amnesty with the concurrence of a majority of all the Members of Congress‖.
e). Kinds: (i) Express: the grant of amnesty is contained in a Proclamation issued by the President
and concurred in by Congress (ii) Implied: when the state takes no action to prosecute and punish
persons committing political offenses.
4. By Grant of Absolute Pardon

a). Concept: the act of sovereign authority which exempts an individual upon whom it is bestowed
from the punishment which the law inflicts for the crime be committed. It is the act of forgiving and
remitting the penalty. It is the private but official act of the president.
b). Pardon is granted to an individual after conviction of a crime. It is a private act of the President
alone of which the courts cannot take judicial notice of. It does not erase the fact of conviction, as it
merely remits or forgives the penalty. It does not affect the civil liability of the accused
C. Kinds: (i) Absolute, when there are no conditions attached. Absolute pardon restores the convict
to all his civil rights, but not his political right to hold public office or exercise the right of suffrage,
both of which must be expressly restored by the terms of the pardon (ii) conditional, when the
president attaches conditions to be observed by the grantee.
d). Basis is Article VII Section 19.
e). Limitations:
i). To be exercised only after conviction
ii). In case of election offenses, there must be a favorable recommendation by the COMELEC
iii). The following cannot be granted pardon: conviction in impeachment cases, civil contempt
and congressional contempt.
f). Distinction from Amnesty

i) As to the crimes covered: Amnesty is granted usually to political crimes while pardon is given
to common or ordinary crimes against peace and order
ii). As to need for congressional concurrence: Amnesty requires the concurrence of a majority of
congress while pardon is solely the prerogative of the President
iii). As to the effects: Amnesty looks backward and obliterates the crime and all its effects

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
whereas pardon looks forward and affects only the penalty of the crime. Hence one granted an
amnesty may not be a recidivist whereas when one is granted a pardon the fact of his conviction
remains such that he is a recidivist
iv). As to the recipients: amnesty is given to a class of persons while pardon is given on an
individual basis or to a limited number of persons
v). As to proof: amnesty may be taken judicial notice of while pardon must be proved
vi). As to when given: Amnesty is given at any time i.e before prosecution, during trial or even
after conviction while pardon is given only after the sentence of conviction has become final.
5. By Prescription of the crime (Art. 90)
1. Concept: Prescription of offenses is the loss of the right of the state to prosecute an offender for a
certain crime after the lapse of a certain period of time.
2. Article 90 applies only to offenses penalized by the Revised Penal Code and the periods are as
follows:
a). Crimes punishable by reclusion temporal, perpetua and death- 20 years
b).Those by other afflictive penalties ( i.e prision mayor)- 15 years
c). By correctional penalties – 10 years
d). Those by arresto mayor – 5 years
e). Libel or other similar offenses- 0ne year
f). Offenses of oral defamation and slander by deed – 6 months
g). Light offenses- two months
3. As to violations of special laws the period is either:

(i) that as provided for by the law itself
For example: The Anti Graft law Provides a 15 year prescriptive period
(ii) as provided by Act No.3326.

a). Penalty of fine or 1 month imprisonment….. 1 year
b). More than 1 month but less than 2 years….4 years
c). More than 2 but less than 6 years…………..8 years
d). More than 6 years…………………………….12 years
4. Prescription maybe raised even after arraignment and even if not raised in a Motion to Quash
5. The accused may not be convicted of an offense even if included in a graver offense if it has
prescribed at the time the graver offense was filed
6. When the last day falls on a non-working day, the charge cannot be filed on the next business day
7. The computation is thus: The period starts to run one day after:
a). The day of its commission if it is known to the offended party, the authorities or their agents.
i). Thus knowledge by any person does not start the period
ii). Knowledge is actual or constructive
iii). Where the law provides for a constructive notice of an act, it is the publicity of the act from
which the prescriptive period commences to run. Thus for falsified documents affecting registered
lands, the period starts to run from the registration of the document and not from the actual
discovery of the falsified document. This is because of the provision that the act of

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
registration is the notice to all. On the other hand, no such similar provision is provided for
documents or records in the Office of the Local civil Registrar.
(a). Thus the prescriptive period for the crime of bigamy is from the day of discovery and not
from the date of registration of the bigamous marriage( Jarillo vs. Pp. 601 SCRA 236)
b). The day of its discovery by the offended party, the authorities or their agents.
i). discovery by any other person does not start the period
ii). Discovery refers to the crime and not to the identity of the criminal
c).The day of the occurrence or happening of a juridical event when so provided by law
i). For Violation of B.P. 22, the period starts after the lapse of five days (hence on the 6th day) from
receipt by the accused of the written Notice of Dishonor
ii). For the crime of False Testimony Against the Accused (Art. 180) the period is from the finality
of the decision in the criminal case where the accused testified falsely. This is because the result
of the criminal case determines the penalty to be imposed upon the false witness.
d). Principle of Blameless Ignorance: prescription begins only upon actual discovery- not
commission- of the crime by the offended party or state through a person in authority or his agents,
if they did not know or had no reasonable means of knowing the existence of the crime. (Disini vs.
Sandiganbayan, September 11, 2013)
8. Interruption of the period

a). By the filing of appropriate charges with the proper office
i) If a proper barangay case, referral to the barangay Lupon suspends the running of the period
for 60 days
ii) In case of a CICL, where there is a Contract of Diversion, the period is interrupted for 2 years
iii). In chartered cities, by the filing or referral of the charges/ complaint with the Office of the City
Prosecutor and not with the courts because direct filing with the courts is not allowed.
However, if the offense is a violation of a city ordinance, it is the filing of the Information with the
Court which interrupts the prescriptive period and not the filing of the complaint with the
Prosecutor‘s Office ( Jadewell Parking System Corp. vs. Judge Lidua Sr.,706 SCRA 724, Oct. 3,
2013)
iv). In the municipalities and provinces: (a) as to cases which do not require a preliminary
investigation (penalty prescribed does not exceed 4 years and 2 months) by the filing of the
complaint with the MTC and (b) as to cases requiring a Preliminary Investigation, by the filing of
the complaint with the proper officer authorized to conduct a preliminary investigation
v). The filing of a Motion for Reconsideration tolls/stops the running of the period
9. The period commences to run again if:

i) The proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or acquitted, as when the
Prosecutor dismissed the complaint, or there was a provisional dismissal or when the Information
was withdrawn.
Note that in case of a provisional dismissal the case must be revived or re-filed within 2 years in
case of RTC cases else the dismissal becomes final.
ii). The proceedings are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to the accused as
when the Prosecutor failed to file an Amended Information when so ordered within the time

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
given by the court, or no hearings are held for an unreasonable length of time.
10. The period does not run when the accused is absent from the Philippines unless he goes to a
country with which the Philippines has an extradition treaty. The following are the countries with
which the Philippines has extradition treaty:
1. Canada 2. China 3. Hong Kong 4. South Korea 5. Switzerland 6. Thailand 7. UK 8. USA 9.

Indonesia 10. India 11. Spain 12. Micronesia 13. Australia
6. Prescription of Penalty
A. Concept: The Loss of the right of the state to enforce the penalty upon the convict after the lapse
of a certain period of time.
1. This presupposes that the accused was sentenced, the sentence became final but the convict
evaded service or that he escaped from custody. In short he committed evasion of sentence.
2. It is necessary that the sentence is final and that the accused must have been actually placed in
jail and that he escaped from there
FACTS: An accused was sentenced in absencia to a penalty of 2 months. He never appeared for
promulgation despite notice and an Order was issued for his arrest. He was arrested after 10
years. Has the penalty prescribed?
HELD: The prescription of penalty applies only to those who are convicted by final judgment and
are serving sentence which consists of deprivation of liberty. The period of prescription of
penalties begins only when the convict evades service of his sentence by escaping during the
term of his sentence ( Dangan vs. Gatbaile, 449 SCRA 144).
3. It does not run against those: (a) who have not been arrested, or those who were tried in
absencia or those who went in hiding to avoid serving their sentence and (b) those who escaped
before being actually brought inside the penal institution
4. The period stops running if the escapee: (a) commits another offense while on the run (b)
surrenders (c) is captured (d) goes to a foreign country with which the Philippines doe not have
an extradition treaty
B). The periods are as follows:

1. Death and Reclusion Perpetua.……………………..20 years
2. Other afflictive penalties…………………………….. 15 years
3. Correctional penalties……………………………….. 10 years
4. Arresto Mayor……………………..…………………. 5 years
6. Light Penalties……………….……………………… 1 year
C. The period for prescription of penalties for violation of special laws is: (i) that provided by the
special law itself and if there is none (ii) the periods provided by article 92 shall apply pursuant to the
suppletory character of the Penal Code to special laws.
D. The period is interrupted by the acceptance and enjoyment of a Conditional Pardon, being

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
under probation or parole.
6. Marriage of the Offender with the Offended in certain Private Crimes

1. The crimes are limited to abduction, seduction, acts of lasciviousness and the public crime of
rape. Adultery and concubinage are not included.
2. The marriage must be in good faith in that it was contracted with the intention of the offender of
assuming the duties and responsibilities of a marriage and not to evade punishment. Where it is
proved that the marriage was a sham, the case may still be revived or refilled.
3. It extinguishes both the civil and criminal liabilities.
4. The marriage of the principal benefits the accomplices and accessories but not other co-
principals.
B. Partial Extinction
1. Commutation of sentence: replacement of the original sentence with another of a different length
or nature or reducing the original term of the sentence to a lower term
2. Allowance or deductions due to: (a). good conduct: i.e reward for good behavior (b) or loyalty
which is 1/5 of the original sentence as to those who escaped and 2/5 to those who chose to stay
whether he is detention prisoner or a convict (c) plus 15 days for each month of study, teaching,
mentoring, time rendered (RA10592)
3. By the grant of Conditional Pardon: failure to comply with the conditions is a ground for
revocation of the pardon and a prosecution for evasion of sentence
3. By release on Parole
a). This is enjoyed by convicts who were meted an Indeterminate Sentence and have served the
minimum range, subject to supervision by the Board of Pardon and Parole.
4. By the grant of Probation
PROBATION
A. Concept: a disposition under which an accused, after conviction and sentence, is released subject
to conditions imposed by the court and to the supervision of a probation officer. It is a situation where
the convict does not serve his sentence inside prison but is allowed to go back to his family and/or
society, but for a certain period of time, he is subject to certain restrictive conditions and is supervised
by a probation officer.
It is a form of individualized treatment.
B. Purposes:
1. to promote the correction and rehabilitation of the accused by providing him with an
individualized treatment
2. to provide an opportunity for the reformation of a penitent accused which might be less probable
if he were to serve a prison sentence
3. to prevent the commission of an offense
4. to decongest the jail
5. to save the government from the expense of maintaining him in jail
C. Procedure

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. After conviction, but within the period of appeal, the accused files a Petition for Probation with the
trial court.
a).But in case of a CICL the petition maybe filed at any time i.e. even after the lapse of the
period of appeal.
b). The accused may appeal the civil liability and still apply for probation
2. The Petition is referred by the court to the Probation Office to conduct a post sentence
investigation to find out whether there is any ground to deny the petition.
3. The Probation Office then submits to the court its findings and recommendation either that the
Petition be granted or denied.
4. The court issues an Order either denying or granting the Petition of the accused.
5. After the lapse of the period of probation (6 years or 2 years) the court issues an Order of
Discharge if the convict has not violated any of the conditions of his probation, else the court issues
an Order of Revocation and the convict goes to jail to serve his sentence.
D. QUESTION: May the trial court deny a favorable recommendation of the Probation Office?
ANSWER: Yes. The grant of probation is a mere privilege which is intended more for society than
for the accused. Denial may be for any of the following grounds:
(i). the accused is in need of correctional treatment that can be provided more effectively by
his commitment to an institution
(ii). there is undue risk that during the period of probation the offender will commit another
offense
(iii). the grant of probation will depreciate the seriousness of the offense
The denial is not appealable unless there is grave abuse of discretion.
F. If granted the probationee is subject to conditions:

1. Mandatory conditions or those set by law the violation of which is a ground for the revocation of
the probation
2. Discretionary or those which the Judge may impose provided they are reasonable and intended
for the reformation of the accused. Examples: planting of trees, to stop playing gambling, to come
home early, avoid places of ill-repute, control one‘s temper, refrain from intoxicating drinks.
QUESTION: May the probation be revoked for failure to pay the civil liability? (ANS). In Soriano vs
CA (March 4, 1999) a probation was revoked for failure of the probationee to comply with the order
of the court directing him to submit a schedule of payment of the civil liability of the offended party.
(Personal opinion) If the court includes the payment of the civil liability as a condition, non- payment
may be a ground for revocation.
G. Persons disqualified
1. Those sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than 6 years

2. Those convicted of any offense against the security of the state or crimes against public order
even if the penalty is less than 6 years ( Is one convicted of Alarm and Scandal disqualified as
this is a crime against public order?)
3. Those with a previous conviction of more than 1 month and one day or fine of not more than
P200.00
4. Those convicted of election offenses and the Drug law

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
5. Those already granted a probation. Note that probation can be enjoyed only once.
6. Those who appealed their conviction
H. Termination and Revocation. The period is 2 year if the penalty is imprisonment of less than 1 year
and 6 years in all other cases.
1. During the term the court may issue an Order of Revocation upon the report and
recommendation of the Probation Office, in which case the accused must serve his original sentence.
2. Upon the lapse of the period, the court issues an Order terminating the Probation if and only if
the Probation Office has submitted a final Report and recommendation. Thus:
a).But if the court has not yet issued an Order of Discharge, the convict must continue
complying with the terms of his probation even beyond the 1 year or 6 year terms
b). Upon submission of the Final Report, the court may (i) issue an Order of final Discharge (ii)
extend the period of probation (iii) modify or alter the conditions of the probation (iv) Cancel the
probation and order the accused to serve his sentence
2. Effect of The Order of Final Discharge

a). the case is deemed terminated
b). operates to restore all civil rights lost or suspended
c). totally extinguishes the criminal liability as to the offense for which probation was granted
I. Important considerations
1. If the accused is sentenced or convicted for several offenses, the simultaneous convictions
shall be considered as one. For purposes of determining the maximum limit of 6 years, it is not
the total of the penalties but the individual prison terms to be considered.
2. Effect of filing of a petition for probation upon the right to appeal:

a) the filing of a Petition for Probation is a waiver of the right to appeal just as the appeal of a
conviction foreclosed the right to file a petition for probation.
II. Effect of Appeal on the right to apply for probation:
1. Under R.A. 10707 if the judgment by the trial court imposed a non probationable penalty which
penalty was modified on appeal or review, the accused can apply for probation, but if he
sought a review of the modified penalty, he is not entitled for probation.
2. If the penalty appealed is probationable, said appeal is a waiver of the right to apply for
probation. Both remedies afre mutually exclusive .
III. The grant of probation does not erase the fact of conviction, hence the conviction will still be
considered for purposes of recidivism and habitual delinquency.
IV. Effect on the right of suffrage:
QUESTION: Under Section 40(a) of the Local Government Code, those sentenced by final
judgment for an offense punishable by more than one (1) year or more of imprisonment are
disqualified from running for any elective position within two (2) years after service of sentence.
Does this apply to an accused who was granted probation and thereafter discharged?

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
ANSWER. No, the probationer is not disqualified.
a). The grant of probation is a suspension of the imposition of sentence as well as the accessory
penalties of ―serving‖ from public office. Hence during the period of probation, the probationer is
not even disqualified from running for a public office because the accessory penalty is put on hold
for the duration of the probation
b). The period of probation cannot be equated with service of sentence‖ as the probationer does
not serve the penalty but is merely required to comply with all the conditions prescribed in the
probation Order
c) Those who have not served their sentence by reason of the grant of probation which should
not be equated with the service of sentence and should not likewise be disqualified from running
for a local office because the 2 year period of ineligibility under section 40(a) of the Local
Government Code does not even run
d) When the probationer is discharged his case was deemed terminated such that all civil rights
lost or suspended as a result of conviction were restored to him including the right to run for a
public office (Moreno vs. COMELEC 498 SCRA 457).
V. Effect
CIVIL LIABILITY
I. Introduction:
A. Sources of civil liability: law, contracts, quasi-contracts, quasi-delicts and delicts or crimes
1. The prosecution of the civil action based on a quasi delict is no bar to recover the civil liability
based on the crime ( Santos s. Pizaro 465 SCRA 22)
B. Persons liable for the civil liability based on the crime

1. The accused himself pursuant to Article 100 which provides that ―A person criminally liable is
also civilly liable‖.
2. Strangers or third persons who have nothing to do with the crime

i). Those declared by law to be primarily civilly liable
ii). Those declared by law to be subsidiarily civilly liable
II. The Civil Liability of the Accused ( Ex delito in senso strictiori)
A. The Dual nature of a criminal prosecution. Two actions involved:

1. The criminal action for the punishment of the offender where the parties are the People of the
Philippines as plaintiff and the accused. The real party in interest is the public as the crime
primarily results to an injury to the public, a violation of the peace and order. The purpose is to
exact punishment of the public wrong. The offended party or victim is merely the principal witness.
2. The civil action arising from the crime where the private offended party is the plaintiff. The
purpose is to seek payment or compensation from the accused for the injury to the rights of the
victim.
B. Thus the rule provides for the automatic institution of the civil action with the criminal action, as
well as the suspension of the civil once the criminal action was commenced.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. In prosecutions for Violations of B.P. 22, the Supreme Court has issued a circular to the effect
that a separate civil action is not allowed. The recovery of the civil liability is in the criminal case.
C. Exceptions to the rule or when the accused is criminally but not civilly liable.
1. In case of victimless crimes
2. When the civil liability has been waived, reserved, or a civil case was actually instituted ahead
of the criminal case and is not consolidated with the criminal case.
D. Instances Where the accused is not criminally liable but is civilly liable. The court may acquit the
accused and impose a civil liability or the offended party may file a civil case against the accused.
1. Where the accused is acquitted based on reasonable doubt as only a preponderance of

evidence is required to prove the civil liability, pursuant to article 29 of the New Civil Code.
2. Where the court declared that the liability is only civil.
3. Acquittal based on an exempting circumstance except in the case of accident or lawful or

insuperable cause. However in case of acquittal due to irresistible force or uncontrollable fear, the
principal by direct participation who is acquitted is only subsidiarily liable i.e. after the principal by
force or by inducement is found insolvent.
4. Acquittal based on the justifying circumstance of state of necessity.
5. Acquittal based on an absolutory case, as in the case of estafa, theft or malicious mischief
between spouses; ascendant and descendants; brothers and sisters who are living together (
Article 332).
QUESTION: May the court impose a civil liability based on article 32, 33, 34, 36 and 2177 of the
civil code?
NO. Only the civil liability based on the crime may be imposed.
E. When there is no civil liability whatsoever
1. if there is a finding in the final judgment in the criminal action that the act or omission from
which the civil might arise, did not exist. i.e. the act/omission complained of was not proven to
exist.
2. When the accused was proven to be not the author of the act/omission.
II. Third Persons Primarily Civilly Liable: in that the civil liability may be immediately enforced
without having to proceed first against the accused.
A. Parents or guardians with respect to the civil liability of minors or insane persons who were found
to be exempt from criminal liability. They however can put up the defense of diligence in the
supervision of the minor.
1. The minor, insane or imbecile become liable in default of their parents or guardians.
2. If the minor acted with discernment, the Child and Youth Welfare Code states that the civil
liability shall devolve upon the father, then the mother, then the guardian, and lastly the minor.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
B. Persons who benefitted from the act of the accused, but in proportion to their benefit, in case of
the justifying circumstance of ―State of Necessity‖.
III. Third Persons Declared By law to be Subsidiarily Civilly Liable. They become liable only if the
person primarily liable is unable to satisfy the civil liability.
A. Hotel keepers, innkeepers, tavern keepers and proprietor of similar establishments ( Article
102)
1. For any crime committed within their establishments if there was a violation of some municipal
ordinance or police regulation by them or their employees. The crime must be related to the violation
of the ordinance or police regulation.
Example: The hotel management allowed liquor stalls within their establishment without the
necessary permit to sell. Seller A then stabbed seller B.
3. In cases of theft or robbery against their own guests, they are liable for the restitution or return of
the goods or payment of their value provided the guests notified the management in advance of
the presence of the goods and followed directions as to their safekeeping.
a).The author of the theft or robbery must be strangers to the hotel either as outsiders or even a
guest himself. If they are employees of the hotel, then it is article 103 which will apply.
b). The robbery must not be by intimidation (hold-up)
B. Employers, Teachers, persons and corporations engaged in any trade or industry.
1. The requirements for liability are the following:

(a). There must exist, between the accused and the person sought to be subsidiarily liable, a
relationship either of (i) an employer-employee or (ii) teacher-pupil/apprentice.
i). The term teachers do not refer to teachers in academic institutions but to those conducting
a course of instruction for a particular industry or vocational workshops. An example would be
a master carpenter/mechanic teaching their trade or skill to others.
(b). The teacher/employer is engaged in a trade or industry

i). Trade or industry means an enterprise for profit or gain. It includes any branch of art,
occupation, or undertaking which applies labor and capital. Examples: transportation business,
factories, hotels, stores, maintenance of a private office in the exercise of one‘s profession.
Charitable institutions are not included. The operation of a vehicle for family or private use is
not engaging in a trade or industry.
ii). The accused must be employed in that trade or industry
(c). The employee, servant, pupil or apprentice, was found guilty of the wrongful act and was
found to have committed the crime during the actual performance of his duties, and not just
―while in the discharge thereof‖.
i). He was actually performing his functions or duties at the workplace during work hours, and
was not on a break or at rest.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
(d). The accused-employee was adjudged civilly liable or that he was ordered to pay or indemnify
the offended party.
i).The fact that he was found civilly liable and the amount of his civil liability, are conclusive
and cannot be questioned anymore by the employer.
(e).The accused was found to be insolvent.

i).This requires that there must first be a Motion for Execution against the accused. The
return by the sheriff that the writ was returned unsatisfied is the best proof of insolvency.
ii). Even if the accused is known to have no property, still there must be a Motion for
Execution directed against him.
2. Where to Prove the Liability of the Employer/Teacher

a). During the criminal proceedings/trial where the offended a party may already introduce
evidence on the presence of all the requirements for subsidiarily liability.
b). During the Proceedings for Execution of Judgment i.e. during the hearing on the Motion for
Execution.
3. How to Enforce the Subsidiary Liability

a). By filing a Motion for Writ of Execution against the employee
b). Once the writ is returned unsatisfied, by filing a Motion for Execution against the employer in
the same criminal case. A copy is furnished the employer and if he opposes, a hearing will be
conducted to find out if the requirements for his liability are present.
c). A civil case may also be filed but the defendants must be both the employer and employee.
Such civil case is not necessary as a mere Motion for Execution is enough because:
i). The judgment of conviction, the fact that the employee is adjudged civilly liable, and the amount
of his liability, which are the basis of the civil case, are conclusive upon the employer hence there
is no need to present evidence again on these matters.
ii). The employer is by law a party in the criminal case as far as the civil liability of the accused is
concerned. Thus he has every right to participate and present evidence of his non-liability.
iii). The Motion for Execution is a mere continuation of the criminal proceedings where the civil
liability has already been adjudged.
4. Defenses by the Employer and appeal of the decision.

a). The non-existence of all or some of the requirements
b). The following are not allowed as defenses: (i) diligence in the selection and supervision of the
employee (ii) evidence or questions on the conviction or questioning the fact of civil liability and
the amount thereon.
c) The employer cannot appeal the conviction of his employee if the later jumped bail or himself
did not appeal (Phil. Rabbit Bus Lines vs. PP, April 14, 2004).
C. Those who gratuitously participated in the crime to the extent that their wealth was
enhanced provided they did not know the criminal source else they become accessories.
D. The principals, accessories and accomplices: solidary within their class and subsidiary for
the others.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
E. The heirs of the accused.
WHAT CIVIL LIABILITY INCLUDES
A. The components of civil liability include (i) restitution (ii) reparation and (iii) indemnification. But
in cases of rape, abduction and seduction where the victim gave birth, it also includes compulsory
recognition and support of the offspring unless the law prevents him from doing so, i.e. the victim is a
married woman.
B. Restitution: the return of the very thing itself, with allowance for any deterioration or diminution of
its value.
1. This presupposes that the victim lost a personal property by reason of the crime. The rule applies
even if the thing is in the possession of a third person unless the third person acquired it in a manner
which bars recovery such as: (i) purchase in good faith in a public sale, (ii) movables acquired by
prescription (iii) a holder in due course of a negotiable instrument.
2. If the third person appropriated the thing, he must pay its value to the offended party.
3. The thing must have been submitted to the court as to be within its jurisdiction. If the thing is in the
possession of a third person, the latter must have been ordered to present and surrender it first to the
court otherwise the court can not order its return to the owner. If the third person refuses to voluntarily
surrender, the proper action is for the owner to file a Motion in Court praying that the third person be
ordered to present and surrender the thing.
4. No substitution is allowed and if the thing returned is of a higher value, the owner/offended party
must pay the difference to prevent unjust enrichment.
C. Reparation: if the thing cannot be returned, the accused must pay its value including its sentimental
and economic value
D. Indemnification: the monetarial obligation due to the offended party, those suffered by his family,
or by third persons because of the crime.
1. Damages Recoverable
a). For the fact of Fact of Death/Rape: P50,000.00 for indemnity by reason of death. P50,000.00
and P75,000.00 for each conviction for simple and qualified rape respectively.
b). Loss of earning capacity in case of death. The formula is as follows:
(i). X= Life expectancy X (Gross Annual Income – Necessary Living Expenses)

(ii). Life expectancy is computed thus: 2(80 – age at death) /3
c). Moral damages in favor of the offended party only in criminal cases enumerated in Article 2219
paragraphs 1,3,4,5,7 of the Civil Code and analogous cases. To wit:
i). a criminal offense resulting in physical injuries
Moral damages are mandatory in cases of murder and homicide without need of any
allegation or proof other than the death of the victim (Villamor vs. People 605 SCRA 616)
ii). Seduction, abduction, rape or other lascivious acts
iii). Adultery and concubinage

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
iv). Illegal or arbitrary detention

v). libel, slander or any other form of defamation
Thus the law does not intend that moral damages should be awarded in all cases where the
aggrieved party has suffered mental anguish or morals shock… otherwise there would not have
been any reason for the inclusion of the specific acts in Article 2219 ( PP. vs. Manuel 476 SCRA
461)
d). Exemplary damages are justified under Article 2230 if there is an aggravating circumstance,
whether ordinary or qualified and ―also where the circumstances of the case show the highly
reprehensible or outrageous conduct of the offender‖ (PP.vs. Dalisay, 605 SCRA 807) or to serve
as example for the public good ( PP. vs. Combate 638 SCRA797)
e).Temperate damages are awarded if the court finds that some pecuniary loss has been suffered
but its amount cannot, from the nature of the case, be proved with certainty.
i). The amount of P25,000.00 is awarded as temperate damages when the actual damages
established during trial is less than P25,000.00 ( PP. vs. Agudez 428 SCRA 692). It is therefore
which ever is higher between the amount proved or P25,000.00.
e). To summarize: ―When death occurs due to a crime, the following may be recovered: (i) civil
indemnity ex delicto for the death of the victim (2) actual or compensatory damages (3) moral
damages (4) exemplary damages (5) attorney‘s fees and expense of litigation and (6) interest, in
proper cases‖. ( PP vs. Hernando 605 SCRA 741)
2. It is Enforced by filing a Motion for Execution.

a). Rights and obligations of heirs: The right to demand the civil liability and the obligation of the
accused to make restitution devolves upon the heirs of the injured party and those of the accused.
3. Extinction: by the same method and same manner as extinction of a civil obligation under the civil
code: payment, remission, merger, novation, prescription, condonation. But if death occurs before
final judgment, the civil liability arising from the crime is totally extinguished.
a). Note that in the crime of malversation, the payment or return or reimbursement of the funds
after the commission of the crime affects merely the civil liability of the accused.
b). Desistance by the offended party may constitute a waiver of the civil liability
BOOK II. CRIMES AND PENALTIES
1. This defines the specific felonies, the manner by which they are committed, their elements and
their corresponding penalties.
2. The felonies are grouped into Titles depending upon the nature of the felonies, the rights affected
and the persons liable. There are 15 titles each subdivided into chapters and the latter into articles.
3. Several felonies have either been repealed or amended by special laws.
TITLE ONE. CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY

AND THE LAW OF NATIONS

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. Crimes against the law of nations are punishable anywhere being crimes against the family of
nations.
2. Crimes against national security include the so called ―war crimes‖ and those committed both in
times of war and in times of peace.
3. Rebellion is not a crime against national security although in scope, magnitude and purpose, it poses
a danger to the security of the existing political order.
Art. 114. TREASON
I. Concept: the act of turning one‘s back to one‘s country during war and siding with the enemy. It is
essentially a war crime. The Philippines must be involved in a shooting war with a foreign country, not
just a breaking off of diplomatic relations. It may be a declared or undeclared war. The concept is of
American Origin.
II. Its essence is the breach of allegiance to the Philippine government. It is disloyalty in times of war in
favor of the enemy. Persons liable are Filipinos and resident aliens provided they are not the nationals
of the enemy country. The resident aliens are expected to remain loyal in exchange for the protection
of the law and of the government given to them during their residency in the Philippines. They are
allowed to leave the Philippines back to their own country or to go to a third country, otherwise they are
interned.
III. As a political crime: it absorbs ordinary crimes which are used as aggravating circumstances; it is
continuing and transitory. It may be committed outside of the Philippines.
IV. There are two modes of commission:

A). Fist Mode: By levying war against the Philippines
1. It must be in support of the enemy else it becomes sedition or rebellion
2. It requires a number of people assembled who engage in actual combat with the government,
or at least assembled for purposes of effecting a treasonable design.
B). Second Mode: By adherence to the enemy giving them aid or comfort.
1. Adherence is favoring the enemy emotionally or intellectually; harboring feelings of sympathy.
Giving aid or comfort is any act to strengthen the enemy or to weaken the government‘s ability to
fight the enemy. E.g.: giving them food, shelter, ammunition; data or information, intelligence or
engaging in black propaganda against the government.
2. The giving of aid or comfort must be to the enemy as an enemy and not by reason of
humanitarian considerations.
V. Proof of Guilt:
A. By the plea of guilt
B. The two-witness rule: on the testimony of two witnesses to the same over act. This applies only
to the second mode i.e. adherence to the enemy. The purpose is to guard against fabricated
testimony considering that emotions run high in time of war, and because treason is the highest
crime committed by a citizen, and on account of the penalty therefore.
VI. Defenses Not Allowed:

A. Righteous action: collaboration saved lives of civilians and soldiers
B. Suspended Allegiance Due to Change of Sovereignty

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 115. Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit Treason
A. If treason is actually committed, the conspiracy and proposal are absorbed.
Art. 116. Misprision of Treason
A. This is a crime by omission or by silence, being an act of concealment of one‘s knowledge about
the existence of a conspiracy to commit treason. The essence of the crime is the failure to report to
the proper authorities about the existence of a conspiracy to commit treason. This may be committed
in peace time.
B. Only Filipinos are liable.
C. There is no liability if the conspirators actually commit treason since, by then, the treason is
known to the government.
D. The penalty is that of an accessory i.e. two degrees lower, but article 20 will not be applied even
if he is related to the principal in the crime of treason.
Art. 117. Espionage (Military)
I. Two Laws are involved:

A. Art. 117 which enumerates two acts by which espionage is committed
1. by the unauthorized entry into a warship, naval/military establishment or reservation to
obtain information or confidential data relative to the defense of the Philippines
2. disclosure of such data by a public officer to the representative of a foreign country
A. C.A. 616 enacted in 1941:

1. It expanded and broadened the acts of espionage to cover virtually any act or means or modes
of obtaining, disclosing to any person, any data involving national defense or related to the
security of the state.
2. It also punishes conspiracies to commit espionage
3. It punishes the act of harboring or concealing a spy with a penalty of not more than 10 years
or a fine of no more than P10,000.00
4. It punishes the act of destroying or injuring war materials or national defense materials (
sabotage).
B. Offenders may be Filipinos or aliens and may be committed in war or in peace time.
C. This is the first of several offenses which involve the unlawful disclosure of secret or sensitive
information or data which affects national security.
D. In the light of electronic gadgets, google earth, unmanned satellites and other modern
technology of obtaining information, the two laws on espionage needs appropriate amendment.
E. The two laws refer more to military espionage rather than to diplomatic or economic espionage.
Art. 118. Inciting to War and Giving Motives for Reprisals
A. This is committed only during peace time.

B. The essence is the commission of hostile or unlawful acts against the persons or properties of the
nationals of a foreign country which acts could provoke hostilities or reprisals from the foreign country
against the persons or properties of Filipinos within that foreign country, or as reason for that foreign

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
country to declare war against the Philippines.

C. The hostile acts must be committed against the foreign nationals as foreign nationals and not when
they become the indiscriminate victims of ordinary crimes.
D. Examples: flag-burning, confiscation of their properties; mass ejectment; expulsion from school on
account of their nationality or religion; destruction of the military installation built by Vietnam or China
on the disputed Spratley Islands.
Art. 119. Violation of Neutrality
A. Concept: The Philippines has adopted a policy of neutrality on the occasion of a war between third
countries. The accused violates rules and regulations issued by the government to enforce neutrality.
B. Examples: secret sale of goods, food or war materials to a combatant state which sale is forbidden
by the government.
Art. 120. Correspondence with Hostile Country
A. Concept: The Philippines is at war with a country and the accused corresponds with a person in the
enemy country or territory occupied by the enemy troops. The correspondence is in whatever form such
as by mail, radio, texting or by e-mail provided:
1. The correspondence is prohibited, even if the communication is innocent

2. Or is in ciphers or conventional signs
3. If notice or information is given which might be useful to the enemy such as providing news as to
the morale of the troops, state of preparedness of the Philippines; public support to the war. This by
itself is an act of treason if done intentionally.
Art. 121. Flight to Enemy Country
A. The flight must be prohibited. The purpose is immaterial. Mere attempt constitutes the crime.
CRIMES AGAINST THE LAW OF NATIONS
CONCEPT AND SOURCES : These are acts or omissions which are considered as crimes against all
nations and not merely against a particular state or country. Any country which first acquired jurisdiction
over the person of the accused may prosecute the offender under its own laws, or waive jurisdiction
and turn over the offender to another country, or to an international tribunal established to try these
crimes.
These crimes are found in several statutes:
(i). The Revised Penal Code defines and penalizes the traditional crimes which are piracy and mutiny
in the high seas
(ii). The Rome Statute of International Criminal Court
(iii). Special Penal Laws passed by Congress
Art. 122 Piracy and Mutiny in the High Seas.
A. PIRACY IN THE HIGH SEAS

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. This is essentially robbery or depredation committed on board a ship in the high seas. Hence
there must be the use and application of force, violence, threat, or intimidation against persons.
2. The purpose of the pirates is gain and the object may either be the vessel itself which includes
military sea crafts; its cargo; the personal effects of the passengers/crew; or all of these.
3. If the purpose is to hold the vessel, crew and passengers hostage for the purpose of demanding
ransom or political reasons, the act may be considered as terrorism.
QUESTION: What about the act of members of the Green Peace Movement boarding a Japanese
Whaling ship to dramatize their protest against the killing of whales? ANSWER: Since the purpose
is not gain, their act can not be considered as piracy.
4. The term ―high seas‖ refers to the waters beyond the territorial waters or jurisdiction of any
country. However piracy is a continuing offense and need not be committed wholly in the high seas
as the crime may commence in the territorial waters of a foreign country and continue in the high
seas, or start in the high seas and end up in the territorial waters of a country.
5. Pirates are ―Hostis Humanis Generis‖ and may therefore be tried anywhere by any country
under its own internal penal laws. The first country which captures the pirates may try them to the
exclusion of other countries.
6. The offenders are generally strangers to the vessels in that they do not belong to the crew or are
not legitimate passengers. Those posing as passengers/crew are still pirates, including legitimate
passengers/crew who conspire with pirates.
7. If the offenders are crew members/passengers, the crime is Robbery in the High Seas or Mutiny,
depending upon the purpose.
8. Qualified piracy:
a). whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding or firing upon the same
b). whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims without means of saving themselves
c). whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries or rape.
(i) these crimes are not separate offenses and neither can they be complexed, they
become qualified aggravating circumstance
(ii) the term murder or homicide should be understood to mean that there was a killing
II. Mutiny In the High Seas
1. Concept: The raising of commotions, disturbances, or acts of disobedience to the commands of

the ship captain, which acts involve violence.
2. The purpose is not gain but it may be to voice displeasure, opposition, disobedience to the
policies, rules or regulations enforced by the captain. The mutineers may however seize the ship in
order to enforce their will or to have their way, but the primary purpose is not gain. Example: the
Mutiny on the Bounty.
3. The offenders are either the crew themselves or the passengers. However, where slaves
managed to seize the ship and take control of it, the crime was considered as mutiny as said slaves
while being transported, were considered as passengers.
4. Qualified by (i) when the offenders abandon the victims without means of saving themselves or

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
(ii) when it is accompanied by rape, murder, homicide or physical injuries
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
This treaty which was adopted in Rome in 1997 and became enforced in 2001,established the
International Criminal Court. It created four international crimes; (i) genocide (ii) Crimes against
Humanity (iii) War Crimes and (iv) Crimes of Aggression
I. Genocide: acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or
religious group, which includes the following:
a).killing members of the group, causing serious bodily injury or mental harm
b). deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical
destruction in whole or in part
c). imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group
d). forcibly transferring children of the group to another group
II. Crimes Against Humanity: offenses against human dignity or grave humiliation or degradation of
human being as part of either a government policy or a wide practice of atrocities tolerated or condoned
by a government or de facto authority. Ordinary crimes such as murder, massacre, human
experimentation, extrajudicial punishments, military use of children, kidnapping, become crimes against
humanity if part of a widespread or systematic practice.
III. War Crimes. Serious violations of the laws and customs of war giving rise to individual criminal
responsibility, such as the Geneva conventions of August 12, 1949. These are serious violations of the
laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of
international law.
a). murder, maltreatment of POWS or civilian internees
b). killing of hostages
c). murder, maltreatment or deportation of civilian residents of an occupied territory to slave labor
camps
d). killing or punishing spies without a fair trial
e). wanton destruction of cities or towns not warranted by military necessity
Iv. Crimes of Aggression which involves: (i) planning, preparation, initiation, execution, by a person in
a position effectively to exercise control over or direct the political or military action of a state, if the act
of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the UN
Charter and (ii) use of armed force by a state against the sovereign territorial integrity or political
independence of another state, or in any manner inconsistent with the UN Charter
a). invasion, military occupation, annexation, bombardment, against the territory of another state
b). blockading of ports
c). military attacks
d). sending of mercenaries or allowing its territory as base for mercenaries
Special Philippine Penal Laws which provide for extra territorial application:
R.A. 9372. AN ACT TO SECURE TO SECURE

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
THE STATE AND PROTECT OUR PEOPLE

FROM TERRORISM
(THE HUMAN SECURITY ACT OF 2007)
1. It created the crime known as terrorism and declared it to be ― a crime against the Filipino people,
against humanity, and against the law of nations‖.
II. Defines the crime of terrorism to be the commission of ―any of the crimes of : (THE PREDICATE
CRIMES)
A. Under the Revised Penal Code.

i. Piracy in general and Mutiny in the High Seas or in the Philippine Waters
ii. rebellion
iii. Coup d‘etat
iv. Murder
v. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention
B. Under Special Laws

i. Arson under P.D. 1613
ii. Violation of R.A. 6969 ( Toxic Substance and Nuclear Waste Control)
iii. R.A. 5207 ( Atomic Energy Regulatory and Liability Act of 1968)
iv. Hijacking
v. Piracy in Phil. Waters and Highway Robbery
vi. P.D. 1866 ( Possession and Manufacture of Firearms/explosives)
thereby sowing and creating a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the
populace, in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand”
III. Requirements for Terrorism
A. The accused ( maybe a single individual or a group, Filipinos or foreign nationals) must commit
any of the enumerated crimes referred to as the PREDICATE CRIMES
B. There results a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace
i. The extent and degree of fear and panic, including the number of people affected in order to meet
the term ―populace‖, are questions of facts to be determined by the courts and on a case to case
basis.
ii. Is the term ―populace‘ to be interpreted as referring to the local inhabitants where the acts were
committed, or does it refer to the national population?
C. The purpose of the accused must be to coerce the government to give into an unlawful demand
i. The word ―demand‖ is broad enough as to cover not only political, criminal or monetarial demands
but also those which maybe categorized as social or economic, or even religious. This however is
qualified by the word ― unlawful‖.
ii. The government is therefore held hostage by the terrorists.
IV. Other Acts/Persons Liable

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. Conspiracy to commit terrorism. The penalty is the same as terrorism itself ( i.e. 40 years of
imprisonment)
B. Accomplices- he cooperates in the execution of either terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism

by previous or simultaneous acts (Penalty is 17 yrs. 4 months and one day to 20 years)
C. Accessory-The acts punished are the same as that under Article 19 of the RPC. The penalty is 10
yrs. And one day to 12 years
1. The law however adopts the absolutory cause of exemption of accessories from liability with respect
to their relatives
V. Surveillance of Suspects and Interception and Recording of Communications
A. Authorizes the grant of Judicial Authorization to listen, intercept, and record, any communication,
message, conversation, discussion, or of spoken or written words between members of (i) a judicially
declared and outlawed terrorist organization or association or group, or (ii) of any person charged with
or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism
1. The Judicial Authorization can only be issued by the Court of Appeals (a) upon a written application
filed by a police or law enforcement official or members of his team and (b). after an ex parte hearing
establishing (c). probable cause that terrorism/conspiracy to commit terrorism has been committed, or
is being committed, or is about to be committed ( note that the wording is not attempted)
2. The applicant must have been authorized in writing to file the application by the Anti Terrorism
Council ( The Body created to implement the law and assume responsibility for the effective
implementation of the anti-terrorism[policy of the country)
3. The Judicial Authority is effective for a maximum period not to exceed 30 days from date of receipt
of the written order and may be extended for another similar period
B. Punishes the act of failure to notify the person subject of the surveillance, monitoring or interception,
if no case was filed within the 30 day period/life time of the Order of Court authorizing the surveillance
C. Punishes any person who conducts any unauthorized or malicious interceptions and or recording of
any form of communications, messages, conversations, discussions or spoken or written words
VI. Provides for a Judicial Declaration of Terrorists and Outlawed organization, association, or group
of persons, by any RTC upon application by the DOJ and upon prior notice to the group affected.
VII. Procedure when a suspected terrorist is arrested
A. A suspected terrorist maybe arrested by any law enforcement personnel provided:

1. The law enforcement agent was duly authorized in writing by the Anti Terrorism Council
2. The arrest was the result of a surveillance or examination of bank deposits

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
B. Upon arrest and prior to actual detention, the law enforcement agent must present the suspected
terrorist before any judge at the latter‘s residence or office nearest the place of arrest, at any time of
the day or night. The judge shall, within three days, submit a written report of the presentation to the
court where the suspect shall have been charged.
C. Immediately after taking custody of a person charged or suspected as a terrorist, the police or law
enforcement personnel shall notify in writing the judge of the nearest place of apprehension or arrest,
but if the arrest is made during non-office days or after office hours, the written notice shall be served
at the nearest residence of the judge nearest the place of arrest
D. Failure to notify in writing is punished by 10 years and one day to12 years of imprisonment
VIII. Period of Detention has been extended to three days
A. The three day period is counted from the moment the person charged or suspected as terrorist has
been apprehended or arrested, detained and taken into custody
B. In the event of an actual or imminent terrorist attack, suspects may not be detained for more than
three days without the written approval of the Human Rights Commission, or judge of the MTC RTC,
Sandiganbayan or Court of Appeals nearest the place of arrest
C. If arrest was on a nonworking day or hour, the person arrested shall be brought to the residence of
any of the above named officials nearest the place of arrest.
IX. Other Acts Punished As Offenses (punished by imprisonment of 10 years and one day to 12
years) which acts are related to the arrest/detention of suspected terrorists
A. Violation of the rights of a person detained

1. Right to be informed of the nature and cause of the arrest; to remain silent; to counsel
2. To communicate and confer with counsel at any time without restriction
3. To communicate at any time and without restrictions with members of family or relatives and be
visited by them
4. To avail of the services of a physician of choice
B. Offenses relating to an official log book:
1. Failure to keep official logbook detailing the name of the person arrested the date and time of initial
admission for custody and arrest; state of his health; date and time of removal from his cell, and his
return thereto; date and time of visits and by whom; all other important data bearing on his treatment
while under arrest and custody
2. Failure to promptly issue a certified true copy of the entries of the log book
C. Using threat, intimidation, coercion, inflicting physical pain, or torment or mental emotional, moral
or psychological pressure which shall vitiate the free will
D. Punishes Infidelity in the Custody of Detained Persons

1. The penalty is 12 years and one day to 20 years if the person detained is a prisoner by final

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
judgment
2. The penalty is 6 years and one day to 12 years if the prisoner is a detention prisoner
E. Punishes the act of knowingly furnishing False Testimony, forged document or spurious evidence
in any investigation or hearing under the law ( 12 yrs and one day to 20 years)
X. Prosecution under the Law is a bar to another prosecution under the Revised Penal Code or any
other special law for any offense or felony which is necessarily included in the offense charged under
the law
XI. If the suspect is acquitted he is entitled to P500,000.00 for every day of detention without a
warrant of arrest.
A. Any person who delays the release or refuses to release the amount shall be punished by
imprisonment of 6 months
XII. Provisions on the Identity of the Informant
A. The officer to whom the name of the suspect was first revealed shall record the real name and
specific address of the informant and shall report the same to his superior officer who shall in turn
transmit the information to the Congressional Oversight Committee within 5 days after the suspect was
placed under arrest, or his properties sequestered seized or frozen.
B. The data shall be considered confidential and shall not be unnecessarily revealed until after the
proceedings against the suspect shall have been terminated.
( NOTE: It would seem that the confidentiality of the informant‘s identity is not permanent but may be
revealed, not like the provisions of the Rules of Evidence which considers the confidentiality as
permanent)
XIII. Territorial Application of the law:
The law applies to any person who commits an act covered by the law if committed:
A. Within the terrestrial domain, interior waters, maritime zone and airspace of the Philippines
B. Inside the territorial limits of the Philippines
C. On board a Philippine ship or airship
D. Within any embassy, consulate, diplomatic premises belonging to or occupied by the Philippine
government in an official capacity
E. Against Philippine citizens or persons of Philippine descent where their citizenship or ethnicity was
a factor in the commission of the crime
F. Directly against the Philippine government.
XIV. The provisions of the law shall be automatically suspended one month before and two months
after the holding of any election.
-o0o-
R.A 9851: THE PHILIPPINE ACT ON CRIMES AGAINST INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
LAW, GENOCIDE
AND OTHER CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.
This act defines and penalizes three crimes known as: (i) War Crimes or crimes against
International Human Humanitarian Law (ii) Genocide and (iii) Other Crimes Against Humanity.
I. War Crimes or Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law
A. In case of an International armed conflict, which is defined as the use of force or armed violence
between two or more states including belligerent occupation, those which are grave violations of the
Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949, which are :
(a) Willful killing

(b) Torture or inhuman treatment including biological experiments
(c) Willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health
(d) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property not justified by military necessity
B.Violations in the course of an armed conflict between government authorities and organized armed
groups or between such armed groups within a state, are not included. Hence atrocities committed by
and between the government and the NPA/MILF are not covered.
(iii).Trafficking In Persons or for Violation of RA. 10364 ― The Expanded Anti-Trafficking Against
Persons Act of 2012‖ where the accused is a Filipino or permanent resident of the Philippines, or the act
is against a Filipino citizen.
III. Piracy and Mutiny in Philippine Waters
1. These crimes are punished by Pres. Decree No. 532 as amended by R.A. 7659 (The Heinous
Crime law).
2. The concept of piracy/mutiny as committed in the high seas whether simple or qualified, applies
as well when committed within Philippine waters. Hence when the taking does not involve violence,
the crime is theft. The offenders include crew members/passengers.
3. The term Philippine waters include: (i) those waters around, between and connecting the islands
(ii) all waters belonging to the Philippines by historic right or legal title including the territorial
waters, insular shelves and sea bed (iii) navigable rivers.
4. The term vessel includes any water craft in Philippine waters whether moving or anchored so long
as it is sea worthy, used in transporting of people or goods or both. This includes a fisherman‘s
banca and a submarine, as well as vessels owned by aliens.
5. Crimes other than murder, homicide, physical injuries or rape may qualify the piracy. However
intimidating the ship captain may constitute direct assault.
6. The decree creates and punishes the crime of AIDING OR ABETTING PIRACY.
a. This is a crime in itself although the acts involve the acts of an accessory.
b. The penalty however is that of an accomplice.
c. Examples: by profiting one‘s self or helping the pirates profit from the effects of the crime;
harboring the pirates, providing information/data on the sailing route ad/or schedule of ships.
THE ANTI HIJACKING LAW ( R.A. 6235)

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
(Aircraft piracy)
I. The four acts punished
1. Hijacking of a Foreign Aircraft
2. Hijacking of a Philippine Plane
3. Violation of Rules inimical to civil aviation by
a). carrying/loading prohibited substances
b). carrying of certain substances in violation of rules and regulations concerning their
transportation
II. Hijacking of a Philippine aircraft or one registered under the laws of the Philippines. This includes
helicopters. They maybe privately used/owned or commercial planes or government owned, civilian or
military aircraft.
A). Two ways of commission
(i). by usurping or seizing control while it is in flight

a) In flight means when the exterior doors are closed following embarkation until opened for
disembarkation. There are passengers on board.
b).It is not necessary that the plane is already airborne and may still be in the tarmac or it has
taxied but the passengers have not yet been allowed to disembark
c). If not in flight, the crime may either be theft or robbery, or threats or coercion
(ii) compelling the pilot to change the course or the destination of the aircraft
a). this presuppose the plane is already in flight else it is coercion or threat
b). the flight may be a domestic or international flight
III. Hijacking of Foreign Aircraft
A). How committed

i). usurping or seizing control of the aircraft while within Philippine territory
a). It need not be in flight because it is considered in transit while in the Philippines
b). It is enough that the hijackers are on board the aircraft and have commenced instructing the
pilots or crew even if the engine has not yet been revved
ii). Compelling the plane to land in the Philippines
a). This presupposes that the Philippine is not the point of destination or a stop over
b). Does this apply when the plane is forced to land to refuel or obtain food or to land a sick
passenger?
IV. When Qualified:

a). By firing upon the pilot, member of the crew or passenger even if they are not hit
b). exploding or attempting to explode any bomb or explosive to destroy the aircraft
c). if the crime is accompanied by a killing, physical injuries or rape ( other crimes should be
treated as separate offenses such as robbery or theft)
NB: This is another unique instance when an act punished under the RPC qualifies a violation of a
special law
IV. Acts Inimical to Civil Aviation

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A). By carrying or loading on board an aircraft operating as a public utility passenger aircraft in the
Philippines, any flammable corrosive, explosive or poisonous substances.
i) If there results any injury or damage to property on account of said prohibited substances, they
shall be separate offenses
B). By loading or carrying or transporting on board a cargo aircraft operating as a public utility in the
Philippines, any of the substances if not done in accordance with the rules and regulations set and
promulgated by the Air Transportation Office
-o0o-
TITLE TWO: CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL

OF THE STATE
INTRODUCTION
A. Articles 124 to 133 are the penal sanctions for violation of certain rights provided for in Article III of
the constitution. The civil sanction for damages is based on Article 32 of the New Civil Code.
B. The offenders are public officers. However private persons can be held liable in the following
instances: (i) For Violation of Article 133 ( Offending Against Religious Feelings) since this can be
committed by any person (ii) when they conspire with the public officer and (iii) when the participate as
either accomplices or accessories.
ARBITRARY DETENTION IN GENERAL
I. MEANING OF DETENTION. This is the penal sanction for violation of a person‘s personal freedom
or freedom of movement and locomotion, the freedom to go where one chooses to go and the freedom
not to be restrained therefrom and freedom from being brought where does not want to go. This
includes:
A. ―Lock Up‖, or the actual deprivation of a person of his liberty by confinement in a room, space, or in
any enclosure.
B. Or rendering him physically immobile even if he is not confined such as tying him up.
C. Placing physical or psychological restraint on his freedom of locomotion thereby restricting his
movements
II. CRIMES WHICH ARISE WHEN A PERSON IS DETAINED

a). Arbitrary detention under article 124
b). Arbitrary detention under article 125
c). Unlawful arrest under Article 269
d). Coercion under Article 286
e). Abduction under Article 342
f). Kidnapping or Illegal Detention under Article 267 and 268
g). Trafficking in Persons
h). Failure to return a Minor
i) Inducing a minor to abandon his home
III. CLASSES OF ARBITRARY DETENION

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a). Arbitrary Detention Proper under Article 124 or detaining a person without legal grounds
b). Arbitrary Detention Under Article 125 or delay in the filing of the proper charges
c). Delaying Release under article 126
ART. 124 :ARBITRARY DETENTION PROPER
A. CONCEPT AND ELEMENTS:

1. The crime committed by a public officer who detains another without just or legal grounds.
2. It requires (a) that the offender is a public officer or employee (b) he detains another (c) there is no legal
ground for the detention. The reason must be because the person detained is a suspect in a crime and the
purpose is to make him answer for the crime or to investigate him as to his participation in said crime. If the
purpose is otherwise, some other offense involving restraint of liberty is committed.
3. The legal grounds are: (i) commission of a crime (ii) violent insanity which however requires that the
insane be brought to the hospital and (iii) serious ailment requiring compulsory confinement in a hospital.
4. The essence of the crime therefore is that a public officer arrest and or detains another but :
a) there is no valid warrant of arrest
b). the person arrested/detained has not committed any crime, is not violently insane or ill
c) if the person committed a crime, the arrest does not fall under any of the situations of a valid warrantless
arrest
5. The persons liable are limited to public officers with powers to actually detain or to cause the detention of
a person who is the suspect of a crime.
a) The persons liable are the law enforcement agents, prosecutors, judges and persons in authority who have
charge of maintaining peace and order.
b). Arbitrary Detention is not committed if the officer did not make use of his position/function.
c) Private persons are not liable unless they were in conspiracy or participated as accomplices or accessories.
If it was a private person who is the principal accused i.e. who thought up the crime, the crime is illegal
detention.
d). Are members of the AFP liable if they arrest and detain suspected rebels? Example: is the Army Major
liable for Arbitrary Detention for abducting Jose Burgos?
d). Exercises:
(i). A policeman pretended that there is a complaint against the victim and asks the victim to go to the police
station. He brought the victim to a house instead and kept him there until the victim was rescued. Did he
commit arbitrary detention?
(ii). A friend of an NBI agent asked the former to bring a rival to the NBI office so the victim will not be able
to bring the friend’s lady love to a date. The NBI agent pretends the victim is needed for investigation and
invites the victim to the NBI office and refused to let him leave until the following morning. Did the agent
commit arbitrary detention?
B. Valid Warrantless Arrests
1. Arrest in Flagranti: when in the presence of the arresting officer, the person arrested has committed, is
actually committing, or attempting to commit an offense
a). To be valid the arrest must be at the time and place of the commission of the crime except in situations of

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a Hot Pursuit.
b). “In his presence” means either: (i) that the officer sees the offense being committed (ii) he hears the
disturbance and proceeds at once to the scene of the crime or (iii) when the offense is continuing, has not been
consumated at the time the arrest is made .
c). the person arrested must have performed an overt act which can be characterized as a crime
2. Arrest based on Probable Cause: when an offense has just in fact been committed and he has probable cause
to believe, based on personal knowledge of facts and circumstances, that the person to be arrested has
committed it.
a). This requires that a crime was in fact committed but the officer did not see who committed it or how it
was committed
b) He has however personal knowledge of facts and circumstances or evidence as to who is the author. This
may be based on his on-the-spot investigation and interview of the victim and witnesses.
c).There must however be an immediacy in time between the commission of the crime and the arrest of the
suspect, a question to be determined on a case-to-case basis.
3. Arrest of escapees whether a detention prisoner or a prisoner by final judgment.
C. Principles Involved
1. The law recognizes so called “Good Faith Arrests”.
a) It is not required that the person arrested was actually performing an act which amounts to a crime as the
person may be doing an innocent act but this by itself does not make the officer liable for arbitrary detention.
b). The legality of the arrest does not depend upon the judicial fact of a crime but upon the nature of the deed
performed by the arrested arrested, when its characterization as a crime may reasonably be inferred by the
officer. The officer must however have acted in good faith
2. The legality of the arrest/detention is not affected by the subsequent conviction or acquittal of the accused.
The liability of the officer is separate from the liability of the arrested person.
3. If the person arrested was killed or injured (other than slight physical injuries) a complex crime may arise
4. In addition the officer may also be held liable for Violation of RA 7438 (The law providing for the Rights
of Persons arrested, under Investigation or /detained) if the officer:
a) Fails to Mirandize the person arrested
b). Takes his confession without Mirandizing him or without the rights having been validly waived
c). Refuses visitation to the person arrested
5. The penalty depends upon the period of detention i.e.

a). If it has not exceeded 3 days
b). More than 3 but not more than 15 days
c). More than 15 days but not more than 6 months
d). More than 6 months
ART. 125. DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSONS

TO THE PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES
A. CONCEPT.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. A person was validly arrested without a warrant but the arresting officer failed to file the proper charges
with the proper office within the period of 12, 18, or 36 hours depending on whether the person committed an
offense punished by light penalties or their equivalents, correctional penalties or their equivalents and by
afflictive or capital penalties or their equivalents, or three days in case of suspected terrorists and, more
importantly, they failed to release the person detained after the lapse of the said periods.
2. If there was a warrant, it presupposes that a formal charge has already been filed in court against the suspect.
All that the arresting officer has to do is to make a return and the accused is detained until he is ordered released
by the court.
3. This is a crime by omission because the gist of the offense is the failure to file the appropriate charges within
the time required by law coupled by the failure to release the person detained. It is not the arrest which brings
about the crime because the arrest is valid, but it is the subsequent inaction of the arresting officer which is the
gist of this offense.
4. The officers liable are those with power to actually detain or to cause the detention of a suspect of a crime.
5. This may be committed by negligence.
B. Principles involved:
1. Rationale: (i) To enable the arresting officers a reasonable time to gather evidence to support a charge
against the person arrested and (ii) to prevent abuse on the part of the arresting and prolonged detention by
compelling the officers either to release the arrested person if they cannot file charges within the period given
them or to file the charges so that if the offense is bailable, the accused can post bail for his liberty.
2. “To Deliver” does not mean to bring the person arrested but the act of filing the proper charges with the
proper officer/office.
3. “Proper Judicial Authorities” should be understood to mean the proper officer/office as follows:
a). In chartered cities- the Office of the City Prosecutor because direct filing with the court is not allowed
b). In provinces :
(i). As to offenses requiring preliminary investigation ( i.e. penalty is more than 4 yrs. 2 months or less but
the law requires a preliminary investigation, such as libel, with the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor
(ii) All other offenses, with the Municipal or Circuit Trial Courts or through the Provincial Prosecutor
except cases which fall under the Rules of Summary Procedure
4. Allowable Period of Detention

a). 12, 18 and 36 hours based on the gravity of the offense, as determined by the maximum penalty, to be
determined from the acts of the accused at the time of his arrest.
b). However, for the crime of terrorism, the period has been extended to three days from the time of arrest.
c). How to count the hours: continuously and without interruption from the time of arrest but if the last hour
falls on a non working hour or non-office hour, the charges should be filed within the next office hour.
4. How to count: Tolling of the Hours. The hours of non-office days is not to be included in the
counting ( Soria vs. Disierto, Jan. 31, 2005, reiterating Medina vs. Orosco ( 125 Phil. 313)

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
5. Defenses allowed:
a). The accused may set up insuperable causes for his failure or omission. The time, place of arrest,
availability of transportation and similar circumstances, are factors to be considered.
b). The last hour is a non-office hour
c). The accused has executed a valid waiver for his detention. This is a written statement by the accused,
assisted by a counsel, that he is willing to be detained for a period longer than the 12, 18 or 36 hours so that
the case against him may undergo a preliminary investigation. However despite the waiver, the investigation
must be terminated within 15 days.
d). QUESTION: IS THE EXISTENCE OF A PENDING WARRANT OF ARREST AGAINST THE
ACCUSED FOR ANOTHER CASE A VALID DEFENSE?
Art. 126. DELAYING RELEASE
I. CONCEPT
A. The crime committed by any public officer who has a person under his custody who does any of the
following acts:
1). Delays the performance of a judicial or executive order for the release of a prisoner. This is means he
delays taking the necessary steps to effect the release.
2). Or unduly delays the service of notice of such order to the prisoner.
3). Obstructs or impedes or delays any proceeding upon any petition for the release of a detained person.
Such as, not bringing the person to the court for hearing in a Petition for Habeas Corpus or Writ of Amparo.
B. The officers liable are usually the Jail Wardens/Guards but they include the arresting officers who have
not yet turned over the arrested person to the jail and those directed to serve the orders of release. Also included
are court personnel who do not serve immediately orders of release.
C. The penalty depend on the length of the delay i.e. 12, 18 and 36 hours.
II. The order for the release must have been issued by any of the following:
A. The court
i). In case the arrested person posted bail
ii). The court found no probable cause after a hearing for this purpose
iii) The Information was withdrawn, or the case was dismissed or the accused was acquitted
iv). After a Petition for Habeas Corpus or Petition for a Writ of Amparo and the court found no valid
ground for the continued detention of the accused
v). When it grants a Petition for Probation
B. The Office of the President when it grants pardon or amnesty

C. The Commissioner of Immigration and Deportation with respect to aliens who are under detention by the
BID
D. The Board of Pardons and Parole upon the grant of parole
E. The Prosecutors Office as to cases under is investigation prior to said case being filed in court:
i). when it finds no probable cause and dismisses a complaint
ii). When it finds the arrest is not a valid warrantless arrest
iii). In meritorious cases or humanitarian reasons

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 127. EXPULSION
A. CONCEPT. This the crime committed by any public officer or employee who, not being authorized by law,
expels a person from the Philippines or compels a person to change his residence.
1. This is the penal sanction for violation of the right of abode and of changing the same.
2. If the accused is a private person, the crime is coercion.
3. It is believed that the victims should have established their dwelling in the Philippines. Thus foreign
tourists who are immediately deported as undesirable aliens are not included.
B. When the expulsion is lawful

1. Upon Order of the court in cases of ejectment, unlawful detainer, recovery of possession/ownership of
property, penalty of destierro, or when imposed by the court as penalty upon an alien convicted of violation of
a law which prescribes deportation as a penalty.
2. Upon an order of deportation by the President or The Commission on Immigration and Deportation after
deportation hearings
3. Expulsion of diplomatic officials declared as person non grata are not covered.
4. Aliens who are not allowed to enter the Philippines but are immediately sent back are not included.
VIOLATION OF DOMICILE
INTRODUCTION:
1. These crimes are the penal sanction for violation of the sanctity of the dwelling (the Castle) of a person.
2. The three forms or kinds include:
a). Violation of Domicile Proper (Art. 128)
). Search Warrant Maliciously Obtained and Abuse in the Service of a Valid Search Warrant
c). Searching Domicile without witnesses
ART.128. VIOLATION OF DOMICILE
I. CONCEPT:
A.The crime committed by any public officer who without being authorized by a judicial order, commits any
of the following acts:
1. enters a dwelling against the will of the owner
2.having been allowed entry, searches papers or effects therein without the previous consent of the owner
3. having surreptitiously entered and being required to leave, refuses to do so
B. The authority to enter a dwelling even against the will of the owner/occupant is a judicial order which
includes:
1. a Writ of Execution
2. Writ of Possession
3. Writ of Attachment
4. Warrant of Arrest
5. Search Warrant
6. Order of Demolition
7. Protection Order
C. The officers liable are those whose duty includes enforcing Orders from the court such as Sheriffs,

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
process servers and other personnel of the Court and Law Enforcement Agents. If by a private person or any
other public officer, the crime is Trespass to Dwelling.
D. Dwelling should be given a more liberal meaning than its meaning as an aggravating circumstance. The
term owner should include a lawful occupant even if not the owner of the structure, such as a lessee.
E. Justified Entry into the dwelling even without a judicial order

1. to prevent serious injury to himself, to an occupant or to third person
2. to stop an ongoing crime
3. to arrest a criminal in hot pursuit
4. to render service to humanity
5 to search or seize the effects of a crime
B. First Mode
1. There must be an objection or opposition, not just lack of consent, which objection may be express or
implied. Objections may be verbal, or written, or by the fact that a door is closed, or there is a physical blocking
of entry. This includes surreptitious entry i.e. entering through the window.
2. The owner need not be present at the time of entry.
C. Second Mode
1. The entry is lawful or permitted or allowed but the gist of the offense is a search conducted thereafter
which was not consented to.
2. The meaning of search is not just by looking or staring but connotes a physical act of going around rooms,
opening closets, pulling of wardrobes or drawers, lifting of objects.
3. The following unconsented searches and seizures however are valid:
a). Search incidental to a lawful arrest
b) Seizure of evidence in plain view
4. If the person is a private person the crimes is unjust vexation for the act of searching and theft if he takes
away anything.
5. QUESTIONS: PDEA agents were allowed to enter a house but they suspected drugs were intentionally fed
to a cow tied to the post of the house. They killed the cow, opened stomach and recovered a plastic of shabu.
Is there Violation of Domicile? Supposed what they searched is a van parked in a nearby garage?
D. Third Mode
1. There was a surreptitious entry and when required to leave, the accused refused to do so.
2. The request to leave must be promptly given upon discovery of the presence of the accused. If he was
entertained or was asked to leave only after some displeasure, the surreptitious entry is deemed ratified.
E. Qualifying Circumstances
1. If committed at night time
2. If papers or effects not constituting evidence of a crime are not returned immediately after the search.
ART. 129. Search Warrant Maliciously Obtained and Abuse

in the Service of those validly obtained
A. Persons liable: only law enforcement agents since private persons can not apply for a search warrant or serve
a search warrant.
B. Two acts punished:

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. By obtaining a Search Warrant without probable cause: it is actually the act of applying for a search warrant
knowing that: (i) the facts are fabricated or (ii). The applicant has no personal knowledge of the facts but made
it appear that he has.
a).The applicant resorts to perjury either by testifying falsely or by submitting a false affidavit. Said acts are
separate crimes.
b). However the search warrant must be quashed first
2. Exceeding his authority or by Abusing the service of the valid search warrant such as by the following:
a). resorting to unnecessary physical force resulting to injury to persons or damage to property; or seriously
intimidating the occupants.
i) Injuries inflicted or damages caused are separate offenses
b). Searching a place not described
c). Seizing things not described or included
d) Serving the warrant beyond the 10 day period
C. Remedies Against the Warrant and Search.

1. There being no probable cause, a Motion to Quash is proper to be filed in the issuing court, but if a case has
already been filed in court, then the motion should be filed in the criminal court.
2. A Motion to Suppress may also be filed to prevent the items seized from being used as evidence. It is to be
filed in the criminal court.
ART. 130 SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT WITNESSES
A. CONCEPT: the crime committed by a public officer who is armed with a valid search warrant who conducts
a search in the absence of either the lawful occupant, member’s of the latter’s family of sufficient age and
discretion, or two members of the community.
1. The occupant is one who has a right to be in the premises.
2. Household helps are qualified to be witnesses
3. Two witnesses are required only in the absence of the occupant or members of his family.
4. Even if the occupants were present in the house but they were not allowed to witness the search of the
individual rooms, the search is illegal and the articles seized are inadmissible in evidence ( PP. vs. del Rosario
439 SCRA 601)
ART.131. Prohibition and Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings
I. Concept: This is a crime against the Right of Peaceful Meetings. The crime is committed by a public
officer or employee who commits any of the acts specified below.
II. First Act: Prohibiting or interrupting, without legal grounds, the holding of a peaceful meeting, or by
dissolving the same.
A. Grounds for prohibiting, interrupting or dissolving a meeting:
1. Lack of a required permit where the meeting is to be held in a public place where peace and
order will be affected, or when others are prevented from using the place. Example: meeting in a

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
street, or bridge or sidewalk.

(i). No permit is necessary if held in a freedom park, private place or campus of a
government owned and operated educational institution as in state universities
(ii) For religious purposes or conducted by labor arising from a labor dispute
2. The requirement of a permit is only for purposes of regulation but not as an exercise of
prohibitory powers. Thus, the refusal to issue a permit without any valid ground constitutes
prohibition of a peaceful meeting.
3. When the meeting constitutes a trespass to private property
4, When the meeting is not peaceful as when it becomes chaotic or the participants are enjoined
to do acts of destruction of property or acts of violence , or when the meeting becomes seditious
B. The accused officer must not be a participant in the meeting otherwise his act may either be
unjust vexation or tumultuous disturbance.
C. Dissolution is usually in the form of dispersal or by the arrest of the leaders or the speakers
III. Second Act: Hindering any person from joining any peaceful meeting, such as by threatening to
arrest them, unless the meeting is that of criminal associations. Example: joining the meeting of the
CPP is not prohibited, but that of the NPA is prohibited.
IV. Third Act: Prohibiting or hindering another from addressing a Petition to the authorities for redress
of grievances. Provided the address is done in an orderly manner and there is no damage to public
peace or order.
NOTE: The Provisions of Article 131 should be read in conjunction with B.P. 880 otherwise known as
the Public Assembly Act of 1985.
B.P. 880: AN ACT ENSURING THE FREE EXERCISE BY THE PEOPLE OF THEIR RIGHT
PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE AND PETITION THE GOVERNMENT AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
1. This is known as ―The Public Assembly Act of l985‖
I. Declares the policy of the state to ―the ensure the free exercise of the right of the people to
peaceably assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances, without prejudice to the
rights of others to life, liberty and equal protection of the law‖.
II. Defines public assembly to mean: ‖any rally, demonstration, march, parade, procession or any
other form of mass or concerted action held in a public place for the purpose of presenting a lawful
cause; or expressing an opinion to the general public on any particular issue; or protesting or influencing
any state of affairs whether political, economic or social; or petitioning the government for redress of
grievances‖
A. Public place includes any highway, boulevard, avenue, road, street, bridge or other thoroughfare,
park, plaza square, an/or any open space of public ownership where the people are allowed access
B. It does not cover assemblies for religious purposes which shall be governed by local ordinances
and those by workers and laborers resulting from labor disputes to be governed by the Labor Code

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
and BP. 227
IV. Establishes the policy of Maximum Tolerance to be observed in dealing with public assemblies or
in the dispersal thereof. It means the highest degree of restraint from the military, police: and other
peace keeping authorities.
V. As to the requirement of a permit:
A. A written permit shall be required for any person/persons to organize and hold a public
assembly in a public place during any election campaign period
B. No permit shall be required:
i) if the public assembly shall be done or made in a freedom park duly established by law or
ordinance
ii) If done or made in private property in which case only the consent of the owner or the one
entitled to its legal possession is required
iii). If done or made in the campus of a government owned and operated educational
institution which shall be subject to the rules and regulations of said educational institution
iv). Political meetings or rallies held during any election campaign period
C. Procedure for issuance of a permit

i). A Written applications shall be filed with the office of the mayor at least five (5) working
days before the scheduled public assembly
ii). The Mayor‘s Office shall acknowledge in writing the receipt of the application and Posting
of the application by the Mayor‘s office in a conspicuous place of the city/municipal building
a). If the application is acceptance the application shall post it on the premises of the
mayor and shall be deemed to have been filed
iii) Action by the Mayor within 2 working days from date of application . If they fail to act within
two days, the permit shall be deemed granted
a) He may grant
b). He may deny or modify but only on the ground that there is imminent and grave danger
of a substantive evil
(i) The applicant must be informed in writing within 24 hours who may be heard or may
contest it in a court of law
VI. Dispersal
1. No public assembly with a permit shall be dispersed unless it becomes violent ( or when it
becomes seditious, or if held in a private property against the will of the owner who requests for its
dispersal because there is now a trespass to property)
2. When the public assembly is held without a permit where a permit is required it may be
peacefully dispersed

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Note: It is provided that ―tear gas, smoke grenades, water cannons, or any similar anti-riot device
shall not be used unless the public assembly is attended by actual violence or serious threats of
violence, or deliberate destruction of property
VII. Acts Punished include the following:
1. Holding of any public assembly without having first secured the written permit , or use of such
permit for such purposes in any place other than those set out in the permit. However, the persons
liable are the leader or organizer, but not the participants
2. Arbitrary and unjustified denial or modification of a permit by the Mayor or official acting in his
behalf
3. Unjustified and arbitrary refusal to accept or acknowledge receipt of the application for a permit
4. Obstructing, impeding, disrupting or otherwise denying the exercise of the right to peaceful
assembly. This already includes the acts defined under Article 131
5. The unnecessary firing of firearms to disperse the public assembly
6. Law enforcers who (i) refuse to provide assistance when requested by leaders or organizers of
public assemblies (ii) do not wear proper and complete uniforms (iii) do not observe maximum
tolerance (iv) carry firearms and (v) who use anti riot devises to disperse a peaceful public assembly
7. The following acts are prohibited, if committed within100 meters from the area of activity of the
public assembly or on the occasion thereof:
a).carrying or a deadly or offensive weapon or devise
b) carrying of bladed weapon and the like
c). malicious burning of any object in the streets or thoroughfares
d). carrying of fire arms by members of a law enforcement unit
e). interfering with or intentionally disturbing the holding of a public assembly by the use of a
motor vehicle, its horns and loud sound systems
VII. As interpreted in BAYAN vs. EDUARDO ERMITA ( April 25, 2006)
A. BP. 880 is constitutional. It is not an absolute ban of public assemblies but simply a regulation of
the time, place and manner of the holding of public assemblies.
1. It is a ―content neutral‖ not ―content-based‖ regulation.
Note: ―Content-neutral regulations‖ are those imposed without reference to the contents of the
speech. They are tests demanding standards and need only a substantial government interest to
support them. ―Content-based regulations‖ are those imposed because of the contents of the
speech. They are censorial and bear a heavy presumption of constitutional invalidity. They are
subject to the test of over breadth and vagueness.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
2. It is not over broad as it regulates the exercise to peaceful assembly and petition only to the
extent needed to avoid a clear and present danger of the substantive evils Congress ahs the right
to prevent
3. There is no prior restraint, since the content of the speech is not relevant to the regulation
4. The delegation of powers to the Mayor provides a precise and sufficient standard- the clear
and present danger test
B. Rallyists who can show the police an application duly filed on a given date can, after two days
from said date, rally in accordance with their application without the need to show a permit, the grant
of the permit being then presumed under the law, and it will be the burden of the authorities to show
that there has been a denial of the application
C. The so called calibrated preemptive response policy is null and void
D. Until a freedom park shall have been established, all public parks and plazas of the
municipality/city concerned shall in effect be deemed freedom parks; no prior permit of whatever
kind shall be required to hold an assembly therein. The only requirement will be written notices to
the police and the mayor‘s office to allow proper coordination and orderly activities.
-o0o-
Crimes In Violation of the Freedom of Religion.
ART. 132. Interruption of Religious Worship
I. Concept: The crime committed by any public officer or employee who shall prevent or disturb the
manifestations or ceremonies of any religion.
II. Manifestation or ceremonies refer to the rituals or rites or practices such as the holding of a mass or
religious service, baptisms and other sacraments, or prayer meetings.
A. They may be unorthodox such as crying, dancing, gyrating or with the use of props
B. They extend to all kinds of worships so long as these are not indecent or violative of laws or public
morals
C. If the activity does not qualify as a religious manifestation or ceremony, the offense may be
violation may be under B.P. 885.
III. The term any religion is broad enough to include not only the institutional religions, whether
Christian or not. It does not however include cults.
ART. 133 Offending Against Religious Feelings
I. Concept or essence: the crime committed by any person- i.e. a public officer or a private person, who
performs acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful which are committed either: (i) in a
place dedicated to religious worship or (ii) during the celebration of any religious ceremony.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
II. The act contemplated is one which ridicules or makes fun of a practice, tenet, dogma, or belief,
otherwise the offense is unjust vexation. These may be oral or written statements or actions.
III. Whether the act is offensive is to be viewed from the reaction of members of the religion involved.
REMEDIES FOR VIOLATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
I. A criminal prosecution under title II or an action for damages under Article 32 of the New Civil Code.
II. A petition for Habeas Corpus (produce the body) to compel the public officer to present the body of the
person detained and to explain the reason for the detention, so that if the grounds are not legal, the court shall
order his release.
III. Petition for a Writ of Amparo: (i.e. to protect from the word amparar)
A. General Concept: this originated from Mexico. Depending on the purpose, the kinds of amparo are :
1. Amparo Libertad: to protect personal freedom like habeas corpus
2. Amparo contra leyes: for the judicial review of the constitutionality of statutes
3. Amparo casacion: for the judicial review of the constitutionality and legality of judicial decisions
4. Amparo administrativo: for the judicial review of administrative actions
5. Amparo agrario: to protect the rights of peasants
B. Rule in the Philippines. This is governed by the Rule on the Writ of Amparo adopted by the Supreme
Court and effective on October 24, 2007
1. Meaning. Section 1: The Petition for a writ of Amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right
to life, liberty and security is violated, or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a pubic
official or employee, or of a private individual or entity. The writ shall cover extralegal killings and enforced
disappearance or threats thereof.
a). Extralegal killings: killings committed without due process of law i.e. without legal or judicial
safeguards. E.g,: salvaging
b). Enforced disappearances are attended by the following characteristics:

(i). an arrest, detention or abduction of a person by a government official or organized groups or
private individuals with the direct or indirect acquiescence of the government
(ii). Refusal of the state to disclose the fate or whereabouts of the person concerned
(iii). Or a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty, which places such persons outside the
protection of the law
C. Relief: (i) the specific and appropriate relief or (ii) a general prayer for other just and equitable relief
D. Interim Reliefs
1. Temporary Protection Order- order that the petitioner or the aggrieved party or member of his immediate
family be protected in a government agency or by an accredited person or private institution capable of
keeping and securing their safety.
2. Inspection Order – ordering any person in possession or control of a designated land or other property,
to permit entry for the purpose of inspecting, measuring, surveying or photographing the property or any

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
relevant object or operation thereon.

3. Production Order – ordering any person in possession of documents, tangible objects, or objects in
digitalized or electronic form, which constitutes or contains relevant evidence, to produce and permit the
inspection or copying or photography.
4. Witness Protection Order – order to refer a witness to the DOJ for admission to the Witness Protection
Program
E. The Petition may be filed as an independent petition or if a criminal case is filed, by motion in the
criminal case.
IV. Petition for a Writ of Habeas Data. To compel public officers to disclose any information or data compiled
against a person and to correct any error or misinformation or untruthful data concerning the person. (secret
dossiers)
TITLE III. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER
The crimes involve political crimes; those crimes affecting legislative bodies and legislative officers;
crimes against public officers and crimes causing disturbance of public peace and order.
Certain offenses punished by not more than 6 years are now probationable.
The Political Crimes
1. (a) Political Crimes Proper: These refer to the crimes of rebellion, coup d‘ etat, sedition
and their derivative lesser offenses of conspiracy, proposal, and inciting. There used to
be a crime known as ―subversion‖ penalized by martial law decrees but these have
been repealed so that subversion is a non-existent crime.
2. (b) Crimes of political coloration: ordinary crimes committed in furtherance, or on the
occasion of, a political crime proper
II. The principles include:

a. The fact that they are transitory and continuing
b. That of absorption of common crimes with political coloration, except in the case of sedition.
The offenses absorbed include offenses with higher penalties and offenses penalized under
special laws
c. They maybe committed in times of war and in times of peace
ART. 134 AND 135. REBELLION OR INSURRECTION
I. Historical Concept: Rebellion is considered as the last remedy of an oppressed people against an
oppressive or tyrannical ruler, as a heroic and noble fight to bring about a change in the social, political
and social order for the better. That the rebels are patriots and what impelled them to rebel is love of
country. Thus several rebellions or revolutions are glorified and considered as historical events such
as: the American Revolution which brought the birth of the USA; the French Revolution which brought
an end to monarchial governments and the rights of Kings; the Philippine Revolt against Spain.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
This explains why traditionally rebellion was treated with liberality, and the law provided a penalty which
is relatively light. However, the penalty has been increased to deter rebels so much so that this blunted
the ―noble and heroic character‖ of rebellion and has instead been considered as similar to acts of
terrorism and as affecting national security. In Enrile vs. Salazar ( 186 SCRA 217) as well as Baylosis
vs. Chavez ( 202 SCRA 405) there was the observation that rebels are impelled by lust for power and
would commit mayhem not only against the military but against civilians as well, in their quest for power.
II. How Committed: By Rising Publicly and Taking Up Arms Against the Government
1. This connotes a civil uprising involving the masses, a sizable number of people seeking to change
the established order through force and violence. The movement is not a passive movement, not
just a propaganda war but it involves actual fighting with government soldiers or policemen, the
destruction of public property, kidnapping, extortion.
2. Modern rebellion however is not confined to just an open fight with the government as rebels
resort to all means to achieve their purpose. These include the so called ‖Above Ground‖, or using
legitimate means such as formation of associations or groups sympathetic to the cause of the rebels
among the various sectors of society, such as from students, laborers, farmers; intellectuals and
professionals. This is coupled by the so called ―Under Ground Means‖ or the use of violence.
III. Purposes of Rebellion are always political:
A. To remove from the allegiance to the government or its laws, the territory of the republic or any
part thereof.
a. This may either be a complete overthrow of the existing government to be replaced by that of
the rebels. This is often called a ―power grab‖. Examples are the present Communist Rebellion
b. It may also be a partial overthrow or secession. A portion of the territory is taken away to form
another government different from and independent of the existing government. An example is
the MILF-MNLF Secession movement which is to establish a Bangsa Republic in Mindanao and
Palawan.
C). It may also be to remove a portion of the territory and to make it part of the territory of another
country
B. To remove any body of land, naval or other armed forces from owing loyalty and/or allegiance
to the government
a. The Armed Forces are the instruments of power, the coercive portion of the government by
which it carries out and imposes its will and preserves itself. Alienating the armed forces affects
the very existence of the government. This includes mutiny by soldiers.
C. To deprive the chief executive or congress, wholly or partially, of any of their powers or
prerogatives.
a. This is rarely done
IV. Rule when other crimes are committed during a Rebellion ( known as crimes with political
coloration)
1. Principle of Absorption: Rebellion absorbs other crimes committed in furtherance of rebellion

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
whether they be of a lesser or higher penalty or punished by special laws.

2. Separate crimes: those committed for private purposes
3. Is the Principle of Complex crimes applicable? Not under the PP. vs. Hernandez and Enrile vs.
Salazar decisions which have not yet been overturned.
a). In Gonzales vs. Abaya ( 449 SCRA 445) the court, aside from recognizing coup d‘ etat as a
political crime, affirmed that common crimes committed in furtherance of a political crime, are
absorbed.
b). The penalty of rebellion has been increased which met the observation in Enrile as to the
penalty of certain crimes being lesser when committed in connection with rebellion, but higher in
all other cases.
c). In Baylosis vs. Chavez, the Court, through Justice Narvasa, wrote that it needs legislation if
common crimes committed in furtherance of rebellion are to be complexed so as to be given a
higher penalty.
V. One maybe convicted of rebellion even if he did not engage in actual fighting as when he was in
conspiracy with the rebels and he acted as a courier, supplier of food and ammunitions and weapons
ART. 134-A. Coup d „etat (putsch) (RA 6968)
I. Concept: A swift attack directed against the duly constituted authorities, or any military camp, or
installation, communications network, public utilities or facilities needed for the exercise and continued
possession of power, in order to seize or diminish state power.
( A quick and decisive extra-legal seizure of government powers by a relatively small but highly
organized group of political or military leaders, typically by means of unexpected arrest and
assassination of the incumbent chief executive and his principal supporters within the government
. For a coup to be successful, the rank and file of the police and military have to be willing to take
orders from the new government leaders once the coup is accomplished, so typically the
organizers of successful coups have previously recruited important military and police
commanders to their cause prior to going ahead with it. They are apt to be successful in countries
where both the general population‘s and government bureaucracy‘s ideological dedication to up
holding established constitutional procedures is relatively weak and consequently there is little
danger of massive civilian resistance or noncooperation by the rank and file of soldiers and other
government employees.)
II. The participants are a compact group of people, selected from the military/PNP or persons holding
public office or employment
III. Of French origin: it is said that it was Napoleon who first successfully staged and initiated it
IV. Essential Features:

1. The success depends on the elements of surprise, swiftness and secrecy. There is the use of
stealth, strategy, threat, violence. It is never announced. It is always calculated to be over in a
matter of days.
2. It is initiated principally by soldiers/PNP with or without civilian support
3. The purpose is either to seize state power ―Power Grab‖ or to diminish state power i.e to
destabilize and assume a position where the coupters can dictate upon the government
4. The centers of attack are the seat of power usually the presidential palace, military

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
establishments, communication facilities

5. A junta is usually established which exercises full powers and authority.
V. Distinguished from Rebellion
1. As to the manner of commission: In rebellion it is by rising publicly whereas coup makes use of
secrecy, stealth and strategy
2. As to the number of participants: rebellion involves a multitude of people, it develops a ―mass
base‖ whereas a coup involves a selected group of members of the AFP/PNP (core group)
3. As to civilian participation: in rebellion the rebels are civilians whereas a coup is a move by
military/police members
4. As to purpose: rebellion is either to overthrow the government or to secede whereas a coup may
be to cause destabilization or to paralyze the government
VI. QUESTION: Can rebellion be complexed with coup d ‗etat?
VII. QUESTION: Who are the persons liable for the crimes of rebellion or coup d ‗etat?
Answer: All who joined but their liability/penalty depends on whether they are the leaders or merely
ordinary participants.
A). The leaders may refer to the actual leaders if known, they are the ones who promote or head a
rebellion or coup. Where the real or true leaders are not known, then the leader refers to any person
who leads, directs, or commands the others(Presumptive Leaders). Their penalty is reclusion
perpetua.
B). All others are participants punished by reclusion temporal. But in a coup the penalty is further
affected by whether the participant is a public official or not. If he is a public official, the penalty is
reclusion temporal maximum.
Related Crimes
I. Conspiracy and proposal to commit Rebellion or Coup d etat.

A. The penalty is higher if it relates to coup d ‗etat
II. Inciting to Rebellion: the crime committed by a person who has not taken up arms against the
government but incites others to commit rebellion by public means such as speeches, writings,
emblems, banners or other representations.
1. It is different from proposal in that in proposal the accused has decided to commit rebellion and
that the means used are secret.
2. To incite is to publicly stir up, to agitate, to encourage. The words of incitement should have
been premeditated and not just spontaneous outbursts else it constitutes merely tumultuous
disturbance.
3. There is no inciting to coup d ‗etat because it is not compatible with the essence of coup d‘ etat
being characterized by secrecy.
4. If rebellion is actually committed, the inciter becomes a principal by inducement. The inciter
should not have taken up arms otherwise he is a participant in rebellion and the inciting is just
part of the rebellion.
III. There is no misprision of rebellion or coup d etat

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
IV. Disloyalty of Public Officers and Employees- the crime committed by public officers and employees
who:
1. Fail to resist a rebellion by all means in their power. Suppose they are outnumbered and out
armed such that resistance is futile?
2. Continue to discharge their duties under the control of rebels. This gives a semblance of support
to the rebels
3. Accept appointment to office under the rebels
ART. 139 To Art. 142. SEDITION and related crimes
1. Sedition
I. Concept of Sedition: This consist of making disturbances, commotions, or resorting to acts of

violence or destruction, or violation of public peace and order, for the purpose of expressing discontent,
disagreement, disapproval, opposition, criticism to: (i) a government policy, program or course of action,
(ii) or to a law, rule or regulation or (iii) to a government official or his official action or (iv) to members
of a social class.
A. Basically this is in the nature of a civil disobedience. The accused desire to make known their
discontent, disapproval or protest or dissatisfaction, but instead of availing of the legal means - such
as through the media, the courts, or administrative remedies, the accused resort to violence or illegal
methods.
1). Example: The act of supporters of an official who block and take over a government building
to prevent the replacement of said official
2). Market vendors who fight with personnel of the engineer‘s office demolishing their illegal
structures in the city market
3). Barricading session road to protest increase in passenger fares
4). Burning a gas station to protest the increase in the cost of gas
B. There must be a public and tumultuous uprising, i.e the participation of at least four persons and
their actions are not orderly or peaceful; they resort to violence against persons, threats or
intimidation or destruction of property or are generally unruly and violent
C. The purpose may either be political or social but not the downfall or overthrow of the government.
The accused are not rebelling against the government.
Examples: to protest the increase in oil prices or the policy on land reform; or against the increase
of new taxes; or appointment of an official; or cheating in the election; or moves to amend the
constitution
II. The acts maybe directed to private persons or their property, or to public officials or to property of
any political subdivision. Examples:
1. Staging a violent demonstration in front of the SM building to protest the failure to protect

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
small and medium scale businessmen.

2. Destroying the trucks of illegal loggers.
3. Vendors stoning the car of the chief of police for preventing them from selling in side walks
4. Stoning the Bishops House because of the opposition of the Church to artificial birth control
and to the introduction of young kids to these pregnancy-preventing items.
III. If other crimes are committed, such as killings, physical injuries, or destruction of properties, these
are separate crimes as the principle of absorption does not apply to the crime of sedition
IV. The persons punished are the leaders and participants
2. Conspiracy and Inciting to Sedition
I. There is no proposal to commit sedition
II. Inciting to Sedition under Article 142 is committed in three ways:
A. Inciting others to commit sedition by means of speeches, proclamations writings, emblems, etc.
The enumeration is broad enough to cover any means methods or form by which people are stirred
to commit acts constituting sedition. These include text messages and graffiti on walls as well as
dramas, radio/television plays or programs. It is basically encouraging people to resort to violence
or illegal means.
B Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to disturb public peace. A guest speaker for
instance in a town fiesta starts lambasting the administration with words calculated to make the
people get angry
C. Writing, publishing or circulating scurrilous libel against the government.
1) ―scurrilous‖ means low, vulgar, foul, baseless
2). Article 142 embodies the ―Doctrine of Seditious Libel”- publications or speeches which
tend to overthrow or undermine the security of the government or weaken the confidence of the
people in the government and are thus prohibited and the authors thereof are punished. They
tend to stir up general discontent or induce the people to resort to illegal means.
3). Note that the Doctrine of Seditious Libel is one of the four crimes serving as limitations to the
freedom of the speech and of the press. The other three are Prosecutions under Article 154 for
Unlawful Means of Publication; Obscenity Raps under Article 201 and a Prosecution for Libel
against a private person under Article 353.
III. Test to determine whether the writing, publication, or speech, is seditious or protected exercise of
the freedom of speech and press.
In Chavez vs. Gonzales ( 545 SCRA 441; Feb. 15, 2008) (The case of the Hello Garci Tapes) the
court reiterated the following principles relative to the freedom of the press and of speech:
1. Press freedom has four aspects:

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a). freedom from prior restraint: prior restraint refers to official government restrictions on the press
or other forms of expressions in advance of actual publication or dissemination. It is freedom from
government censorship in whatever form including licensing or permit requirements or payment of
licensing taxes
b).freedom from punishment subsequent to publications
c). freedom of access to information
d). freedom of circulation
2. Certain prior restraint is permitted by the constitution but determined only upon a careful
evaluation of the government action (the restraint) as against the appropriate test by which it should
be measured against. It must be ascertained whether the restraint is:
a). a content-neutral regulation or censorship i.e. merely concerned with the incidents of the
speech, or one that merely controls the time, place, or manner, and under well defined standards.
Only a substantial government interest is required for its validity.
b). content-based restraint or censorship i.e. the restriction is based on the subject matter of the
utterance or speech. This is given the strictest scrutiny in the light of its inherent and invasive impact.
It is presumed to be unconstitutional hence it is the government which must show that it passed the
clear and present danger rule for it to be valid
3. It reiterated that of the three tests to evaluate restraints on freedom of speech and expression, it
is the Clear and Present Danger Rule which is still applied.
a). The Dangerous Tendency Rule: The publication, writing or speech is seditious if the words
have a tendency to create a danger of public uprising; if they could easily produce disaffection
among the people and a state of feeling incompatible with a disposition to remain loyal and obedient
to the laws.
This is the rule which is often applied in times of emergency.
b). The Clear and Present Danger Rule: To be seditious the writing or speech must pose a danger
of public uprising state which is not only clear but is also imminent or at the point of happening, a
certainty. There is probability of a serious injury to the state.
This is the rule applied during normal situations. It is more liberal as it allows critics, and political
opponents of the government, especially during election times, to bring to the public what they
perceive to be short comings of the government.
Thus the written article or the speech may be very critical and may use strong language, yet, as long
as the possibility of an uprising is remote, such article or speech is not seditious.
c. The Multifactor Balancing of Interest Test: The courts should weigh the manner and intensity
of the interference on the right of the people, gravity of the crime committed and circumstances
attending the incident viz the damage to the public interest; between the infringement on the freedom
of speech and the danger to the state, between private rights and social values on a case- to-case
basis.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
3. Expressions which may be subjected to prior restraint (i.e content-based regulations) per
concurring opinion of Justice Carpio in Chavez vs. Gonzales). They are often called the unprotected
speech.
a). pornography
b). false or misleading advertisement
c). advocacy of imminent lawless action
d). danger to national security
The following are not also protected: slander or libel, lewed and obscene speech, as well as
fighting words.
IV. Article 142 punishes also a person ― who shall knowingly conceal such evil practices‖ as inciting
to sedition although this act is that of an accessory. This is similar to misprision of treason.
Crimes Against Popular Representations
Crimes Against Legislative Bodies
1. Acts tending to prevent the meeting of Congress, constitutional commissions and local legislative
bodies under Article 143.
A).The act punished is the prevention of the meeting by force or fraud. If the force results to
physical injuries or damage to property, or if the fraud consists of falsification of documents, these
are complexed with violation of Article 143.
B). The meeting includes the committees or sub committees or divisions of the legislative bodies.
If it is a meeting of congress, the accused may further be subjected to Congressional Contempt.
Local legislative bodies do not have the inherent right to punish for contempt. This right must be
expressly given by law.
C). The offenders are any persons.
D). Examples: barricading the entrance to Congress; or sending letters to the committee
members that the meeting is postponed by falsifying the signature of the committee chairman.
Sending a false Bomb scare.
E). If by the use of force, there must be no public uprising else the crime is sedition
2. Disturbance of Proceedings Under Article 144. This includes:
A. Actual disturbance of the meetings of congress, local legislative bodies and their committees
or sub committees. Example: cutting off the electric power; noise barrage
B. Behaving in any manner as to disturb the proceedings: such as singing, farthing; loud
laughter; (what about sending of a shut-up note?)
3. Violation of Parliamentary Immunity under Article 145.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. This is the crime committed by any person who (i) searches or arrests a member of congress
while congress is in session unless it is for an offense punishable by more than 6 years of
imprisonment or (ii) prevents, by any means, a member of congress from delivering any speech
before congress or its committees.
B. Members of congress enjoy (i) immunity from being held liable for any speech made on the
floors of congress and (ii) immunity from arrest while congress is in session. Presumably this is
to enable them to attend to their legislative duties. They cannot therefore be arrested unless it is
for a crime punishable by more than 6 years imprisonment.
C).This privilege attaches to the legislator by virtue of his office and is enjoyed by him even if he
is not actually joining the sessions of congress.
D). The immunity from arrest covers both warrantless arrest and arrest by virtue of a warrant.
They include offenses committed prior to his election to congress.
E). Session refers to the year long regular session or special session and not the day-to-day
session.
Art. 146 Illegal Assemblies
A. Assembly means a meeting or gathering or group of persons, whether in a fixed place or moving, as
a meeting inside a bus. There are two kinds of illegal assembly:
1. A meeting where the purpose is to commit any felony and attended by armed men. If there are
no armed persons, there is no illegal assembly
2. A meeting where the audience are incited to commit treason, rebellion, sedition or assault
upon persons in authority or their agents. It is not necessary that there are armed persons.
B. In both the persons liable are the (1). Leaders or organizers and (2) the persons present in
attendance. If a person present is with an unlicensed firearm, it will be presumed as to him that the
purpose of the meeting is commit a felony and he will be deemed the leader.
C. If the meeting is to commit an act punished by special law, such as drug pushing or to engage in
gun running, there is no illegal assembly even if all participants are armed.
D. If the assembly is in the public places defined by BP. 885, what will apply may be The Public
Assembly Act
Art. 147. Illegal Association
A. Concept: those associations organized for the purpose of committing any felony or for some purpose
contrary to public morals. These include the criminal gangs as the Kidnap for Ransom Gangs, Bahala
Na Gang; Siguesigue Commandos.
B. What is punished is the act of forming said association and becoming a member thereof. The
persons liable are the founders, organizers, and members.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Be it noted that R.A 1700 which outlawed the Communist Party of the Philippines and declared it
an illegal association has been repealed. Hence membership therein is not punished.
C. The association is still illegal even if it is duly registered with the SEC as what matters is not the
stated purposes in its registration papers but the actual and hidden purposes.
Crimes Against Persons in Authority and their Agents
A. They include: (1) Direct Assault (2) Indirect Assault (3) Resistance and Disobedience and (4)
Disobedience to Summons of Congress and Constitutional Commissions
B. Distinctions between:
1. Public officer- any person who takes part in the performance of public functions in the
government (Art. 203)
2. Person in authority( PIA)- one who is directly vested with jurisdiction to execute or enforce the
laws
3. Agent( APIA)- one who is generally charged with the maintenance of peace and order and the
protection and security of life and property
4. Hence a public officer is not necessarily a PIA or APIA but the latter are always public officers.
Art. 148. Direct Assault
I. There are two kinds the first being: Without a public uprising by employing force or intimidation to
attain any of the purposes of rebellion or sedition. This is very rare.(Rebellion by a few.) It is the second
form which is commonly committed.
II. Second kind is committed when, without a public uprising, the offender: (i) Attacks (ii) Employs force
(iii) Seriously intimidates or seriously resists (iv) Any person in authority or his agent (v) while engaged
in the performance of official duties or on the occasion thereof (vi) knowing him to be such.
III. Requirements:
A. There must be no public uprising otherwise the offense becomes sedition, or rebellion
B. There must be an attack or employment of force or serious intimidation, upon the person of the
victim. This includes any offensive or antagonistic movement of any kind, with or without a weapon.
This may be an actual physical contact or the instilling of fear or threat of an evil on the person of
the victim, but not on his property.
1. Examples: boxing, pointing a gun, brandishing a weapon, shouting and berating, challenging
to a fight, throwing an article at him
2). The degree of force required depends on whether the victim is a PIA or APIA. In case of a PIA
actual force is not necessary because mere laying of hands is sufficient, such as by pushing or
shoving him or pulling at his collar. If he were an APIA, actual force is required because mere
laying of hands would constitute simple resistance.
3). As to intimidation and resistance the same must be serious and actual whether the victim is a
PIA or APIA otherwise the offense is resistance and disobedience under article 151.
C. The offended party must be a PIA or a APIA and has not yet been separated from the service.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Thus the crime is committed even if at the time of commission the PIA/APIA is on leave, on
vacation, or under suspension, but not when he has retired or was dismissed or removed.
1. The following are PIAs:

a). Any person directly vested with jurisdiction i.e he has the power to govern, execute the
laws and administer justice.
i). The elected officials
ii). Those related to the administration of justice
iii). Those in the line agencies occupying positions which are policy determining; on the
regional or provincial level or city level in chartered cities
b). Teachers, professors and persons charged with the supervision of public or duly
recognized private schools, colleges and universities. They must be within the school
premises during school hours or are actually performing the tasks outside the school
premises
c). Lawyers in the actual performance of their professional duties or on the occasion of such
performance.
Note that teachers and lawyers are PIAs only for purposes of Direct Assault and Resistance
and Disobedience but not for purposes of Indirect Assault
d). Under the Local Government Code: (a) the Punong Barangay, (b) Sanguniang Barangay
members and (c) members of the Lupong Tagapamayapa
2. The following are APIAS:

a. Those who, by direct provision of law, or by election or by appointment, are charged with
the maintenance of public order and the protection of life and property ( AGENTS PROPER)
such as :
(i). Law Enforcement Agents such as the PNP and the NBI irrespective of their rank
(ii). Barangay Tanods
(iii). But Members of the AFP are not included
b. Those who carry out or implement the orders of PIAs who are their immediate superiors
(i) Municipal treasurers as agents of the Provincial Treasurer
(ii) The Postmaster as agent of the Director of Posts
(iii) Sangguniang Secretary
(iv) Clerks of Court
3. Any person who comes to the aid of PIA who is under direct assault. ( AGENTS BY
ASSISTANCE)
Note that if a teacher or lawyer is the person who comes to the assistance of the PIA, then
he is considered as an APIA.
4. Thus private persons may be victims but to a limited extent: (i). when they are considered by
law as PIAs or APIAs such as teachers and lawyers (ii). and those who come to the aid of PIAs
D. The requirement of scienter. The accused must know the victim is a PIA/APIA which fact must
be alleged in the Information
1. There must be a clear intent on the part of the accused to defy the authorities, to offend,

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
injure or assault the victim as a PIA/APIA. The offense is against the office represented by the
victim.
IV. Time of the Assault:
1. If the assault is engaged in the performance of official duties the motive of the accused is
immaterial. As long as the victim was assaulted in his office or in the premises where he holds
office, or even while on his way to office, it is not required that he was actually doing an act
related to his duties.
However if the PIA/APIA was performing an act which is unlawful, or highly irregular, and was
the reason for the attack, there should be no direct assault as the attack may well be the result
of righteous indignation. Example: gambling, peeping, smoking drug
2. If not on the performance but thereafter and elsewhere then the motive is important as the
assault must be because of the past performance of official duties by the victim. The length of
time between the performance of the duty and the time of the assault is immaterial. If the motive
cannot be established, there is no direct assault but some lesser offense.
V. Rule When Material Injury Results: The crime of Direct Assault aims to punish lawlessness and
defiance of authority and not the material injury which results from such defiance. When material injury
however results, the following are the rules:
1. Where death, serious or less serious physical injuries result, they are to be complexed with direct
assault. Example: A policeman was shot death while directing traffic: the crime is Homicide with
Direct Assault
2. If only slight physical injuries are committed, the slight physical injury is a qualifying circumstance
if the victim is a PIA but it will be absorbed if the victim is an APIA ( PP. vs. Acierto, 57 Phil. 614)
VI. When the Attack does not Constitute Direct Assault:
1. If both accused and victim are PIAs/APIAs and they contend or there is conflict arising from the
exercise of their respective functions or jurisdictions. Examples:
(a). A fight between the Incumbent Mayor and the Acting Mayor as to who shall occupy the
office
(b). NBI vs. Police concerning who shall take custody of a suspect
2. Where the PIA/APIA act with abuse of their official functions, or when they exceed their powers
they are deemed to be acting in a private capacity. They become aggressors and the accused has
a right to defend himself.
3. Where they voluntarily descend to matters which are purely personal. But not when the PIA/APIA
is dragged down to purely personal matters by the accused.
VII. Qualified Direct Assault:

1. When the accused lays hand upon the victim who is a PIA
2. When the accused is himself a Public Officer or employee

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
3. When the assault is with a weapon i.e an object other than a part of the body capable of
inflicting injury
ART. 149. INDIRECT ASSAULT
I. Concept: The crime committed by any person who uses force or intimidation upon any person coming
to the aid of an APIA who is under direct assault. The person who is assaulted should not be a PIA
because the third person automatically becomes an APIA and the attack on him would constitute direct
assault also.
1. The APIA is an agent proper such as a law enforcement agent. Direct Assault is being
committed against him, not merely Resistance or Disobedience.
2. A Third person comes to his assistance. It is not required that the assistance be by virtue of the
order or request of the APIA. The third person need not know that the person he is assisting is
an APIA.
3. The third person is himself attacked. This is the gist of indirect assault.
II. Illustrations:
A. Examples: 1. A policeman is having a hard time pushing a suspect inside a police car because
the suspect is pulling back. A third person who came to help put the suspect inside the car was
kicked by the suspect. The kicking of the third person constitutes Physical Injuries merely. The police
is not under Direct Assault.
B. Example 2. The Mayor is pushed and shoved while on his way home by an irate person whose
house was demolished. A vendor who pulls the Mayor away is himself slapped. The crime on the
Mayor is direct assault and the crime on the third person is also direct assault.
But if the third person directs the vendor to stop but the vendor tells him not to interfere, the
crime against the third person would be resistance under Article 151.
C. Example 3. X came to help The Chief of Police who was being pushed and shoved by vendors
who were not allowed to sell on the sidewalk. X was also kicked and boxed and thrown to the ground.
Y came to help X but was himself kicked and boxed. What is the crime against Y?
ART. 151. Resistance and Disobedience
I. Concept: The crime committed by any person who shall resist or seriously disobey any PIA or APIA
while engaged in the performance of official duties.
A. The essence is the failure to comply with, or refusal to obey, orders directly issued by the
authorities. Such orders are peremptory and not merely a declaration of facts or rights. They are
directed to the accused for compliance or implementation without allowing any exercise of discretion
by him.
B. Whether it be resistance or disobedience depends upon the degree of defiance by the offender
C. Examples:
1. Refusal to submit to the authority of the police and proceed to the police station by

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
pushing and shoving the police

2. Refusal to hand over one‘s driver‘s license when required to do so
3. Refusal to vacate premises despite writ issued by court to place a party in possession, or
disobeying a writ of injunction
4. Refusal to give up article subjects of lawful seizure
5. But merely questioning the manner of arrest is not resistance
II. It is distinguished from direct assault thus:
a. In assault the force employed is more serious, unless the offended party is PIA
b. Resistance and disobedience can only be committed on the occasion of actual performance of
duties by the offended party
c. Direct assault is committed in 4 ways, not just by resisting and disobeying
Public Disorders
Art. 153. Tumults and other disturbances of public order
I. Causing any serious disturbance in a public place, office or establishment

1. This includes those in private places where public functions or performances are being held
2. Examples: challenging people to a fight inside city hall or at the market; unruly behavior at the
corridors of Justice Hall
3. Firing a gun within the premises of a public building, and if somebody was hurt there is a
separate crime of reckless imprudence resulting to physical injuries
II. Interrupting or disturbing performances, functions or gatherings or peaceful meetings, if the act is
not included in Article 131 and 132
1. The act must not be the crime of Prohibition, interruption or dissolution of peaceful meetings (
Art. 131) or Interruption of Religious worship ( Art. 132)
2. Example: throwing bottles at the stage during a Miss Barangay Coronation; intentional loud
singing and derisive laughter by the losing candidates during the oath taking of the winning
candidates of the school student organization
3. If while addressing the employees, the mayor was stoned by the accused the crime is the
complex crime of direct assault with disturbance of public order
III. Making an outcry tending to incite rebellion or sedition in any meeting association or public place
1. The outcry must not be intentional premeditated but is an emotional outburst or an on-the-spot
utterances, otherwise the crime is inciting to sedition or rebellion if the utterances were pre-
planned with the expectation that the crowd would re-act positively
IV. Or displaying placard or emblems which provoke a disturbance of public order in such place
V. Burying with Pomp the Body of a Person Legally Executed. These persons have been proven guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of a heinous crime. They should not be made martyrs or heroes else it would
create hatred on the part of the public.
VI. The first two acts ( A ) and ( B) are punished with a higher penalty if it is tumultuous in character
i.e. committed by more than 3 persons who are armed or provided with means of violence

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 154. Unlawful Means of Publications
I. This is the second limitation to the Freedom of the Speech and of the Press. Mass media is supposed
to provide information on matters of public interest, to entertain, to serve as medium for the expression
and free exchange of opinions and ideas. But when, under the guise of dissemination of news and
information, it instead causes disturbance to public peace and order, then a criminal prosecution is
justified.
II. It is Committed in four ways:
A. Publishing or causing to be published as news any false news which may endanger the public
order, or cause damage to the interest or credit of the state.
1).Not any false news gives rise to prosecution. Only those which affect public order give rise to
a prosecution. Yellow journalism or sensationalism do not ipso facto constitute a violation of this
article.
2). Thus publishing that a woman gave birth to a fish-baby is not the news contemplated. But
publishing falsely that the Congress has decided to impeach the President is punishable.
3). To publish need not be by print media but may be oral, as in radio or TV announcements.
B. Encouraging disobedience to the law or to the authorities by praising, extolling any act punished
by law. Example: praising the act of the Magdalo soldiers as a supreme sacrifice worthy of emulation
by all soldiers.
C. Malicious and unauthorized publication or premature publication of official resolutions or

documents. These resolutions may still be withdrawn or amended. Example: publishing a Resolution
of the City Prosecutor‘s Office before it is officially docketed and mailed to the parties. The intention
must be to cause damage.
D. Printing publishing or distributing periodicals or any published material, which do not bear the
printer‘s name or those classified as anonymous. These are those publications the subject or
contents of which are prohibited by law, such as obscene materials.
Art. 155. Alarms and Scandal
I. These offenses must be caused in public places or must affect public peace and tranquility but the
disturbances are only of minor degree, or not as serious or tumultuous as those under Article 153.
II. The word ―Alarms‖ are acts which frighten or scare people, causes them to panic or to become
nervous, uneasy and tense. The word ―Scandal‖ has no reference to acts of indecency or affecting
public morals which are properly the subject of Grave Scandal.
III. There are four acts punished:
A. Discharging any firearm, rocket or fire cracker or other explosive in any town or public place which
caused alarm or scandal

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1). The gun should not be pointed at any person or in the general direction of a person
2). It does not matter that the gun was fired within the premises of one‘s house so long as there
were people who were disturbed.
3). If a gun is pointed at any person the following are the possible crimes:
(a). Grave threats if the gun is not discharged

(bi). Illegal discharge if fired but there is no intent to kill
(c). If with intent to kill and the gun is fired resulting to a harm, it is homicide, frustrated or
attempted homicide depending on the actual material injury
(d). If fired but with intent merely to injure; it is slight, less serious, or serious physical injuries
(e). If the pointing or firing is to compel the victim to do something or to prevent him from
doing something lawful, it is grave coercion. If it be to compel the victim to hand over
personal property, it becomes robbery.
B. Instigating or taking part in any charivari or other disorderly meeting offensive to another or
prejudicial to public tranquility.
1). charivari means mock serenade or simply making noise from materials, not music, and the
purpose is to disturb public peace. It should not be directed to any particular individual else it is
unjust vexation.
2). It need not be committed at night
3. Example: banging on cans, drums, stomping on the floor
C. Disturbing the public peace while wandering about at night or while engaged in other nocturnal
activity. Examples are:
1). shouting at night even if by a vendor
2). holding a party in one‘s house but with loud music
3). partying or quarreling in the street
4). jamming or acting as street musicians
D. Causing any disturbance or scandal in public places which are only slight and not tumultuous.
Examples: (i) a drunk walking, spitting, bad-mouthing and/or bumping passers-by (ii). or the act of
two people fighting each other in the market (iii). becoming a public nuisance .
Art. 156. Delivering Prisoners from Jail
I. Concept: This is the crime committed by a person who removes/springs a prisoner from jail or helps
him escape. It is a crime involving public disorder because it causes people to be angry, frightened,
fearful and critical of the public authorities.
II. The prisoner may be a mere detention prisoner or a prisoner by final judgment. The correct
description now is PERSON DEPRIVED OF LIBERTY ( PDL)
III. The offender is usually an outsider to the jail i.e he is not a jail guard. But a jail guard may be liable
if he was not then on duty at that time he removed or assisted in the removal of a prisoner form jail.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
IV. The act of removal may be by any means, such as substituting him with another, but if the method
used is violence, intimidation or bribery, then the offense becomes qualified and the penalty is higher.
Note that the act of bribing is not a separate offense but becomes a qualifying circumstance.
V. What is the liability of the prisoner who escaped?
1. If he is a convict, he is liable for evasion of service of sentence

2. If a mere detention prisoner, some say he is liable if he cooperated with his removal. But if he
himself escaped, some say he does not incur any liability however if he is later convicted for his
crime then he will not be entitled to an Indeterminate Sentence.
3. Personal opinion: he is liable for he delivered himself from jail
Evasion of Service of Sentence
Introduction: Evasion means to escape or to avoid serving a penalty. Only prisoners who have been
sentenced by final judgment are liable for evasion. The penalty of the accused must be one of
imprisonment or destierro. There are three kinds of evasion:
1. Evasion by Escaping under ordinary circumstances (Article 157)
2. Evasion by Escaping on the occasion of a disorder or mutiny ( Art. 158)
3. Evasion by Violation of a Conditional Pardon (Art. 159)
ART. 157. Evasion by Escaping
I. Concept: the crime committed by a prisoner by final judgment who escapes during the term of his
imprisonment, or, having been sentenced to destierro, shall enter the designated prohibited area. ( Note
the escapee is referred to in police/prison parlance as a Jailbird)
II. In case of destierro, the penalty for the evasion is also destierro.
1. Question: Is there evasion if the prisoner enters the prohibited area due to an emergency? Such
as bringing a loved one to the hospital or attending a burial? The principle of avoidance of a greater
evil may be invoked.
III. In case the prisoner voluntarily returns, his liability remains but the penalty maybe mitigated as this
is analogous to voluntary surrender
ART. 158. Evasion on the Occasion of Calamities
I. Concept: There is a disorder, widespread panic and confusion resulting from a conflagration,
earthquake, explosion or similar catastrophe, or a mutiny in which he has not participated; a prisoner
by final judgment escapes or leaves the penal establishment; he fails to give himself up to the authorities
within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation by the Chief Executive announcing the passing
way of the calamity.
II. It is not the act of escaping which constitutes the evasion because it is normal for people to try to
save their lives during a catastrophe or calamity. What gives rise to the crime is the failure to return or
to give himself up or to return within 48 hours
III. If the prisoner returns within 48 hours, he is given a deduction of 1/5 of his original sentence for

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
loyalty. If he fails to return, his penalty is 1/5 of the remaining sentence but not to exceed 6 months.
Those who did not escape are given a deduction of 2/5.
IV. The term mutiny does not include prison riots but subordinate prison officials rising against their
superiors. If the escapee participated and escaped, he is liable for evasion under Article 157.Neither
does it include mass jail breaks.
V. QUESTIONS: (1) Will the foregoing provision apply to prisoners in the provincial or city jails? (2)
Suppose it was a death convict who, while awaiting his execution, escaped ?
ART. 159: Other Cases of Evasion of Service of Sentence
I. Concept: This is in truth Violation of Conditional Pardon. A convict accepted the grant of a conditional
pardon, which thus becomes a contract between him and the Chief Executive. This has the effect of
suspending the enforcement of a sentence, or which exempt the convict from serving the unexpired
portion of his prison penalty.
II. Requirements:
1. The violation usually consists of the commission of another offense
2. The prisoner must first be convicted by final judgment of the other offense
3. The violation or commission of another offense must be during the remaining period of the
sentence. If the commission was after the lapse of the remaining unserved portion of his
original penalty, he may be required to continue serving his original penalty if the terms of the
condition were such that the condition will continue even after the lapse of the unserved
portion of his penalty.
III. The liability therefore of the accused consists of: (1) Prosecution for the new offense and (2)
Prosecution for Violation of Conditional pardon and (3) Administrative, or to serve his sentence upon
order of the President (recommitment). This is independent of his criminal liabilities.
IV. Illustration:
1. Convict served 5 years of his 12 years sentence for robbery and then he accepted a conditional
pardon. He must comply with the conditions or he should not commit any offense during the 7 year
period. If within the 7 year period he committed physical injuries, then the consequences are as
follows:
a) He will be prosecuted for Physical Injuries
b) If found guilty then he will be prosecuted for Violation of Conditional Pardon
c) The President may order him to serve his original sentence. This is upon the discretion
of the President.
2. If the physical injury was committed after the lapse of 7 years, the convict is not liable for
Violation of Conditional Pardon. He will just be liable for the new offense he committed.
However, the President may, at his discretion, order that the convict go back to jail to serve the
remaining 7 years of his original sentence, if so provided in the pardon.
V. Penalty for Violation:

A. Prison correctional minimum if the remitted portion ( i.e the portion which was not served is up to

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
6 years). This is why it is said that Violation of Conditional Pardon is a substantive offense.
B. No new penalty if the unserved portion is more than 6 years. This is the reason for the view that
Violation is not a substantive offense.
Art.160 Commission of Another Crime During the Service

of Penalty for Another Previous Offense
I. This is the special aggravating circumstance of Quasi-Recidivism or the commission of another

offense by a convict before beginning to serve his sentence for a previous offense or while serving the
same.
II. The first offense may be any crime but the second must always be a felony
III. The legal consequence is that the penalty for the new offense will be in its maximum period
irrespective of ordinary mitigating circumstances
IV. The new offense may be committed: (i) while the convict is being transported to prison (ii) while in
prison or (iii) during the period of time that he escaped from prison
V. If the new offense and old are both under the same title of the Revised Penal Code, it will be quasi-
recidivism which will be favored over recidivism in view of the intention of the Code to punish those who
commit an offense even after having been already convicted.
TITLE FOUR: CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST
I. Concept: These are crimes which involve deceit, misrepresentation, or falsity against the public at
large. If the misrepresentation or deceit or falsity was purposely availed of against a particular person
the same will constitute estafa.
II. The crimes are grouped into three categories:
A. Forgeries: these refer to deceits involving:

1. The seal of the government, the signature and stamp of the chief executive
2. Coins
3. Treasury or bank notes, obligations and securities of the government
4. Documents
B. Other Falsities: these are deceits pertaining to : (1). Authority, rank or title (2) Names (3)
Uniforms and insignias and (4) False Testimonies
C. Frauds or acts involving (1) machinations in public biddings and (2) Combinations and
Monopolies in Restraint of Trade and Commerce
A. FORGERIES
I. Those involving the seal of the government, the signature, or stamp of the Chief Executive.
A. The acts punished are: (1). The act of counterfeiting the seal of the government (2). Forging

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
the signature of the Chief Executive or his stamp and (3). Using the forged signature or counterfeit
seal or stamp
B. The act of forging the signature is ordinarily punished as falsification but it is set apart as a distinct
crime with a much higher penalty (reclusions temporal) to emphasize its gravity
C. The act of counterfeiting or forging the signature must be on what purports to be an official
document purporting to have been signed by the Chief Executive in his official capacity, other wise
the offense is ordinary falsification
D. Example: (i). In what purports to be an appointment paper or grant of a pardon bearing the
heading of the Office of the President (ii). Forging the signature in a private thank- you- letter is
falsification
E. In the crime of using, the user is a third person not the forger or counterfeiter
II. Those involving coins: (a) Counterfeit/false or (ii) mutilated coins
A. Counterfeit/false coins- those not authorized by the Central bank to be minted for circulation as
legal tender. They include coins which have been demonetized so as to prevent the accused from
using his skill upon genuine coins
1. The acts punished

a. The act of counterfeiting, minting or making
b. The act of importing
c. The act of uttering- passing of as legal tender
d. Possession with intent to utter. Thus possession of coins as a collection is not punished
B. Mutilated Coins- these are genuine coins or coins of legal tender whose intrinsic value has been
diminished due to the diminution of their metallic contents.
1. The acts punished:

a. The act of mutilating or any act upon the coin the purpose of which is to accumulate the
metallic contents, such as by chipping off a portion, scraping its surface or boring a hole
b. The act of selling, importing or uttering
c. Possession with intent to utter
C. Related Laws (1). Pres. Decree No. 247: (Penalizing the defacing, mutilation, burning or
destruction of central bank notes and coins) has modified Article 164. (2) R.A. 427: which punishes
the act of amassing coins in excess of P50.00
III. Forgeries committed upon Treasury or Bank Notes, Obligations and Securities
A. This is related to Banking and Finance. The subject matter are papers in the form of obligations
and securities issued by the government as its own obligations which are also used as legal tender
B. Not included are paper bills as the crime relative to them is ―counterfeiting‖

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
C. They do not include commercial checks
D. The reason is to maintain the integrity of the currency and to ensure the credit and standing of
the government
E. Examples are:
1. Bonds issued by the Land Bank in connection with the Land Reform Program
2. Postal Money Orders
3. Treasury Warrants
4.Treasury Certificates
5. Sweepstake Tickets ( Lotto tickets?)
F. The Acts punished are :
1.The act of forging or Forgery consisting of either:
(a). giving to a treasury or banknote or any document payable to bearer or to order, the
appearance of a true and genuine document. Such as the act of manufacturing or producing
fake treasury warrants.
(b). erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering, by any means, the letters, figures, words
or signs contained therein.
Note: (i).if the note does not resemble a true and genuine document in that it can not possibly
fool any person the act is considered as frustrated forgery
(ii). Where the accused encashed a treasury warrant by posing and signing as payee, the crime
is falsification
2. The act of importing or uttering
3. The act of possession or use
(a). Possession must be with intent to utter

(b). Possessor must know the notes are forged
IV. Forgeries Upon Documents
A. The proper term is Falsification
B. Document is : (1) any writing, whether paper based or in any solid surface, which is complete,
creating rights or extinguishing obligations, or defining the relations between persons. Examples:
deeds and contracts, receipts, promissory notes, checks (2) a writing used as evidence of the facts
contained in the document such as death/birth certificates; clearances, medical records, x- rays;
driver‘s license
C. General Classification: (In falsification, it is essential to specify the document falsified)
1. Falsification of Legislative Document punished under Art. 170- bills, resolutions, ordinances

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
whether approved or pending approval, by any legislative body

a). the act of falsification is limited to alterations of a genuine legislative document
b). if by any other means, such as simulating a legislative document, the offense is ordinary
falsification, such as counter feiting the signature of the Secretary who issued it.
2. Falsification of a Non-Legislative Document

a). Document proper under Article 171 and 172
b). Wireless, Telegram, cablegram, telephone Messages under Article 173
c). Certificates under Article 174
D. Kinds of Documents Proper
1. Public Documents: they consists of the following
a). Those which embody the official acts of a public officer such as Decisions/Resolutions;
Administrative Orders; Marriage Contract; Oaths of Office
b). Those issued by a public officer or in which he participates, virtute officii ( by virtue of his
office) such as clearances;designation of personnel; receipts, certificates of appearance.
These are the so called ―Official Documents‖.
Thus all official documents are public documents but not all public documents are official
documents
c). Those acknowledged before a Notary Public such as deeds and conveyances
d). Private documents: when the falsification is punished as falsification of a public document:
(i). when the act of falsification is upon a private document which already formed part of the
public records ( Public by Incorporation) such as private deeds submitted to the office of
the Register of Deeds; acknowledgment letter sent to the Local Civil Registrar; Protest letters
to the Assessor‘s Office; libelous letters offered as exhibits in a trial; letters formally seeking
opinions; application letters as part of the 201 file of a government official.
(ii). When it is upon a private document which are intended to form part of the public record
( Public by Intention)
Per Monteverde vs. PP ( Aug. 12, 2000) involving falsification of sales invoices required by
the BIR, it was held: ― If the document is intended by law to be part of the public or official
record, the preparation of which being in accordance with rules and regulations issued by
the government, the falsification of that document, although it was a private document at the
time of the falsification, is regarded as falsification of public or official documents‖
Examples: Falsification of Civil Service or Bar Exam Booklets; Application letters and
personal data sheets sent to personnel officers.
Query: What about attendance sheets during seminars or conferences?
Note: In case of falsification of Travel Documents (Visa, Passport, and any document
submitted in connection therewith) the law applicable is R.A. 8239 or the Philippine Passport
Act.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
2.Commercial Documents: (a). those used by merchants or business people to promote trade or
credit transactions or commercial dealings and (b) those defined and regulated by the Code of
Commerce or other commercial laws. Examples: commercial checks; sales receipts and invoices;
trust receipts; deposit and withdrawal slips and bank passbooks; tickets issued to passengers;
enrollment forms; grades.
3. Private Documents: any other document, deed or instruments executed by private persons
without the intervention of a notary public or of other persons legally authorized, by which some
disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced or set forth. Examples: unnotarized deeds, letters,
private receipts, class cards, time records in private employment. Vouchers of business people
are private, not commercial, documents ( Batulanon vs. PP, 502 SCRA 35)
E. Importance of distinguishing Falsification of Public from Falsification of Private Documents
1. As to penalty: a higher penalty is imposed for falsification of public documents
2. As to modes of commission: there are 8 ways of falsifying a public documents as against 7 as

to private documents
3. As to complexing with Estafa: Estafa cannot be complexed with Falsification of Private

document. The reason is because both have a common element which is damage
a). The crime is falsification if the deception cannot be committed without falsification, i.e. the
falsification is committed as a means to commit estafa.
b). It is estafa if the estafa can be committed without the necessity of falsifying a document
4. As to requirement of damage: In falsification of a private document the act of falsification must

be coupled with either (a) actual damage even if there was no intent to cause damage or (b) an
intent to cause damage even if no actual damage resulted. In falsification of public document, the
gravamen of the offense is the perversion of truth; the loss of faith and confidence by the public
in the document even if there is no actual damage to the public
F. Principles Involving Falsification:
1. The Falsification maybe complexed with the crimes of Estafa ( save private documents)
malversation or theft
2. Maybe committed intentionally or through negligence

a). Examples through negligence: (i) The Register of Deeds who issued a duplicate title without
noting on its back a notice of the encumbrances (ii) A Clerk who issues a certified true copy of
a birth certificate but inadvertently copied the wrong entries (iii) a person who signs a check to
accommodate a payee without verifying the payee‘s identification
b). Thus the accused who is charged with intentional falsification may be convicted for
falsification thru negligence without amending the Information because the former includes the
latter ( see PP vs Uy 475 SCRA 248).
3. As to the liability of Heads of Offices as final approving authority if it turns out the document to
which they affixed their signatures contains falsities:

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a). The Arias Principle ( Arias vs. Sandiganbayan, 180 SCRA 315) as reiterated in Magsuce
vs. Sandiganbayan ( Jan. 3, 1995) holds: ― All heads of offices have a right to rely to a
reasonable extent on their subordinate and on the good faith of those who prepared the
documents, and are not liable for the falsification‖
b). Exceptions: (i). Where there is a clear evidence of conspiracy with the authors (ii) if through
their negligence, they brought about the commission of the crime. Thus in PP. vs. Rodis the
Head of Office was held liable where the document signed by him contained anomalies which
were glaring in the document.
4. The following are accepted as defenses
a). Good faith and lack of intent to pervert the truth. As in the case of a co-employee who
signed for another in the payroll because the latter was sick
b). Alterations which are in the nature of corrections such as changing the civil status from
single to married in a Community Tax Certificate
d). Alterations which do not affect the integrity or veracity of the document. Example: The
Certification by the treasurer that he paid the salary on July 10 when in truth it was on July 12
e) Minor inaccuracies as in a deed of sale which declared the consideration was paid in cash
when it was paid in two installments
5. Presumption of Authorship of the Falsification:

a). In the absence of satisfactory explanation, one found in possession of and who used a
forged document is the forger of said document. If a person had in his possession a falsified
document and he made use of it, taking advantage of it and profiting thereby, the clear
presumption is that he is the material author of the falsification. ( Nierva vs. PP. 503 SCRA 114).
b). For the presumption of authorship of falsification to apply, the possessor must intend to profit
or had profited from the use of the falsified document (Eugenio vs. People, March 2, 2008)
6. There is a ruling that generally, falsification of public/commercial documents have no attempted

or frustrated stages unless the falsification is so imperfect that it may be considered as frustrated.
(Personal Opinion: the crime should be consumated since what was frustrated was not the act
but the purpose of the offender)
7. There are as many falsifications as there are documents falsified; or as there are separate
acts of falsification committed by one person within the same period of time
a). The falsification of several signatures in one payroll, or one document, is only one crime of
falsification
b). The falsification of several document give rise to separate offenses even if the falsification
was made simultaneously
8. Falsification is not a continuing crime
V. Proof of Falsification.
A. An allegation of forgery and a perfunctory comparison of the signature/handwritings by

themselves cannot support a claim of forgery, as forgery cannot be presumed and must be proved

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
by clear, positive and convincing evidence and the burden of proof lies on the party alleging forgery.
B. Criteria to determine forgery or falsification: per Ladignon vs. CA ( 390 Phil. 1161 as reiterated in
Rivera vs. Turiano ( March 7, 2007)
The process of identification must include not only the material differences between or among the
signatures/handwritings but a showing of the following:
(i) the determination of the extent, kind and significance of the resemblance and variation ( of the
handwriting or signature)
(ii) that the variation is due to the operation of a different personality and not merely an expected
and inevitable variation found in the genuine writing of the same writer
(iii) that the resemblance is a result more or less of a skillful imitation and not merely a habitual and
characteristic resemblance which normally appears in genuine handwriting
ART. 171. Falsification by public officer, employee, or notary

or ecclesiastic minister
I. Coverage: this article provides: (1) the penalty of falsification if committed by a public officer or
employee or a notary or an ecclesiastical minister. The penalty is higher than if committed by a private
person. The document may be any document. (2) And the eight acts of falsification.
A. The public officer must take advantage of his official position or that there was abuse of office. By
this is meant that his functions include participating in the preparation, recording, keeping, publishing
or sending out to the public of the falsified document otherwise he will be punished as a private
person. As for instance: secretaries, the Clerk of Court; the record officers; those who issue receipts
or licenses; the Register of Deeds; Local Civil Registrar.
B. As for an ecclesiastic, the document he falsified must affect the civil status of a person, else he
will be considered as a private person. The usual document involved is a marriage contract
II. The acts of falsification:
A. By counterfeiting, imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric. To counterfeit a handwriting or

signature is to create one that is so similar to the genuine as to make it difficult to distinguish and
thus easily fool the public. This act includes creating or simulating a fictitious handwriting or signature
B. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not in
fact so participate
1). There is no need to imitate the signature or handwriting
2). This includes simulating a public document like a Warrant of Arrest as having been issued by
a judge
3) Examples: impersonating a person in a document like a notary public or party to a contract;
voting in place of a registered voter, posing as payee if a negotiable instrument in order to encash
the same
C. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other than

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
those in fact made by them.

1). This is twisting the statements or putting words into the mouth of another
2). Substituting a forged will where the accused is now named as an heir in lieu of the original
where he was not so named
3). Where the accused was instructed to prepare a Special Power of Attorney over a parcel of
land, with himself as the agent but he instead prepared a deed of sale with himself as the vendee
4). The Dean instructs the secretary to publish an announcement that classes on Friday be
suspended but the secretary included Saturday.
D. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts
1). This require that (i) the accused knows that what he imputes is false (ii) the falsity involves a
material fact (iii) there is a legal obligation for him to disclose the truth and (iv) such untruthful
statements are not contained in an affidavit or a statement required by law to be sworn to.
2). by legal obligation is meant that the law requires a full disclosure of facts such as in a public
official‘s Statements of Assets and Liabilities; the Personal Data Sheet submitted to the NBI; the
contents of an Application for Marriage; the Community Tax Certificate.
3). An example for private documents would be the data required by the school to be stated in
the enrollment form or the personal bio-data in a job application.
4). Narration of facts means an assertion of a fact i.e about things, people, events, time,
occurrences, conditions, and similar circumstances, and does not include statements of opinion
or conclusions of law. Thus when the accused placed himself as ―eligible‖ in his statement of
candidacy when in truth he is disqualified, this is not a narration of fact but a conclusion of law.
Similarly, the accused as claimant to a land stated in his application that he entitled to the
ownership when under the law he is disqualified, is not liable.
Question: where an heir executes an Affidavit of Self Adjudication naming himself as the only heir
but knowing there is another heir is the statement a conclusion of law or a statement of a fact?
5). There is no falsification if there is some colorable truth in the statement of facts by the accused
6). False statements in an application form of the Civil Service, which was under oath, for police
examination, is perjury not falsification
7). But when a third person, not the Affiant, alters a prepared Affidavit, the crime committed by
him is falsification under mode number 6.
E. Altering true dates. This requires that the date must be material as in the date of birth or
marriage; date of arrest; date when a search warrant was issued; date of taking the oath of office.
F. Making alterations or intercalations in a genuine document which changes its meaning. The
change must affect the integrity of the document. It must make the document speak something false
so that alterations to make it speak the truth cannot be falsification, such as changing the date from
August 21, 1955 to 8/21/55.
1. Changing the grades in one‘s Transcript of Records

2. Changing one‘s time of arrival in the DTR
3. Changing the stated consideration a deed of sale

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
4. Deleting a condition in a contract of lease
G. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be an original when no such original

exist, or including in such copy a statement contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine original.
1. This can only be committed by the Official Custodian of documents
2. Example: Issuing a Certified True Copy of a birth certificate of a person when no such
certificate exists or
3. Issuing a true copy of a title and indicating therein the land is mortgaged when no such
encumbrance exist on the original on file with the office
H. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol, registry or
official book
1. Example: Inserting a Birth Certificate in the recorded of the Civil Registrar to make it appear
the birth was recorded
ART. 172. Falsification by a private individual and

Use of falsified documents
I. Punishes these acts: (1) If the falsification is by a private person and the document falsified is a
public or commercial document (2) Falsification by any person of a private document and (3) Introducing
in any judicial proceeding a falsified document or (4) Using a falsified document in any transaction
II. There are only seven acts of falsification of a private person. In the falsification of a private document,
the element of damage includes damage to honor.
III. In introducing a falsified document in a judicial proceeding, damage is not required. Example: The
act of the defendant in introducing a falsified receipt to show that the debt was paid, or a falsified birth
certificate to show the age; or a false certificate of employment to prove damages.
IV. In the crime use of a falsified document, the user is not the falsifier but a third person, who must
know the falsity of the document. When a person is charged but is acquitted as the author of the
falsification he may still be liable for knowingly using a falsified document.
ART. 173. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegram

and telephone messages
!. Acts punished: (1) The act of falsifying said messages (2) Uttering of said falsified messages and
(3) Using such falsified damages with intent to cause damage or to the damage of third persons
II. The acts of falsifying and uttering:

1). The offender must be officers or employees of the government or of a private entity engaged in
the business of sending or receiving such messages
2) Examples: making up a false ―break-up‖ telegram or decreasing the number of the words in a
message even if the contents are not changed

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
III. The crime of using may be committed by any person

IV. These crimes are rendered passe by availability of cellphones
Crimes Affecting Medical Certificate, Certificates

of Merit and the Like
A. Acts punished:
1. Issuing a false medical certificate by a physician or surgeon

a). The contents are not true in that the person was never examined; or that he actually had no
illness; or that the illness is not as serious as stated in the certificate; or that the period of
confinement or rest is not as stated therein.
2. Issuing a false certificate of merit or service, good conduct or similar circumstances by a public
officer
a). as in the case of a barangay captain who issues a Certificate of Good Moral Character to a
bully , or a head of office who issues a Certificate of Exemplary Conduct to an employee with
several disciplinary penalties
3). The act of falsifying by a private person of medical certificate or certificate of merit
a). The name of the crime is Falsification of a Medical Certificate or Certificate of Merit to
distinguish it from ordinary falsification
b). Example: the patient who altered the period of days of confinement
4. The act of knowingly using said false certificates
Art. 175. Manufacturing and Possession of instruments

or implements for falsification
Acts punished:
1. Making any instrument or implements intended to be used in the crime of counterfeiting or

falsification.
a). Examples: false seals, false branding instruments
b). The tools need not be a complete set
2. Introducing into the Philippines of said instruments or implements
3. Possession of said implements with animus utendi or intent to use
OTHER FALSITIES
Note: the subject of these falsities are not papers, instruments or documents but : (1) official authority
or functions; (2) rank, title, names, (3) uniforms and insignias and (4) testimonies under oath. These
are also capable of being falsified or subjected to acts of deception
Art. 177. Usurpation of Authority or official functions

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. Usurpation of Authority- the crime committed by a person who knowingly and falsely represents
himself to be an officer agent, representative of any department or agency of the Philippine government
or foreign country.
1. The representation must be active, i.e by words or acts and the accused need not actually perform
any function pertaining to the office misrepresented. What is punished is the act of false
misrepresentation. He who does not object when introduced as a ranking official is not guilty of
usurpation.
2. This is different from the crime of Usurpation of Powers under articles 239 to 241 which deals
with interference in the functions of one department by another department
3. This includes any government owned or controlled corporations
4. Example: a private person greets tourists, gives them the key to the city, welcomes them, by
declaring that he is the city mayor
B. Usurpation of Functions- the crime committed by any person who actually performs an act pertaining
to a public official of the government or any agency thereof accompanied by a pretense that he is such
public official.
1. There must be a pretense or falsie assertion of being a public official. In the absence thereof,
there is no usurpation of functions.
a) Thus one who enters a public school and starts teaching pupils, without claiming to be a
teacher, is not liable. Same with one who asks questions on witnesses about a crime
without asserting he is a police investigator. Or one who directs traffic might be performing
a civic action.
b) One who introduces himself to be an NBI agent and begins interrogating witnesses is
liable. As with one who claims to be a BIR agent and begins going over the books of a
businessman, or one who claims to be with the Department of Labor and starts inquiries
as to the employment status of employees.
c) There is such a crime as Seduction through Usurpation of Official Functions.
2. The offender may himself be a public official who assumes a position without color of law. As in
the case of a number one councilor who took over the position of the mayor who was on leave
despite opinions that it be the vice mayor who must be the acting mayor.
3. However, if the authority or function usurped pertains to a diplomatic, consular or other accredited
officers of a foreign government, the offender is also liable under R.A. 75.
Art. 178. Using Fictitious Name and concealing true name.
A. Using Fictitious Name is the act of publicly using a name other than one‘s registered or baptismal
name for the purpose of either to: (1) conceal a crime (2) evade judgment or (3) cause damage to public
interest
1. A fictitious name is any name which a person publicly applies to himself without authority of law.
2. The purpose is material even if it is simply to cause confusion among the public
3. If the purpose is to cause damage to a private person‘s interest, the crime may constitute estafa
4. If the purpose is to obstruct justice the offense is punished under P.D. 1829

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
5. The use of Aliases is punished under C.A. 142 as amended by RA 6085
In Ursua vs. CA (256 SCRA 144) reiterated in PP vs. Estrada ( 583 SC RA 303), it was held that to
be liable for Illegal Use of an Alias ( a name or names used publicly and habitually usually in business
transactions in addition to one‘s real name by which one is registered at birth or baptized the first
time, or substitute name authorized by competent authority) there must be a sign or indication that
the user intends to be known by this alias in addition to his real name from that day forth. Publicity
(unlike in libel) is more than mere communication to a third person … but must be made openly, in
an open manner or to cause it to be generally known. In order to be liable for violation of CA142, the
user must have held himself out as a person who shall publicly be known under that other name i.e.
the intent to publicly use the alias must be manifest.
B. Concealing True Name and other Personal Circumstances- the purpose is to conceal one‘s
identity. Such as for instance: to avoid giving support or to avoid debtors.
C. When may a person use a name other than his registered or baptismal name?
1. When allowed by the court in a petition for a change of name
2. When used in the field of entertainment, literature or sports
a). Pen names of authors ( nom de plume) such as Mark Twain, Saki. Plaridel
b). Names in the entertainment industry: Screen Names
(i). Nicholas Cage ……………………..Nicholas Coppola
(ii). Tom Cruise.………………………. Tomas Mapother IV
(iii). John Denver………… Henry John Deutschendorf Jr.
(iii). Bob Dylan ………………………..Robert Zimmerman
(iv). Enya………………………………Eithne Ni Bhraonian
(v). Eminem………………………….….. Marshall Mathers
(vi). Whoopie Goldberg……………………. Caryn Johnson
(vii). Elton John……………………………….Reginald White
(viii). Joseph Estrada………………….. …….Joseph Ejercito
(ix). FPJ………………………………………...Ronald Poe
c). Sport‘s Monickers such as ―Flash‖: Speedy‖‖ Bata‖, ―Sugar‖ ―Marvelous‖; ―Ocho Cinco,
―Pacman‖. The use is limited and not allowed in official or business transactions
d). nom de guerre such as: ―Dante‖, ―Che‖
e). nicknames
3. When allowed by law such as when a woman marries or when a person is legally adopted
4. Under the Witness Protection Program in order to protect the identity and safety of the
witness
Art. 179. Illegal use of Uniform or Insignia
I. The act punished is the public and improper use of any insignia, uniform or dress pertaining to an
office not held by the accused or to a class of persons of which he is not a member.
A. Examples: unlawful use of ecclesiastical habit of a religious order; school uniforms; uniform of the
boy‘s scout; the regalia of the Knights of Columbus
II. If the uniform, insignia, badge, emblem or rank, medal, patch or identification card pertains to
members of the military what applies is R.A. 493. If it pertains to the uniform, regalia or decoration of

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a foreign state, it is punished under R.A. 75.
III. The use must be malicious i.e. to give the impression that the accused is a member of the office or
class and thereby enjoy the prestige and honor of that office or class.
FALSE TESTIMONY
INTRODUCTION
1. In its most comprehensive sense, the crime called False Testimony involves the act of lying under oath or
under a solemn affirmation to tell the truth. It may be committed in judicial, administrative or legislative
proceedings where a person bound himself to tell the truth. It includes also false statements made in documents
so long as the statements were made under oath. The penalty depends on the kind of proceedings where the
false testimony was given.
2. False testimony is always intentional and cannot be committed by negligence. Perjury requires malice and
cannot be willful where the oath is according to belief or conviction as to its truth ( Villanueva vs. Secretary
of Justice 495 SCRA 475)
3. If the false statement is made in the course of judicial proceedings, the name of the crime is False Testimony
which in turn is classified as follows:
a. False Testimony in Criminal Cases which may either be False Testimony against a defendant ( accused) or
False testimony favorable to the accused
b). False Testimony in Civil Case
c) False Testimony in other cases
4. If the false statement is made in administrative or legislative proceedings, or in documents, the name of the
crime is Perjury.
5. In all of these crimes, it is not a defense that the false testimony was not believed or was not given any
weight or that it did not affect the decision or outcome of the case. It is enough that the accused intended to
perpetuate or impose a lie. However if the statements were not made under oath, the accused does not commit
False Testimony but he may be liable for contempt or Falsification, if the false statements were made in
documents.
False Testimony Criminal Cases
A. Against an Accused (Art. 180)
1. The persons liable are usually the Prosecution witnesses

2. The crime by the principal accused must be FELONY. This is because the penalty to be imposed upon the
false witness is based on whether the principal accused is acquitted or convicted. And in the latter case, the
penalty of the principal accused is the basis for the penalty for the false witness.
3. The prescriptive period therefore begins after finality of the decision against the principal accused.
4. If the crime against the principal accused is a violation of a special law, which does not adopt the scheme of
penalties under the RPC, the false witness is liable for False Testimony in other cases. The same is true if the
principal accused is charged for a felony the penalty of which is up to 6 months.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
B. False Testimony In Favor of an Accused (Art. 181)
1. The persons liable are the defense witness or prosecution witness who turned hostile.
2. As to the accused who testifies falsely in his defense, he is not liable because such testimony is part of his
right to due process and to raise a defense. However, where he falsely imputes the commission of the crime to
a third person, then he is liable upon complaint of the third person falsely implicated.
3. The penalty depends on what felony was the principal accused charged of and not on the outcome of the
case. Hence the prescriptive period is governed by the general rule.
C. False Testimony in Civil Cases
1. The persons liable include the parties themselves.

2. The penalty depends on the amount involve in the case i.e whether it exceeds P5,000.00 or not, or can not
be estimated.
D. False Testimony In Other Cases (Art. 183)
1.These cover all other proceedings in court other than the regular criminal or civil cases, such as special
proceedings .Example: Ejectment cases; Petition for Change of Name, Issuance of Lost tiles, Petition for
Habeas Corpus.
2.They however include criminal cases where a witness falsely testifies against the accused but the crime by
the accused is not a violation of the RPC but for violation of a special law which does not adopt the scheme of
penalties under the RPC; as well for felonies punishable by not more than 6 months imprisonment.
E. Perjury
1. It includes: (a) false statements in non-judicial proceedings such as in the course of a preliminary
investigation, or in administrative cases, or in official inquiries (b) false statements in affidavits, sworn
statements/declarations, or in some other documents so long as it is under oath.
2. Perjury in affidavits or sworn statements require the following elements:

a). There must be a deliberate assertion of falsehood. It is always intentional. The accused is aware the fact
stated him is false so that if the accused honestly believes the matter to be true but is false, he is not liable
as malice is absent.
b). the statement must be made under oath i.e. he swears before an officer authorized to administer oath
that the facts stated by him are true
c). the statement is made upon a material matter which is either

(i). the main fact which is the subject of inquiry
(ii). Or any circumstance which tends to prove the main fact
(iii). any fact or circumstance which tends to corroborate or strengthen testimony relative to the subject
of inquiry
(iv). Which affects the credibility of a witness
d). the statement is required by law or by a the office or person concerned

e). The written statement must have been actually submitted to the person or office concerned

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
3. In case of two contradictory statements made/given in two different bodies, it must be shown which of the
2 statements is the false statement in order that the proper charge can be determined.
4. Venue for perjury in sworn statements are: (i) where the document is used and (2) where the oath was
taken
As a rule the venue is the courts of the place where the affiant swears and subscribes to his affidavit…if in
lieu or as a supplement to actual testimony made in a proceeding that is neither criminal or civil, venue
may either be at the place where the sworn statement is submitted or where the oath was taken as the taking
of the oath and the submission are both material ingredients of the crime committed ( Union Bank of the
Phil. Vs. PP, Feb. 28, 2012)
F. Offering False Testimony in a judicial or official proceeding.
1. One who procures a false witness is liable as a principal by inducement. Hence the persons liable for this
offense are the parties.
FRAUDS
Art. 185. MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC AUCTIONS
A. Concept: The crime committed by any person who intends to cause the reduction of the price of a thing
auctioned and shall either (1) solicit any gift or a promise as a consideration for refraining from taking part in any
public auction, and (ii) attempt to cause bidders to stay away from an auction by threats, gifts, promises or any
other artifice.
B. When a thing is sold it is either through a direct sale to a particular individual or through public bidding. Public
bidding is preferred in order to obtain the best and most advantageous price. This is especially true with respect
to judgment debtors in case of judgment sales. The best and highest price is achieved by leaving it to any interested
buyer to offer a better price over those offered by others. Any a scheme so that the article will be sold at a low
price, is called machination.
C. In the second mode, the threat, coercion or force, is absorbed but the bribery is a separate offense.
D. Examples:
1. X knows Y is interested to buy a piano worth P250,000.00 being sold at an auction. X approaches Y and
says he can bid as high as P250,000.0 but will not bid if Y just give him P25,000.00 so that Y has no competitor.
2. Y wants to buy the piano and knows that X is ready to bid against him. He tells X not to bid and accept
P25,000.00 instead.
ART. 186. MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN

RESTRAINT OF TRADE
A. Introduction:
1. In an open market economy, the price of goods is supposed to be determined by the relationship of supply
and demand. Hence, any act, scheme or strategy, by which the prices of goods and commodities are
intentionally affected, are punished. This includes practices such as such as resorting to artificial

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
shortage or hoarding of goods, spreading false rumors.
2. Likewise there should be free competition in the market.
B. Article 186 punishes any scheme of a person or persons to monopolize goods and commodities, including all
acts to kill competitors, such as under pricing of goods.
1. Article 186 serves as the general law on Anti-Trust to implement the constitutional provision that “No
combination in restraint of trade or unfair competition shall be allowed”.
2. However, Article 186 is ineffective in the face of conglomerates, mergers and combinations of big
companies, hostile takeovers of rival corporations; and the diversification of the products of big companies;
mass production of goods by companies so that they can afford to sell at prices lower than those offered by
retailers.
Frauds in Commerce and Industry
A. Crimes involving Metal Products: Articles made of precious metals such as gold, silver, are supposed to bear
marks, brands or stamps, which must indicate the actual finesse or quality of said metal products i.e carat, so as
not to deceive the public. Hence Article 187 punishes the act of importing, selling or disposing off these articles
knowing that their actual finesse is not indicated in their brand, mark or stamps.
B. As to deceptions involving trademarks, trade names and service marks, the acts punished relative thereto, such
as: Infringement, Unfair competition, Fraudulent Registration, False Designation of Origin; are punished by the
Intellectual Property Code.
Title Five. Crimes Relative to Opium and Other Prohibited Drugs
( The provisions of Article 190 to 194 have been repealed. First there was R.A. 6425 known as the
Dangerous Drugs Law of l972 as amended by R.A. 7659. This law has in turn been replaced by R.A.
9165 otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. Some salient provisions
are summarized hereunder).
A. Change in the classification of dangerous substances. The old classification between Prohibited and
Regulated Drugs have been replaced by classifying dangerous substances into (i) Dangerous Drugs
(DD) and (ii) Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals (CP/EC)
DD and CP/EC are not defined but refer to those substances which are enumerated in the list of
schedules prepared and adopted by International Conventions.
B. Factors Affecting Criminal Liability:
1. The kind of dangerous substance involved: the penalty is higher if what are involved are DD.
2. The Act performed by the accused such as:
a. Importation
b. Sale, trading, dispensation, delivery, distribution and transportation. (Note: The quantity of
the substance involved is immaterial)

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
― A successful prosecution for illegal sale of a prohibited drug requires the concurrence of the
following elements: (i) the identity of the buyer and seller, (ii) the object of the sale, and the
consideration and (iii) the delivery of the thing sold and (iv) the payment therefore‖ ( PP. vs.
Garcia, 529 SCRA 519) and present the object in court.
c. Maintenance of a den, dive or resort
d. Being an employee or visitor of a den, dive or resort (scienter is required)
e. Manufacture of a DD or CP/EC or drug paraphernalia
f. Illegal chemical diversion
g. Possession of a DD
(i). The possession of different substances give rise to separate charges of possession even if
the drugs were seized in the same place and occasion ( PP. vs. Empleo, 503 SCRA 464; PP.
vs. Tira 430 SCRA 134). Thus one may be charged for possession of Marijuana separate from
possession of shabu (methamphetamine hydrocloride)
(ii). One may be charged for sale of shabu and a separate charge of possession of another
gram of shabu which was not the subject of the sale
(iii). One charged for sale or delivery may be convicted of possession if the sale or possession
was not proven
(iv). In this charge of possession, the quantity of the substance determines the penalty to be
imposed
(v). Possession may be actual or constructive. ―Actual possession is when the drug is in the
immediate physical possession or control of the accused… constructive possession exists
when the drug is under the dominion or control of the accused or when he has a right to exercise
dominion or control over the place where it is found‖ ( PP vs. Tira,430 SCRA 134)
Thus a person may be convicted for possession of drugs found inside his bedroom even
if at the time of the seizure, he was physically absent there from ( PP vs. Torres, Sept. 12,
2006)
h. Possession of DD or drug paraphernalia during parties, social gatherings or meetings or in

the proximity of at least two persons ( these are new provisions)
i. Use of DD provided the accused is not charged for possession
j. Cultivation or culture of plants classified as DD or sources thereof. This need not be in a
plantation. One plant of marijuana in a flower pot is included
k. Offenses by physicians and drug stores: (i) failure to maintain and keep records of
transactions of any DD or CP/EC (ii) Unnecessary prescription (iii) Unlawful prescription
l. Two new acts are included:
(i). Acting as a Financier: a person who pays for, raises, or supplies money for, or underwrites
any of the illegal activities involving dangerous substances
(ii). Acting as a Protector or coddler: a person who knowingly and willfully consents to the
unlawful acts provided for in the law and who uses his influence, power or position in shielding,
harboring, screening or facilitating the escape of any person whom he knows or has grounds
to believe has violated the provisions of this Act in order to prevent the arrest, prosecution and
conviction of the violator
m. Attempt or conspiracy. Note that the law does not include possession as being the subject of
an attempt or conspiracy ( Is this omission intentional or by oversight? )

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
3. The Quantity of the dangerous substance if the act is that of possession
4. The presence of special aggravating circumstances.
a). These vary according to the act of the accused. Thus in the act of importing: that the accused
is a diplomat or a financier. In cases of sale, delivery, administration or transporting: that it took
place within a radius of 100 meters form a school; the use of a minor or a mentally incapacitated
person; or that the victim is a minor or a mentally incapacitate person; or that the DD is the
proximate cause of the death; or that the suspect is a financier
b). The application of these circumstances is doubtful considering that the penalties provided for
by the Act do not follow the nomenclature and scheme of the penalties under the Revised Penal
Code and they do not have periods
C. New Acts punished: The law seeks to address certain abuses by law enforcers as well as causes
of unsuccessful prosecution or dismissal of drug cases filed in court.
1. Creation of a new qualifying aggravating circumstance applicable to offenses under the Revised
Penal Code consisting of a ― POSITIVE FINDING FOR THE USE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS‖. This
must be corroborated by a confirmatory drug test.
a). Under the old law what constituted an aggravating circumstance was that the accused
committed a crime” while under the influence of drug”. Under the new law, the accused need
not be high on drugs during the time of committing of a crime so long as the test showed he is
a user of drugs.
b). The application of the new qualifying aggravating circumstance poses a problem to felonies
which do not have qualified forms such as parricide, threats, physical injuries, robbery. ( In such
a case it is suggested the circumstance must be appreciated as a special aggravating to give
meaning to the intent of the congress to punish more severely the users who commits crimes)
2. Defining and Penalizing the offense of “Planting of Evidence” i..e planting of any dangerous
substances in the person, house, effects, or in the immediate vicinity of an innocent individual for the
purpose of implicating, incriminating or imputing the commission of any violation of this Act‖
a). If what is planted is not a dangerous substances the crime is that of Incriminating an
Innocent Person/Incriminatory Machination under the Revised Penal Code.
b). The penalty is (death) reclusion perpetua.
3. Penalizing any public officer who misappropriates, misapplies or fails to account for the
DD/CP/EC, paraphernalia, proceeds or properties obtained form unlawful acts. ( Note: Consider this
as Malversation or Infidelity of Dangerous Drugs, Drug paraphernalia and Drug Proceeds)
4. Penalizes the following acts of law enforcers: (The acts may also constitute Obstruction of Justice)
a). Failure or refusal after due notice, to appear as witnesses for the prosecution
b). Failure of the immediate superior to exert reasonable efforts to present the witness in court

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
c). Failure of the immediate superior to notify the court of the transfer or re-assignment of a
witness during the pendency of the case to another territorial jurisdiction. Note that the transfer
of re-assignment to the witnesses to another territorial jurisdiction must only be for compelling
reason and provided the court was notified 24 hours in advance.
5. Defines and Penalizes the act of Delay and Bungling in the Prosecution of Drug Cases i.e.
the prosecution causes the unsuccessful prosecution or the dismissal through patent laxity,
inexcusable neglect or unreasonable delay. There must first be an Order of dismissal or Judgment
of acquittal, based on the fault of the prosecution.
6. In case of conviction:
a). the convict suffers the accessory penalty of disqualification to exercise civil rights and
political rights and that these rights are suspended during the pendency of an appeal from such
a conviction.(This might be open to constitutional attack)
b). After conviction by the RTC: there shall be hearing for the confiscation and forfeiture of
unexplained wealth of the accused. In case the article declared forfeited is a vehicle, the same
shall be auctioned not later than five days from the order of confiscation or forfeiture
7. Prohibition against plea bargaining and disqualification from probation for those convicted of
drug trafficking
8. Provides as a ground for removal from office of an elective official; that of having benefited from
the proceeds of drug trafficking or receipt of any financial or material contribution or donation from
persons found guilty of drug trafficking.
D. Provisions Against Acts affecting the Integrity of the evidence or their possible appropriation by
agents:
1. Conduct of a Physical Inventory and Photographing of the Evidence

a. Immediately upon the arrest, seizure or confiscation
b. In the presence of (i) the accused or person from whom the articles were taken or his
representative (ii) a representative form the DOJ (iii) representative from the Media and
(iv) an elected official. These persons must also sign the written inventory
2. Submission of the article within 24 hours to the Crime Laboratory for Quantitative ( how many
kilos or grams) and qualitative ( what kind of substance was involved) examination
3. Requirement that the results of the crime laboratory examination must be under oath
4. Upon the filing of the Information in Court:
a. Conduct of an ocular inspection or examination of the evidence by the court within 72 hours.
This may be in the place were the evidence are kept if the same cannot be presented in court, or
the evidence are actually brought and presented in court.
b. Destruction of the articles within 24 hours following the inspection but representative samples
are taken and preserved
5. Destruction of the representative samples after conviction, forfeiture and confiscation of other
proceeds of the crime and

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
E. Provisions intended to benefit the drug dependent- the following are applicable only if the charge is
for the use of DD/CP/EC :
1. Community service in lieu of imprisonment

2. Exemption from Criminal Liability for first time offenders who underwent treatment and
rehabilitation in a Drug Rehabilitation Center under the supervision of the Dangerous Drugs Board
and were discharged thereafter
3. Suspension of sentence of a Minor First Offender
a). A minor is one who is over 15 at the time of the commission of the offense but below 18 at the
time of sentencing
b). The suspension is discretionary upon the court. Contra the Family Court Law ( RA 8369) which
provides that the suspension is mandatory)
c). The minor is placed under the supervision of the Dangerous Drugs Board and is for a period
ranging from 6 to 18 months
d). Upon favorable recommendation by the Board the court shall discharge the accused and
dismiss all the proceedings
e). All records shall be expunged and the minor shall not be criminal liable for perjury for
concealment or misrepresentation of refusal to acknowledge or recite any fact concerning his
case.
F. Provisions to expedite drug cases:
1. The Preliminary Investigation shall be terminated within 30 days from filing and the Information
hall be filed within 24 hours from the termination of the investigation
2. Trial shall be terminated not later than 60 days from date of filing of the Information
3. The decisions shall be rendered within 15 days from submission for decision
G. Miscellaneous Provisions:
1. Requirement of a Mandatory Drug Test in the following:

a). Application and renewal of driver‘s license
b). Application for firearm‘s license or permit to carry
c). Annually for Officers and members of the AFP, PNP and other law enforcement agencies
d). The provision as it refers to all persons charged before the Prosecutor‘s Office for an offenses
punishable by imprisonment of not less than 6 years and one day has been invalidated in Lacerna
vs. PDEA, Nov. 3, 2008) because, as to them the test can never be random or suspicionless as
they are singled out and impleaded against their will, the test violates their right to privacy and
they are virtually forced to incriminate themselves.
e). For all candidates for public office whether appointive or elective, national or local :Note that
this was declared to be unconstitutional in so far as the position of the president, vice-president
and members of Congress are concerned because the requirements for such offices are as
prescribed by the constitution.
2. Requirement of a Random Drug test
a). For high school and college students with parental consent and subject to the rules and

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
regulations of the student handbook because they waive their right to privacy when they seek
entry to the school and they voluntarily submitted their persons to the parental authority of school
authorities.
b). For officer and employees of public and private offices subject to the company‘s work rules
and regulations. The constitutional soundness of the mandatory, random and suspicionless drug
testing proceeds from the reasonableness of the drug test policy ( Lacerna vs. PDEA)
3. Strengthening and Professionalization of the Fight against Drug Menace:

a). Creating of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency ( PDEA) as the implementing arm of the
Dangerous Drugs Board
b). the NARCOTICS group of the other law enforcement agencies are abolished
c. Establishment of a PDEA ACADEMY which shall be responsible for the recruitment and training
of PDEA agents and personnel and whose graduates shall comprise the operating units of the
PDEA
H. Principles based on Jurisprudence:

1. Drug cases are where the principles of Instigation and Entrapment are most often applied
2. Buy-bust operations are recognized as one of the most effective means of arresting criminals in
flagranti. Where the arrest is due to a buy-bust the presentation of the buy-money is not essential,
and as a general rule, the identification and presentation of the civilian informer is considered
privileged
3. If the accused is a CICL and the penalty is Life Imprisonment, said penalty shall be understood to
be Reclusion Perpetua thereby the minor is still entitled to all the beneficial effects arising from his
minority, such as the reduction of the penalty by degrees
4. The physical evidence shall be marked and inventoried at the place where they were confiscated
in order to satisfy the requirement of Proper Chain of Custody of object evidence. However it was
ruled that ―non-compliance with the prescribed procedure does not necessarily render the seizure
and custody of the items void and invalid… provided (a) there is a justifiable ground for the non-
compliance and (b) the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items were shown to have been
properly preserved‖ (PP. vs. Jhon Jhon Alejandro, August 10, 2011).
5. Chain of Custody: the recorded movement of the evidence from the time it was confiscated until
it is presented in court showing that it was handled or taken possession of only by persons who had
the right or duty or authority to handle the said evidence
Title Six. Crimes Against Public Morals
GAMBLING AND LOTTERY
A. Introduction: The law on gambling exemplifies the adage that what is legal is not necessarily moral.
Although gambling is under the title Crimes Against Morals, the law on gambling does not take morality
into consideration. It does not punish gambling per se because they adversely affect public morals, but
what it punishes are gambling games which are not covered by a franchise or permit from the
government.
B. The applicable laws are: (1) Presidential Decree No.1602 : (Simplifying and Providing Stiffer

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Penalties for Violations of Gambling Laws) and (2). R.A. No. 9287 ( An Act Increasing the Penalties
for Illegal Numbers Games, Amending Certain provisions of P.D. 1602 and for Other Purposes).
C. Meaning and coverage of Gambling :

1. Gambling games refer to any game or scheme whether upon chance or skill, wherein wagers
consisting of money, articles of value or representatives of value, are made.
2. It is the fact that bets are made which makes the game a gambling game. The game may be
decided purely on chance, purely on skill, or both i.e. partly by chance and partly by skill.
3. It becomes illegal and therefore prohibited if it is not authorized by a franchise.
4. However parlor games are exempted such as those during wakes, unless it clearly appears that
the wake is unnecessarily prolonged as to be a cover or excuse to conduct illegal gambling.
D. Basis for Liability: A mere spectator is not liable. An accused must participate in an illegal gambling
game in any of the following manner:
1. Participating as a bettor
2. Acting as a personnel or staff: such as being the guard or look-out; usher, cook, washer or
entertainer
3. Allowing one‘s vehicle, house, building, or land, to be used in the operation of an illegal
gambling game
4. Acting as a collector or agent
5. Acting as coordinator, controller or supervisor
6. Acting as a maintainer, manager, operator
7. Acting as a financier or capitalist
8. Acting as a protector or coddler
9. Possession of Gambling paraphernalia or materials
10. Failing to abate or to take action or tolerating, by a public official, of a gambling game within his
jurisdiction
11. Any parent, Guardian, or persons exercising moral authority or ascendancy over a minor, ward
or incapacitated person who induces or causes the latter to participate in an illegal numbers
game
E. Penalties: If the foregoing pertains to any numbers game the penalties are specifically those
provided for in R.A. 8287
F. Lottery: A form of gambling whereby prizes are distributed among persons who have paid, or
agreed to pay, a valuable consideration for the chance to obtain a prize. It requires (i) a consideration
(ii) chance or hazard and (iii) prize. Examples are raffle games.
1. Question: When are promo sales or advertising schemes considered lottery/gambling? (These
refer to the practice of advertising goods for sale offering the purchasers a chance to win a prize by
giving them coupons to be drawn later).
Answer: The scheme is considered a lottery or gambling if: (1) the public pays more than the price
of the article because the excess is used to defray or cover the cost of the prize or (2) the article is
not saleable without the prize and it becomes saleable only because of the prize.
Offenses Against Decency and Good Custom

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 200. Grave Scandal
A. Concept: It is a crime consisting of the performance or doing any act which is highly scandalous as
to offend against decency and good custom.
1. The act, either a physical observable activity or audible noise, both of which scandalizes those
who see or hear them. As for instance the act of engaging in a torrid kissing, urinating or
defecating or going around in scanty attire, or loud obscene sex noises. Is farthing loudly
scandalous if done near where people eat?
2. They must be done either: (a) In a public place i.e where people usually go or congregate such
as in parks, movie houses, bazaars, malls. In these places the presence of third persons is not
required. (b) Within public knowledge or public view. This refers to private houses, rooms,
grounds, veranda, but the noises made are so loud or the acts can be seen by third persons. The
third person must not however be a Peeping Tom.
B. The act must not be punished under any other provision of the Code as this is a crime of last resort
or a catch-all crime.
C. The scandalous acts affect public morals or sensitivity and have nothing to do with violations of
public peace and tranquility. Thus two persons fighting or shouting at each other in a public place would
constitute Alarm and Scandal. But when these same two persons engage in a strip tease contest in full
view of people, the act would be Grave Scandal.
Art. 201. Immoral Doctrines, Obscene Publications and

Exhibitions and Indecent Shows.
A. Persons or acts punished:
1. Those who expound or proclaim doctrines contrary to public morals

a). As for instance advocating polygamy or wife-swapping or killing off the mental/physical
retardates to improve the Filipino race
b). What about advocating same-sex marriage? Or advocating abortion or divorce or that kids
be introduced to sex and birth control? Or opening an exclusive ‖nudist camp‖?
2. In reference to Obscene literature:
a). The authors if they had knowledge of the publishing of their works. Thus writing an obscene
literature is not per se punished but if the authors allow said works to be circulated to any third
person, then they become liable. If the work is stolen and circulated without their knowledge, they
are not liable.
b). The editors publishing such literature
c). The owners/operators of the establishment selling the same
3. In reference to obscene, indecent, or immoral plays, acts or shows:

a). The persons who exhibit them including the producers, actors, movie house/theater owners
b). These include plays, acts, shows which

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
(i) glorify criminals or condone crimes. Does the movie ―The Godfather‖ fall under this
category?
(i) serve no other purpose but to satisfy the market for violence, lust, or pornography
(i) offend any race or religion
(iv) tend to abet traffic in and use of prohibited drugs
(v) are contrary to law, public order, morals, good customs, established policies, lawful
orders, decrees and edicts
4. Persons who sell, give away, or exhibit films, prints, engravings, sculptures, or literature, which
are offensive to morals. Hence mere possession of pornographic literature is not per se punished. It
is the act of distributing to people or circulating the same which is punished. Letting one person
borrow or read is not however distributing.
B. A prosecution for obscenity under this Article is the third limitation to the Freedom of Speech and
Press. Among those considered as ―unprotected speech and which may be subject to prior restraint
(content-based regulation) are obscene or pornographic literature, shows, movies, or films‖ see
Chaves vs. Gonzales (545 SCRA 441).
C. There are no standards to determine that which is obscene (foul, detestable, repulsive, ―censored‖,
indecent, taboo, disgusting). Obscenity is addressed to the sexual morality of a community which differs
from time to time and from culture to culture).What is lewd (i.e what is crude and offensive in a sexual
way) is not necessarily obscene. Nudity is not by itself obscenity. Thus the act of a lady walking down
a street exhibiting a very tight and short skirt maybe lewd but is it obscene? There is such a thing as
―artistic nudity‖, ―erotic art‖ or the permitted commercial nudity, as the advertisement of underwear, or
where sex is implied though not explicitly depicted.
D.Various Tests used by Philippine Courts
1. Per U.S. vs. Kottinger ( 1923):
a). Tendency to Corrupt Test- whether the matter has a tendency to deprave or corrupt those
whose minds are open to such immoral influence and into whose hands a publication or other
article charged as obscene may fall.
(This test is too subjective and does not offer an objective criterion. A matter may corrupt
one person but may have no effect on another. What are obscene to children is not necessarily
obscene to adults).
b). That which shocks the ordinary and common sense of man as indecency. (This is vague.
Moral values vary according to circumstances of time, place and occasion)
2. (Commercial or profit motive) PP vs. Go Pin ( 1955): In reference to pictures if these were used
not exactly for art‘s sake but rather for commercial purposes, the pictures are not entitled to be
protected.
3. (Impure motive or theme of a picture) per PP. vs. Serrano a Court of Appeals case in l950
4. (Redeeming element) PP vs. Padan (1957) the work must have some redeeming element
5. (If the performance elicits or arouses sexual reactions) as in PP vs. Aparici where the gyrations

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
and erotic dancing by the woman who was scantily dressed elicited shouts from the audience.
This would apply to strip tease acts or bold shows or live sex acts.
6. Gonzales vs. Katigbak (1985) followed the trend in the United States and adopted the test laid
down in the case of Roth vs. California which was later modified in Miller vs. California which set
the following guidelines:
a). Whether the average person, applying contemporary standards, would find that the work
taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interest ( those which are dirty, intended to arouse sexual
cravings, things which have something to do with unsafe or unhealthy sex).
b). Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct
specifically defined by the applicable law
c). Whether the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value
d). QUERRY: Can there be such a thing as ―Art for Arts sake‖?
(Personal opinion: Any human endeavor, especially in the field of arts must be to uplift or
improve man either materially, spiritually or aesthetically. They must contribute to what is
universal, good, and beautiful)
e).QUERRY: Why is the so called ― Vagina Monologues‖ not considered obscene?
6. May smut or pornographic materials be seized from vendors in the street? The case of Pita vs.
Ct. of Appeals ( 178 SCRA 362) laid down the following guidelines:
a). The authorities must apply for the issuance of a search warrant from a judge, if in their
opinion, an obscenity rap is in order
b). The authorities must convince the Judge that the materials are obscene and pose a clear
and present danger of an evil substantial enough to warrant state interference and action
c). The Judge must determine on a case-to-case basis if the materials are obscene
d). If in his opinion the Judge finds probable cause he may issue the search warrant
e). The proper criminal case must then be filed in court
Personal Opinion: If the magazines, comics or periodicals, pictures or VCD tapes being sold are
however clearly pornographic, the seller is actually violating Article 201 and hence he may be
arrested in flagranti delicto and the article seized right on the spot. The Pita case should not be made
to apply to situations such as this, or where the vendor or the articles might disappear before the
search warrant is issued. Otherwise the Pita decision would stifle and defeat the intent of the law to
prevent and punish pornography.
E. If a work, such as a movie, has been approved by a government agency for public viewing or
reading, a charge under Article 201 will not prosper.
QUERRY: If a woman who is scantily dressed poses and walks about in a public place, she may be
charged for grave scandal. But when she starts gyrating erotically, the charge would be Violation of
Article 201 for obscene acts.
Art. 202. Vagrants and Prostitutes (This has been repealed)
I.( Is this a crime against status?) There are four kinds of Vagrants:

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. (The Lazy one). A person with no apparent means of subsistence, but physically able to
work, neglect to apply himself to some lawful calling
a). It is not being unemployed per se which is punished but the refusal to look for work .
The lack of work opportunities must however be considered.
2. (The Tourist). Any person found loitering about public or semi public buildings or places,
or tramping or wandering about the country or streets without visible means of support.
3. (The bugao and maton) An idle or dissolute (immoral, lax, unrestrained) person who
lodges in houses of ill fame, ruffians (barairongs in Ilokano) or one who habitually
associates with prostitutes
a. Absence of visible means of support is not required hence wealthy people may
be vagrants under this mode.
4. ( The suspicious stranger) One found loitering in any inhabited or uninhabited place
belonging to another without any lawful or justifiable reason
a. The vagrant may have wealth
b. This is a preventive measure to prevent the commission of some other more
serious offense
c. The estate is not fenced
II. Vagrancy is thus one of three crimes which may be committed when a person is found loitering
inside the estate of another. The two others are:
a). Trespass to property where the accused, without prior consent of the owner, entered a
fenced estate and there is a clear prohibition against entering
b). Attempted Theft if the estate is fenced and the purpose is to hunt or fish or to gather farm
products
III. Prostitutes: a woman who habitually engages in (I) sexual intercourse or (2) or lascivious
conduct, for money or profit.
a. Habitually means not just an occasional intercourse or lascivious but it signifies that the
woman resorts to sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct as a means of livelihood, or to
support herself or to maintain a lifestyle.
b. Profit may include being financed in a lady‘s schooling, payment of rentals or by way of
articles of value
c. If the lady agrees that she will not any more sleep with other men but will become the
exclusive bed partner of one man, in exchange for an apartment or house, she is still a
prostitute. But when they become lovers, she is no longer a prostitute.
d. Example of Lascivious conduct: strip tease dancing before men, or kissing or fondling or
being fondled
e. A man who engages in nude dancing for a fee, as well as call boys, cannot be charged
for prostitution but for vagrancy
f. Question: Must the partner of the prostitute be a man in case of lasciviousness conduct?
IV. Related offense: Mendicancy under P.D. 1563 which punishes those who uses begging as a
means of living as well as those giving money.
V. Non applicability of the article to CICLs.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Title Seven. Crimes Committed by Public Officers
!. Introduction: Although the offenders are principally public officers, there are crimes under this title
which may also be committed by private persons by themselves as such, like if the crime of Infidelity in
the Custody of a Prisoner and Malversation by a Private person under Article 222. They may also be
liable when they conspire with the public officer or when they participate as accomplices or accessories.
II. The term public officer, per article 203, is any person, who, by direct provision of law, popular election
or appointment by competent authority, shall take part in the performance of public functions in the
government, or shall perform in said government or in any of its branches public duties as an employee,
agent or subordinate official of any rank or class.
A. There is no distinction between a public officer and a public employee so long as the person: (i)
takes part in performance of public functions or (ii) performs public duties.
B. It is not the nature of the appointment which counts but the duties performed. They may be
permanent, temporary or casual officers. Hence one appointed as mere laborer but whose function
is to sort and file money orders, or emergency helper but whose functions include custody of
documents, is a public officer.
C. They include members of a special body created by law, to perform a function for the government,
as in the members of the Centennial Commission, the Davide Comission.
III. Breach of Office are classified into three forms:

A). Malfeasance- doing an act prohibited by law or that which ought not to be done or not supposed
to be done. Examples: arresting a person who has not committed a crime; or spending money under
one‘s custody or that of a warden maltreating a prisoner or allowing a prisoner to escape, or
accepting a bribe.
B). misfeasance- the improper or irregular performance of an act which is allowed to be done, as in
the case of a judge who insist on holding trial on holidays, or an officer who is late when he reports
for duty
C). Nonfeasance- the non performance, failure or refusal to an act which one is required to do.
Examples: in failure to collect taxes; refusing to arrest a criminal or to serve a warrant of arrest.
Dereliction of Duty by Officers Related to

the Administration of Justice
I. Introduction: The offenses covered by Articles 204 to 209 pertain to acts by Judges, Prosecutors,
Agents of the Law, and Lawyers ( who are officers of the Court). They are generally considered as
prevaricacion or crimes involving betrayal of trust.
II. Dereliction by Judges ( Articles 204 t0 207)
A. Judges enjoy ―JUDICIAL IMMNUNITY‖ i.e. when a judge is required to exercise his judgment or
discretion, he is not subject to any criminal, civil or administrative liability, even if his decision or other
official acts are erroneous, as long as he acted in good faith. This principle seeks to promote and
protect the integrity and independence of the judiciary. Articles 204 t0 207 are the penal sanctions if
the judge did not act in good faith.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
B. The Judges referred to are Trial Court Judges and not to Judges of Collegial or Appellate Courts
― (It) has no application to members of collegial courts such as the Sandiganbayan or its divisions,
who reach their decision in consultation and accordingly render their collective judgment after due
deliberation‖ ( Cortes vs. Chico-Nazario 422 SCRA 541)
C. Rendering an Unjust Judgment i.e one which is not in accordance with the law and the evidence:
1. Knowingly or Intentionally – (i). the intention is to favor a party or to cause damage to another;
or rendered due to ill will, spite, revenge, or other personal ill motive, but not through bribery (ii).
It is not the fact that the decision was reversed on appeal which brings about the crime but proof
of the ill motive.
2. Rendered through negligence which is manifest or inexcusable, or through ignorance.
Example: applying a law which has been repealed or a decision which has been reversed. Judges
are required to keep abreast of latest developments in the law and in jurisprudence.
D. Rendering an Unjust Interlocutory Order either knowingly/intentionally or through inexcusable

negligence or ignorance.
1. An interlocutory order is one which decides on an issue related to the case but does not
decide the case on the merit or on the evidence
2. Example: granting bail to a non-bailable offense;
E. Delay in the Administration of Justice

1. This must be malicious or that there is an intent to cause damage or injury to any of the
parties
2. Example: delay in the calendaring or cases; frequent grant of postponements, delaying the
decision or failure to render the decision within the time allowed by law
F. However, before a Judge can be charged for Rendering an Unjust Judgment or Unjust
Interlocutory Order, there must be a ― final and authoritative judicial declaration that the decision or
order in question is indeed unjust.‖ The pronouncement may result from either:
1. An action for Certiorari or prohibition in the higher court impugning the validity of the judgment
or
2. An administrative proceeding in the Supreme Court against the judge precisely for
promulgating an unjust judgment or order ( Joaquin vs. Borromeo, 241 SCRA 248).
III. Dereliction or Prevaricacion (Betrayal of Trust) by Prosecutors under Article 208
A. Article 208 embraces all public officers whose official duties involve the initiation of prosecution
for the punishment of law violators. They include:
1. Prosecutors and their assistants
2. BIR agents who fail to report violations of the NIRC
3. Forestry Agents who fail to apprehend and file charges against illegal loggers
4. Chiefs of Police in municipalities who are by law allowed to appear as prosecutors in the
MTC/MCTC in the absence of regular Prosecutors
5. Barangay Captains

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
B. The essence of dereliction is that the public officer knows of the commission of an offense but :
1. He does not cause the prosecution thereof i.e to gather evidence and then file the appropriate
charges
2. He tolerates the commission thereof. Note: if in case of an illegal numbers game, the offense
would be under RA. 9286
C. The crime committed by the law violator must first be proved as basis for conviction for
dereliction.
D. Query: May policemen or law enforcement agents be held liable if they see a crime but do not
arrest the criminal or do not investigate, gather evidence and charge the criminal?
1. The view is that they are not liable under Article 208 but they are to be held as accessories
under Article 19 i.e assisting in the escape of the principal, or that they may be liable under the
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act; or under PD. 1829 for obstruction of justice .
2. Personal view: If the offense by the criminal is punished by a special law, where there are no
accomplices or accessories, the charge should be under Article 208. The same should be true in
case the offense tolerated is a light felony.
IV. Dereliction by An Attorney: Betrayal of Trust Under Article 209.
A. The prevaricacion includes:

1. Causing prejudice to the client through malicious breach of professional duty or inexcusable
negligence. There must be damage to the client. Examples: failure to pay the appeal fee or to file
an Answer or to submit a Formal Offer of Evidence, or to appear in court. Note that a client may
appeal an adverse decision on the ground of incompetent legal representation.
2. Revealing the Secrets of a Client learned by him in his professional duty. (Note: This is the
second offense involving disclosure of secrets). Secrets are to be construed as including the
lawyer‘s advise; papers, documents and objects delivered by the client; the lawyer‘s impressions
of the client
3. Representing the opposing party without the consent of the client
B. The crime is without prejudice to the administrative liability of the attorney
Art. 210. BRIBERY
I. Introduction: Bribery connotes the idea of a public officer utilizing the power, influence or prestige of
his office for the benefit of an individual in exchange for a consideration. The offense cannot be
considered bribery if there is no consideration but the act may be considered as a violation of the Anti
Graft and Corrupt Practices Act or.
II. The two forms:

1. Simple Bribery which is either : (a). Direct (b) Indirect
2. Qualified Bribery
III. Direct Bribery: defined and penalized under Article 310. Its elements are as follows:
1. That the accused is a public officer

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
2. That he received directly or through another, some gift or present, offer, or promise
3. That such gift, present, offer or promise has been given in consideration of his commission of
some crime, or any act not consisting a crime, or to refrain from doing something which it is his
official duty to do
4. That the crime or act relates to the exercise of his functions as a public officer
IV. There are three modes of commission of direct bribery and which is the basis for the penalty to be
imposed:
A. First Mode: requires that the act involved amounted to a crime. Example: Falsification and
destruction of papers, records and properties, killing of inmates, robbery and taking of money or
valuables, invalid arrests, releasing of persons detained
1. Three instances when it is consumated:
a). The act agreed upon was not yet performed but a consideration has already been
received
b). The act was executed even if the consideration has not yet been received
c). The act was executed and the consideration has been received
d). Conspiracy to Commit Bribery: If the officer merely agreed but did not actually do the act
and he did not yet receive nor was given the consideration, there is also the crime of bribery.
This is in the nature of a conspiracy which is punished
2. This has no frustrated or attempted stage since the mere agreement consummates the crime
3. If the act constituting a crime was committed, the officer is liable for bribery and for the
additional crime so committed. The bribe giver will also be liable for the crime. Bribery is never
absorbed or complexed but is always punished separately. But in the crime of Delivering
Prisoners bribery constitutes a qualifying aggravating circumstance.
4. Example: The Jail Guard agreed with Mr. BB to kill X, an inmate, in exchange for money. The
crime is committed if (i) he has already received the money but was arrested before he can kill X
(ii) he killed X but Mr. BB failed to give the money and (iii) He killed X and was paid either before
or after the killing. In the second and third instance, the officer and Mr. BB are liable also for
murder/homicide for the killing.
B. Second Mode: The act is not a crime but is unjust or the doing is improper or unfair
1. The act done is within the proper functions or duties or the public officer. Hence to constitute
bribery, the consideration must be actually received. Future promises or offers or consideration to
be given after the doing, such as reward, do not give rise to bribery.
2. If the officer performed the act regularly, properly, or in accordance with law, he is not liable
even if he already received the consideration.
3. If the act was done improperly without any consideration, the officer is not liable for bribery but
he may be:
(a). Administratively liable
(b). Liable under the Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
4. If the officer received the consideration but he did not do the act as agreed upon, he may be

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
sued for the recovery of the consideration and for estafa by means of deceit.
5. There are only two stages: (i) attempted when the officer agreed to do the act for a
consideration and received the consideration but was not able to perform the act and (ii)
consummated when the act was executed and the officer received the consideration.
6. Examples:
(a). For money received, the Court sheriff delayed the service of summons to the defendant or
that he did not immediately serve the writ of execution until the defendant has sold his properties.
(b) The complainant paid the policeman to serve the warrant of arrest of the accused on Saturday
so that the accused will not be able to post bail. The police however served the warrant on Friday
allowing the accused the accused to post bail. The police is not liable for bribery but the bribe
giver is liable for attempted corruption. But he may file a case to recover the money.
(c). The police received the money but when he went to arrest on a Friday night, the accused had
already posted bail that morning. He is liable for consummated bribery even if the purpose was
not achieved.
(d). NBI agents learned the money will be given on Friday morning. When the money was given
the NBI agents who were waiting, arrested both the giver and the police. Did the policeman commit
direct bribery?
(e). Receiving money to give preference to a late application over others earlier submitted
C. Third Mode: There is non-performance of an official duty due to a consideration provided the non-
performance does not amount to a crime. If so it is bribery of the first mode.
1. Examples:
a). A stenographer received money such that she did not record the testimony.
b). For money received, the clerk did not include the case in the court calendar or that he did
not send the required notices to witnesses.
c). Omission to accept and/or record a pleading filed
V. Common Principles:
A. 1. The accused in the direct bribery case is the public officer only. The bribe giver will be punished
for Corruption of a Public Officer.
2. Private persons are liable if they are performing public functions such as assessors,
arbitrators, appraisers and claim commissioners. These private persons are usually designated
and/or directed by the court to perform these functions as part of pending proceedings, and to submit
their findings to the court.
B. The act or omission must be in relation to the officer‘s duties or functions otherwise the crime
would be estafa if he failed to deliver.
C. The consideration need not be in terms of money, or articles of value so long as it has a pecuniary
value. This is because the penalty of fine is based on the value of the consideration given. Those in
the form of favors or service or non-material considerations may induced a public official to do any
of the act contemplated by law. However there is the question of determining the

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
value as basis for the fine.
The consideration may be given to the officer directly or to members of his family or persons closely
associated with the officer.
1. Examples of Consideration in the form of services: the employment or promotion of a family
member in a certain company; or the giving of a contract to the company of the wife; or that the
private person will shoulder the expenses of the birthday party of the officer‘s son, or acting as
family/personal driver, repairing the house.
2. The borrowing of a vehicle by the LTO Director from a transportation company can be
considered as a gift in contemplation of law ( Garcia vs. Sandiganbayan 507 SCRA 258)
D. The giving of the consideration must be mutual, either at the suggestion of the briber giver or
upon the solicitation of the officer.
1. If it was the officer who solicited but the private person reported it leading to an entrapment
and the subsequent arrest of the officer, the crime is merely attempted bribery.
2. If it was the private person who voluntarily gave but the officer used the consideration as
evidence, it is Attempted Corruption of a Public Officer
E. If the private person was compelled to agree to give a consideration due to force, threat or
intimidation on the part of the officer, the act is called extortion or mulcting but the proper name of
the offense is robbery
F. If a person gives money to a public officer as consideration for the officer to do or not to do his
duty for the benefit of the person, when will the receipt constitute robbery and when will it be bribery?
1. If the money was given willingly at the instance of the giver, it is bribery
2. If he was forced to give it is robbery
3. If the giver committed a crime and at his own instance he gives money so as to avoid arrest
and prosecution, the receipt thereof would be bribery.
4. If the giver is a family member of a person arrested and was prevailed upon to give so that the
case against the relative will not push through, or will be down-graded, the demand and receipt
of consideration is robbery.
5. If the giver committed a crime and it was the officer who suggested the giving of money to
avoid arrest, it is bribery so long as the person did so voluntarily but if he was forced to give, then
it is robbery. Thus if the person was unwilling to give but he pretended to give but reported instead
to the authorities who set up an entrapment, the crime of the officer is robbery
6. If the person did not commit a crime but the officer insist and pretend there was a crime and
threatens to arrests unless money is given, then the receipt thereof is robbery.
Art. 211. INDIRECT BRIBERY
I. Concept: the crime committed by a public officer who accepts a gift given by reason of his office or
position. A gift is actually received and not future promises or offers. The officer must have done an act
appropriating the gift for himself, his family or employees. ― The essential ingredient … is that the public
officer concerned must have accepted the gift or material consideration ( Garcia vs. Sandiganbayan
507 SCRA 258)

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. Illustrations:
1. An envelope was left on top of the desk of officer. The officer called his staff and told them to
use all the amount to buy food and snacks. This is indirect bribery.
2. If the officer however gave it to the Jail or to some children, he is not liable.
3. If he simply let the envelope drop on the floor and left it there, he is not liable.
4. If somebody pays the bill for his meal or drinks, he is not liable for indirect bribery as he did
not accept any gift.
5. Receipt of cash given as ―share in winnings‖ or ―balato‖ are included
II. The phrase ―by reason of his office‖ means the gift would not have been given were it not for the
fact that the receiver is a public officer. The officer need not do any act as the gift is either for past
favors or to anticipate future favors, or simply to ―impress‖ or earn the good will of the officer.
Art. 211-A. QUALIFIED BRIBERY
I. Concept: the crime committed by any public officer who is entrusted with the law enforcement and
he refrains from arresting or prosecuting an offender who has committed a crime punishable by
reclusion perpetua and/or death in consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present.
II. Principles.
A. The offenders are limited to officers entrusted with law enforcement such as members of the
regular law enforcement agencies, as well as those tasked to enforce special laws, and Prosecutors.
This is similar to prevarication under Article 208 but the offenses involved here which the officer
refused to prosecute are graver being punished by reclusion perpetua or death.
B. Actual receipt of consideration is not necessary.
C. The penalty for the officer is that for the offense he did not prosecute. But if it was the officer who
solicited the gift, the penalty is death. However, the guilt of the person who was not prosecuted must
first be proven.
D. Query: (a). what crime was committed by a law enforcement agent who refused to arrest a rapist
or murderer? (Ans). If it was because of a consideration the crime is qualified bribery. If there was
no consideration he is an accessory to the crime.
(b) Suppose it was a drug pusher who was refused to be arrested? (ans). Qualified bribery if there
was a consideration. If there was none it should be Violation of Article 208 because there are no
accessories in the offense of drug pushing.
ART. 212. CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS
1. Concept: This is the crime committed by the bribe giver, promissory or offeror.
II. It has only two stages: attempted if the gift, offer or promise was rejected and consummated if the
same was accepted.
III. This is in addition to his liability if the act done by the officer is a crime in which case he is a principal
by inducement.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
LAWS RELATED TO CRIMES BY PUBLIC OFFICERS
I. R.A. 7080: Defining and Penalizing the Crime Known as Plunder
1. Plunder is the act of accumulating or acquiring ill-gotten wealth in an aggregate amount of at

least P50 million, personally or in connivance with third persons
2. The accumulation must be through a combination or series of overt acts, a pattern indicative
of the over all unlawful scheme or conspiracy. It is thus a continuing crime.
3. The penalty is reclusion perpetua to death
4. For non-public officers their liability will depend on their degree of participation and the
attendance of mitigating and aggravating circumstances
II. R.A 3019 or The Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
A. Introduction: This was enacted to fortify the principle that public office is a public trust. Also the
provisions of the Revised penal Code is inadequate to cover all situations and acts whereby a public
officer performs an act inimical to public service. Some of the salient features are summarized below.
B. There are eleven acts enumerated as constituting corrupt practices, some of which repeat
provisions of the Revised Penal Code, which acts or omissions therefore remain still to be mala
inse. Those which are not defined in the Revised Penal Code are acts mala prohibita .
1. These eleven acts include the following:

a. Those which involve the receipt of material consideration
b. Those where, even if there was no consideration, the public officer uses the ascendancy,
influence or prestige of his office to influence any course of action pertaining to the
government either for himself, a relative or influence ( Influence Peddling), or where the
government stands to be prejudiced
c. Acts constituting an improper exercise of duties especially in the granting of permits and
licenses
d. Acts by private individuals, especially relatives of the officer or close associates who take
advantage of such relationship or connection with any business in which the public officer
has to intervene
e. Acts which are improper for an officer to do such as non-payment of a debt
C. Periodic Submission of a Statement of Assets and Liabilities
D. Defines Unexplained wealth as property manifestly out of proportion to the income of a public
officer.
1. Possession of unexplained wealth is a ground for removal or dismissal

2. It is a prima facie evidence of corruption
3. Prosecution for unexplained wealth is an exception to the Secrecy of Bank Deposits
E. Section 13 of the law Provides for Suspension Pendente Lite of the accused public officer

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. After an Information is filed in Court for : (a) Violation of R.A. 3019 or (b) under Title 7 of the
RPC i.e. Crimes Committed by Public Officers or (c) for any offense involving fraud upon
government or public funds, the officer shall suspended from office.
2. The suspension applies to any office which the officer charged might be holding and not
necessarily the particular office under which he was charged or under which the act was
committed.
3. The crimes maybe simple or complex with another, whether attempted or frustrated and even
if the officer‘s participation is as an accomplice or accessory only.
4. The period was formerly for the whole duration of the trial but the period has been fixed to be
the same period as that provided for under the Civil Service Law which is 90 days and which
likewise is the period provided for under Section 52 of the Administrative Code fo1987.
Example: In Nicart vs. Sandiganbayan ( 495 SCRA 73) a Mayor was charged for Malversation
before the Sandiganbayan and was imposed a 90 day preventive suspension. He argued that
malversation is not covered by the Anti Graft law and he should not be suspended and even then
the period should be only 60 days pursuant to section 63 of the Local Government Code. HELD:
Malversation is an offense involving fraud against the government funds and is clearly included
among the crimes covered by RA 3019. Section 13 of said law provides a suspension for which
the period is 90 days pursuant to existing jurisprudence, notably Segovia vs. Sandiganbayan (288
SCRA 328, March 27, 1998)
Note that under the PNP Law ( RA 6975) when a PNP member is charged with a grave offense
where the penalty prescribed is 6 years and 1 day or more, he shall be suspended from office to
last until the termination of the case ( Himagan vs. PP, 237 SCRA 538)
3. The Suspension is Mandatory But Not Automatic
(a). Mandatory in that the officer must be suspended whatever be his position.
(b). However the suspension is not automatic because before the Court issues an Order of
suspension (note: only the Court may order the suspension) there must first be a Motion to
Suspend but as regards the Sandiganbayan, it can issue an Order motu proprio. If the officer
does not voluntarily place himself under suspension but contests the Motion, then there must
be ―Pre Suspension Hearing ― to determine the following: (i) The validity of the Information
(ii) If the accused was afforded the right to a Preliminary Investigation (iii) If there is a ground
to Quash the Information (iv) If the offense charged is a Violation of Title 7 of the Revised penal
Code or is covered by the AGCPA. It is only then that the Court issues an Order placing the
accused under suspension
© However, if the accused had ample opportunity to be heard on the Prosecution‘s Motion for
Suspension Pendenti Lite and were allowed to file their comment or opposition thereto, and
agreed to submit the Motion for Resolution upon submission of their comment/opposition, there
was no more need to set the motion to Suspend for hearing on a specific time and date. (
Bedrey vs. Sandiganbayan, 477 SCRA 286)
F. Effect of Conviction - Loss of retirement or gratuity benefits. In case of acquittal- reinstatement plus
payment of back salaries unless in the meantime the officer has been administratively

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
G. A public officer maybe charged under R.A. 3019 and under the Revised Penal Code for the same
offense (Ramiscal vs. Sandiganbayan 499 SCRA 75)
H. Jurisdiction over the offense is with the Sandiganbayan for those public officers occupying a salary
grade of 27 or higher
Art. 213. Frauds Against the Public Treasury

and Similar Offenses
A. Concept: The violations punished are equivalent to cheating the public treasury. There are two kinds
of frauds punished.
B. Fraud under Paragraph 1: punishes any public officer who in his official capacity enters into an
agreement or scheme to defraud the government. It does not matter that the government was not
damaged as mere intent to defraud consummates the crime.
1. Usually, when in connivance with suppliers, the government is made to pay for more than what it
has received; or there is overpricing; or paying for poor quality of articles or supplies; or for double
payment; or paying for ―ghost deliveries‖.
2. Also making the government refund more than what it has to refund
3.There must however be no fixed amount which was set aside or appropriated before hand to be
spend or to cover the purchase. Thus if the sum of P100,000.00 was set aside to purchase five
computers, even if said computers are of poor quality and are worth only P75,000.00, there is no
Fraud against the treasury. But if the officer presents a bill of P100,000.00 to pay for five computers
and which amount was given, when in truth the computers are worth only P75,000.00, then this crime
is committed.
C. Illegal Exaction Under paragraph 2

1. The offender is limited to those public officers entrusted with the collection of taxes, licenses fees
and other imposts. He is thus an accountable public officer. If otherwise, the crime would be estafa.
However officers under the BIR and BoC are covered by the NIRC and Customs Code or the
Administrative Code.
2. There is no need for misappropriation of funds or intent to defraud because the essence of the
crime is the improper or irregular manner of the collection.
3. The acts are:

a). Demanding the payment of sums different from or larger than those authorized by law.
(i). Here mere demand is sufficient even if the payer refused to come across. If he pockets the
excess he commits estafa through illegal exaction
(ii). Suppose the payor allows him to keep the change and the officer did not turn it over to the
government, he commits malversation. It is to the government that the change must go as an
accretion of the amount due ( Principle of Accretion) .
(iii). Suppose the officer demands P1,000.00 when the amount due is only P700.00. He spent
the entire P1,000.00. He is guilty of illegal exaction (for demanding a different amount) Estafa
for spending the excess of P300.00 and malversation as to the amount of P700.00 which is
government funds.
b). Failing to voluntarily issue an official receipt for the money collected. The crime is committed

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
if what are issued are only provisional receipt.
c). Collecting or receiving by way of payment or otherwise, things or objects of a nature different
from that provided by law.
(i). Payments are to be in the form of cash or the payor‘s personal check. It does not matter
that the object has a higher value than what is due.
Art. 214. Other Frauds.
A. Concept: This article does not punish any offense. What is provided is the additional penalty of
special disqualification upon a public officer who commits estafa by taking advantage of his official
position.
B. Examples: The Judge entices an accused to hand to him money which the Judge will post as cash
bond but he spends it. The head of Office, who collects contributions from his employees to purchase
for supplies, but spends the money for himself, if found guilty, would be imposed this additional penalty.
Art. 215. Prohibited Transactions
A. Concept: This prohibits any appointive official during his incumbency from becoming interested in
any transaction of exchange or speculation within his territorial jurisdiction. This is to prevent him from
using his influence in his favor
B. Example: A judge is not to participate in an execution sale
Art. 216: Possession of Prohibited Interest.
A. Concept: This punishes the act of becoming interested or participating by a public officer virtute
officii in any contract in which it is his official duty to intervene. Actual fraud is not necessary but the
act is punished to prevent the possibility that the officer may commit fraud or places his interest over
that of the government.
B. Hence if he participated in his private capacity he is not liable. Example: The Director of the DSWD
assumed the mortgage executed in favor of a creditor. He did so as a private businessman. He is not
liable.
C. Example: The City is need of a building to rent. The mayor approved the contract of lease with the
ABC corporation, owner of the building, but he is a director of said company.
MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS

(Embezzlement)
(The loss of public funds or property due to unauthorized or improper or illegal, use and/or misuse)
Classified into (1) Ordinary and Technical and (2) Intentional or culpable

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 217. Simple or Ordinary
A. Elements:
1. The offender is a public accountable officer
2. He has custody or control of funds or property by reason of the duties of his office
3. The funds or property are public funds or property for which he was accountable
4. He appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented, or through abandonment or negligence,
permitted another person to take them
B. By whom committed:
1. Primarily only by an accountable public officer: one who has charge, possession or control of
public funds or properties and is answerable therefore. If he takes property over which another officer
is accountable, he is guilty of theft.
2. An officer is an accountable public officer in two ways:

a). By reason of the functions of his office in that his primary functions pertain to the receipt, care
and custody of funds or property ( Accountable Officers Proper). Examples: treasurers,
cashiers, disbursing officers; Property Custodians, Clerks of Court, BIR/Customs Collectors;
Evidence Custodians. Also a policeman who confiscates contrabands or prohibited articles from
persons arrested. Policemen in custody of articles seized by virtue of a search warrant are
included.
b). By reason of special designation or by reason of the fact that public funds or properties are
entrusted to him by a superior or proper officer. Example: an employee is tasked to get the salaries
of the employees; or supplies are entrusted to a teacher for delivery to the school; or medical
supplies are sent to a municipality through the councilor, or an administrative officer is assigned
as property officer while incumbent is on leave or in case of vacancy.
3. By a private person:
a). Through conspiracy with the public officer

b). As an accomplice or accessory
c). Under Article 222 when he has charge of public funds or property or is the depository or
administrator of funds seized, attached or deposited by public authority.
(i). Forest Rangers seized several logs. The DENR Director deposited them with Mr. X whom
he also appointed to be the custodian until the DENR can get trucks to transport the logs. If Mr.
X uses the logs as firewood he is liable for malversation.
(ii). The Sheriff deposited several household items which he attached from the defendant.
These were asked to be safe kept in the garage of Y who consented to be the custodian. The
articles were stolen because Y went on a vacation without taking measures against theft. He
is liable.
C. Property Subject of the crime
1. Public properties

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a). Strictly public properties – those owned by the government or by the local government units
such as office equipments and supplies; guns and bullets issued to the AFP or PNP members;
vehicles and modes of transportations issued to a public office; money paid or received as taxes,
fines, payments, donations, or income or cash in the public coffers.
(i). thus a policeman who goes on AWOL without returning his firearm is liable for
malversation
(ii). a driver who sells off the gasoline of the vehicle assigned to him as public transport is
guilty of malversation
(iii). the pharmacists of the government hospital who secretly sells the medicines commits
this crime
(iv) the PDAF of Senators given to none existing NGOs
2. Private properties:
a). If held in trust by a public office i.e. he has the duty to account of the property, often referred
to as ―Trust Funds or Trust Properties‖
(i). Money deposited by a party in court as cash bail bond or redemption price
(ii). Private property deposited in court provided they have not been marked yet as evidence;
or when they are ordered to be returned to the owner as evidence
(iii). Property under attachment
(iv). Proceeds of a sweepstake ticket entrusted to a sales agent or of lotto tickets
(v). Articles the possession of which is prohibited, except for dangerous drugs, or the effects
or instruments of a crime in the possession of a policeman
(vi). Funds of the SSS
b). Property in custody of a public office for a public purpose i.e private properties impressed with
public character
(i) Example: The sheriff who conducted an execution sale spent part of the money realized
from the sale instead of turning it over to the plaintiff. He is liable for malversation because the
proceeds are impressed with the character of public funds.
(ii). Example: Blood kept by the Phil. National Red Cross
(iii). Funds of the GSIS
c). Private property considered as public by reason of the (i). Principle of Co-mingling in that all
funds commingled with public funds or found in public vaults, are presumed to be public
funds/property and (ii) The Principle of Accretion
d). Private properties which were confiscated or seized even if deposited with a private person
D. Acts of Malversation: How Committed
1. Intentional Acts:
(a). By appropriating: when the officer himself takes the property for his own use or for that of his
family or for that of a third person
(i). Thus loose changes taken by the officer constitute malversation as the loose changes

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
properly belong to the government.
(ii). Likewise, a collector who brings home funds or property and forgot to bring them to his
office, and is therefore found short by said amount, is guilty of malversation.
(b). By misappropriating: the officer uses them for a different purpose even if a public purpose but
is not authorized to do so
(i). Thus a cashier who uses his collections to change the personal checks on employees, even
at a discount, and even if the checks are good, is guilty of malversation. During the period of
time the check is undergoing clearing by the back, the government is already deprived of the
use of the funds.
2. By abandonment or through negligence ( culpable malversation)
(a). The custodian is expected to exercise utmost diligence and care to prevent the public
funds/properties under his custody from being lost, destroyed, damaged, either by action of nature
or by the acts of people. When these eventualities occur due to his failure to take precautions or
exercise care, then he becomes liable.
(bi). If the funds were lost or destroyed the officer must make a prompt report and prove the loss
or destruction was not due to his fault or negligence
©. Thus the officer is liable even if it was a third person who took and appropriated the property
E. Penalty: The penalty depends on the amount of the fund or property involved
1. The Penalty is the same whether the malversation is intentional or through negligence. This is
the exception to the rule that the penalty for a crime is lower if committed through negligence.
2.The accused may be convicted of for culpable malversation under an Information which charges
intentional malversation without need of amending the original Information. This is because
culpable malversation is included in intentional malversation and because the penalty is the same
whether it was committed intentionally or through negligence. ( PP. vs. Ting Lan 475 SCRA 248)
F. Presumption of Malversation: when there is a formal demand upon the accountable officer to
produce funds or properties in his custody and he fails to produce them, his failure to do so shall be
prima facie evidence that he put the missing funds to his personal use.
1. For purposes of conviction, it is not necessary that there be direct proof that the officer used the
funds to his personal use.
2. The presumption applies only if (i) there is proof of shortage and the amount which is claimed to
be missing is certain, and definite and after an audit which is thorough, complete to the last detail
and reliable (Dumagat vs. Sandiganbayan, 160 SCRA 483) and (ii) the failure to produce is
unexplained.
3. Even if the audit examination was replete with errors in determining the correct amount but the
errors were due to the officer/s simulated entries and not because pertinent documents were
disregarded, or that certain items or record were overlooked, the presumption still stands. ( Duero
vs. PP, Jan. 30, 2007)

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
4. The presumption is rebuttable hence if the accused was able to prove the missing funds were not
used by him personally, as when the missing funds were given to employees as ‖vales‖, the burden
is upon the prosecution to prove the misappropriation.
G. Effect of Restitution or Replacement of the Missing Fund/Property
Note that the accused incurs a criminal liability and is also civilly liable to the government for the
missing fund or property, thus:
1. If made before the shortage is recorded: there is no criminal liability because officially there
is as yet no shortage
2. If made Upon discovery and recording: the criminal liability remains but this may be
considered as mitigating but the civil liability may be extinguished
3. If after the lapse if time: the replacement or restitution has no effect on the criminal liability
what so ever
H. If there is falsification:
1. The falsification must not be to hide the malversation else it is a separate offense
2. As to the liability of heads of office who sign or approve vouchers or documents containing
falsifies, what governs are the Arias and Rodis doctrines
I. Distinguished from Estafa:
1. As to the nature of the property involved: in estafa only private properties are involved.
2. As to the character of the accused: in malversation he must be the custodian or is accountable
over the property involved.
3. As to the need for a prior demand: malversation does not require a prior demand
4. As to the requirement of damage: there need not be damage to the government in malversation
Art. 220. Technical Malversation
Concept: This is often referred to as ―Juggling of Funds‖ or ―Realignment of Funds‖. This is the crime
committed by a public officer who used or applied funds earmarked or appropriated for a specific public
purpose, for another public purpose.
1. The funds involved should have been reserved by an appropriation ordinance for a specific
public purpose.
2. If the fund were not yet earmarked for a specific public purpose, such as the general fund, the
crime is ordinary malversation.
3. If the funds earmarked for a public purpose were used for a private purpose, the crime is
ordinary malversation.
4. It is immaterial that the other pubic use is more beneficial to the public.
5. The reason is that no public fund or property shall be spend except pursuant to an
appropriation or purpose specified by law.
6. This can not be committed by negligence
7. Though this is an intentional and mala in se crime, good faith is not a defense

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Other Offenses Related to Public Funds
1. Failure of Accountable to Render Accounts (Article 218)

a). The accused is an accountable officer and this includes those who may have already been
separated from the service
b). This is a crime by omission. The gist of the offense is the failure to render an accounting to
the COA within 2 months after the accounting should have been rendered as required by law or
regulation.
c). Prior Demand to produce or to account is not an element ( Manlangit vs. Sandiganbyan, Aug.
28, 2007)
2. Failure of a Responsible Officer to Render Accounts Before Leaving Country ( Article 219)
a). The gist is failure to obtain a certificate of clearance from the proper officer for his pending
accounts before leaving the country
b). This applies to all officers who have accounts to settle
3. Failure to make Delivery of Public Funds or Property (Art. 221)
a). The officer is obligated to make payments, or was ordered by competent authority to deliver
property from out of his custody but he refuses to do so
b). The refusal is malicious and must have resulted in damage to public interest
(iii). Ex: (i). The Treasurer refuses to give the salary of an employee out of spite; (ii) or refuses to
give the payment for the purchase of equipments on the ground the equipments are unnecessary
(iii) Property Custodian who refuses to deliver a type writer to a secretary because the secretary
is inept at typing
INFIDELITIES BY A PUBLIC OFFICER
A. Concept: These offenses involve unfaithfulness in the performance of duties amounting to a

violation of the public trust and confidence reposed in the officer.
B. Kinds: (1) In the Custody of Prisoners (2) In the Custody of Documents and (3) In the keeping of
Secrets
Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners

(Articles 223 t0 225)
A. Concept: The crime refers to the act of a custodian of a prisoner in allowing or permitting the
prisoner to escape. This may be intentional or by his negligence.
B. Basis of the Penalty: (i) The public or private character of the person (ii) The status of the prisoner
who escaped and (iii) the circumstances under which the escape was made.
C. Persons liable:
1. A Public officer whose function or duty consists primarily of taking custody of prisoners such as
personnel of the BJMP. At the time of the escape, the personnel must be on duty otherwise his

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
liability is for Delivering Prisoners from Jail.
2. A Private person pursuant to Article 225 to whom the conveyance or custody of a prisoner or
person under arrest was made.
a). With respect to public officials, the person who escaped must be a prisoner where as in
infidelity by a private person, the individual may simply be a ―person in arrest‖ i.e one who has
been lawfully arrested either with or without a warrant
b). If he lets go the prisoner due to a consideration he is liable also for bribery
c). Examples: (i) The escort handcuffed his prisoner to a jeepney asking the driver to watch over
the prisoner because the escort went to help a blind man cross the street. The driver removed the
handcuffs when the wife of the prisoner paid him. He is liable for infidelity and bribery (ii) A
policeman arrested a robber whom he entrusted to X as the policeman still had to chase the other
robbers. X let the robber go. X committed infidelity.
D. Meaning of Prisoner: The term prisoner refers to:
1. Prisoner by final judgment or mere detention prisoner

2. As to persons ―under arrest‖ they are not yet prisoners until they have already been ―booked‖ i.e
fingerprinted, photographed, and placed in the gaol. This is true even if they already are in the police
station and detained in the interrogation room. However if they were entrusted to private persons
who let them escape, infidelity is committed.
3. Persons placed in jail only for ―safe keeping purposes‖, such as drunks, are not prisoners.
E. Meaning of ―Escape‖
1. The act of running away or permitting the prisoner to leave

2. The giving of preferential or special treatment or unjustifiable leniency to enable him to avoid the
rigors resulting from his imprisonment. Examples : (a) As allowing the prisoner to eat or sleep in the
house of the guard or warden (b). Allowing him to repair his cell and convert it into a luxurious room
F. Kinds of Infidelity
1. Conniving with or consenting to the escape

a). This is committed by intentionally allowing a prisoner to escape either by active participation,
such as providing him with the means to escape or by omission as simply letting him go, or by
doing nothing to prevent his escape
b). If the custodian was bribed, there are two separate offenses
2. Through negligence which includes:

a). Failure to take precautionary measures to prevent the escape such as by not checking on
whether the facilities permits a escape; not checking on visitors who may bring in tools with which
to escape;
b). Becoming too familiar and friendly with the prisoners resulting to decrease in vigilance
c). Laxity in escorting the prisoner or permitting him to go to places where he is not supposed to
be brought, such as a restaurant
d) There is no distinction between negligence which results merely to an administrative liability

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
and that which amounts to a willful non-performance of duty
Query: If a prisoner escapes with the assistance of another, what are the respective criminal
liabilities of: (a) the prisoner (b) the person who helped him escape?
Infidelity in the Custody of Documents

Kinds:
1. Through removal, concealment or destruction(Art. 226)
2. By Breaking the seal (Art. 227)
3. By opening of closed documents ( Art. 228)
Art. 226. Removal, Concealment and Destruction
A. Persons principally liable:

1. Public officers
(a) Those who are officially entrusted with the custody of documents it being their function to take
care of documents, such as:
a). The Clerk of Court as regards the records of cases
b). The Post Master as to mail matters
c). The Local Civil Registrar
d). The Register of Deeds or The Assessor
e). The Election Registrar
f). The PRC Commissioner
(b). or officers who are specially entrusted by their superior officers or by competent authority,
with the care and custody of certain documents even if their primary functions do not pertain to
the keeping of documents
Note: If the officer is not the custodian the crime is different i.e theft if he abstracts or takes the
documents; malicious mischief or estafa if he destroys or conceals
2. Private persons who conspire or who participate as an accomplice or accessory
B. Meaning of Document: They refer to written instruments which may be subject to the crime of
falsification
1. Those which are purely public or official documents such as records of birth, titles to land;
records of court cases; official communications; payrolls, time records
2. Commercial Papers such as notes, checks, money bills
3. Private documents entrusted to public officials by reason of their office as for example: (a). Letters
sent through the mail (b). But not packages, pamphlets, books, periodicals or parcel sent though the
mail
4. Articles or money which were marked in evidence as exhibits. When is the crime malversation
and when it is infidelity:
a). When money, objects, or articles are in the possession of an accountable officer, any act of
appropriation/misappropriation or loss or destruction will constitute malversation.
b). But when these money, articles or objects had already been marked in court as Exhibits, they
ceased to be properties and become documents ( note that they are referred to as documentary
exhibits) so that their appropriation, misappropriation or loss, constitutes infidelity in the custody
of documents.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
c). But when the trial is over and these articles are ordered to be returned to their
owners/possessors, such as in crimes against property, they revert to being properties. Hence
any act of appropriation/misappropriation will be malversation.
C. Acts Punished:
1. By abstracting or removal:
a). the crime is consumated the moment the document or paper is removed or taken out from its
usual place in the office. It need not be brought out from the building such as when it is transferred
to another room or place where it is not supposed to be kept.
b). The removal must be for an illicit purpose such as to tamper with it, to profit from it or even to
keep it away from the eyes or knowledge of the public, or to show it to the media.
C) Hence there is no infidelity if the removal is to safe keep the document or to protect it from loss
or destruction.
d) Examples of removal:
(i). When the Postmaster opens a letter and takes the money inside or the letter for
transmission contains Postal Money Orders which he removes and encashed. But if they are
the mail/letter carriers who take the money, the crime is qualified theft.
(ii). But when he received the money order itself - not the letter, which he then signed as payee,
collected and spent the amount, he is guilty of malversation through falsification.
(iii). When the records officer transfers the folder of a case from the records section to the
library and it cannot be located when a party comes to xerox copies.
(iii) A secretary who brings home the folder or record in order to study it is not liable as the
purpose is not illicit.
(iv) Misdelivery of mail matters to third persons is removal
e) Actual damage to the public is not necessary as delay in the production of the document is
sufficient, as is alarm to the public or loss of confidence in government service.
2. By Destroying as in the act of a letter carrier who burned the mail
3. By concealing: This includes acts of hiding or making unavailable the documents to authorized
persons for their inspection, reading, copying or for their own knowledge. This will not apply if the
documents or papers are confidential in nature, such as the records of a Youthful Offender who has
been acquitted.
Art. 227. By Breaking the Seal
A. Concept; It is the crime committed by a public officer, charged with the custody of papers or
documents, who breaks the seal placed thereon by proper authorities on the documents or permits the
seal to be broken. The gist is the fact of breaking the seal even if the contents are not tampered with.
B. Example: Destroying the seal placed on ballot Boxes
Art. 228. Opening of Closed Documents.
A. Concept: The crime committed by a public officer who has custody of closed
documents, papers or objects, who opens or permits to be opened the closed papers,

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
documents or objects without any proper authority to do so.
B. Examples: (i). Closed envelopes containing election returns (ii). Communications in closed
envelopes or folders hand carried by personnel officers to Manila.
Revelation of Secrets.
( Secrets refer to any data or information which is not supposed to be publicized or known without
prior approval of the proper officer)
A. First Kind: Revelation of Public Secrets by an Officer Under Art. 229

1. The Secrets refer to those affecting public interest of minor consequence the revelation of
which are not punished by any other provision of law. Either matter is not to be divulged or to
be divulged upon proper authority to certain persons/agencies at an appropriate time and
occasion.
2. These secrets must be known to him virtute officii
3. If the accused is a private person, the crime would be under the article on Unlawful Means of
Publication
4. Damage to public interest is not required
5. This article is violated in two ways: (a) by the actual revelation of secrets or (b) wrongful
delivery of papers or copies of papers the contents of which should not be known
6. Examples: (a) the Secretary who reveals the decision of the Court/Quasi-
Judicial/Administrative body prior to its promulgation (b) personnel who informs an applicant
of the who has been appointed (c) a prosecutor who reveals the evidence to be presented to
court (d) copy of a Resolution was mis-sent to a wrong person
B. Second Kind: Public Officer Revealing Secrets of Private Individuals (Art. 230)
1. The secret revealed pertains to private secrets which the public official came to know in his
official capacity
2. Examples: (a) Revelation of matters known by Probation Officers or Personnel of the DSWD who
conduct background checks on accused or parties to a case (b) revelation of what a PAO Lawyer or
Prosecution learned about a person he has interviewed as a witness
C. Crimes Involving Disclosure of Information:
1. Under Infidelity of Public Officers Article 229 and 230)

2. Under Unlawful Means of Publication (Art. 154 par.3) if the revelation is by a private individual
3. Under C.A. 616 or Espionage if the matter pertains to secrets of the state or to the defense the
defense of the sate
4. Betrayal of Trust By An Attorney if they pertain to the secrets of a client
5. Under Discovery and Revelation of Secrets under Article 290 (Seizure of Correspondence), 291
(By a manager. Employee or servant) or Article 292 ( Revelation of Industrial Secrets) .These pertain
to the revelation of private secrets by a private person
Other Offenses or Irregularities by Public Officers
A. Disobedience which is either:
1. Open Disobedience or Inceptive Disobedience (Art. 231)

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a). Crime by a judicial or executive officer who openly refuses to execute the judgment, decision
or order of any superior authority within the scope of his jurisdiction and issued with all the legal
formalities i.e perfectly valid.
b). Examples: (i) Refusal of a trial court Judge to comply with the order of the Supreme Court to
remand for the reception of additional evidence (ii) Refusal to reinstate dismissed employee
despite Order of the Civil Service Commission (iii) Refusal to Proclaim the winning candidate as
found by the Court (iv) Refusal to attend a conference
2. Disobedience to the Countermanding Order of Superior (Art. 232)
a). The subordinate suspended the execution of the Order of a superior by asking for a
reconsideration but suspension was disapproved by the superior and still, the subordinate refuses
to carry out the order
b). Example: The Secretary of Justice reversed the Resolution of Dismissal of the City Prosecutor
and ordered him to file the Information in Court. The City Prosecution initially did not carry out as
he filed a reconsideration or objection but were denied, and yet he refuses to comply.
3. Disobedience in the form of a Refusal of Assistance (Art. 233)
a). The crime committed by a public officer who, upon demand from competent authority, shall fail
to lend his cooperation towards the administration of justice or other public services.
b). The refusal must be unjustified
c). Examples: (i) The Chief of Police who refuses to cause the service of subpoena issued by the
Prosecutor (ii) a government doctor who refuses to testify as a witness on request of the
Prosecutor or the Court (iii) A government doctor who refuses to conduct anti-dengue vaccinations
despite request of the City Mayor
4. Disobedience in the form of Refusal to Discharge Elective Office (Art. 234)

a). The crime by an elected public official who shall refuse without legal motives i.e valid
justification to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of his office.
b). He is not liable if his ground is due to a legal consideration, such as when he was arrested
for committing an offense and is imprisoned, or supervening factual reasons, as when he has to
go abroad for medical reasons.
B. Maltreatment of Prisoners Under Article 235.
a). The offender is a public officer who has actual charge or custody of a prisoner and is
responsible for the prisoner
b). The maltreatment is in two forms:
(i). By overdoing himself in the correction or handling a prisoner such as by physical beatings
or deprivation of food, or hanging a sign around his neck
(ii). By the imposition of unauthorized punishments or if so authorized, by inflicting such
punishments in a cruel or humiliating manner. Examples: punishments such as prevention of
visits as punishments or solitary confinements or tying him up or deprivation of sleep, or
deprivation of conjugal rights. Or where cleaning the premises is allowed as punishment: by
ordering the cleaning at night without sleep, or by ordering the prisoner to clean naked;

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
c). If injuries or damages were suffered, they are separate offenses
d). If the purpose of the maltreatment is to compel the prisoner to confess to a crime or to obtain
some information, the crime used to be qualified maltreatment. It is now violation of the Anti
Torture Law
e). The term prisoner is the same as in the prisoner subject of Infidelity i.e one by final judgment
or detention prisoner; one who has already been finger printed and booked and placed inside the
jail.
f ). Other Related Crimes Upon A Person In Police Custody

i). Physical Injuries: if the person is merely in arrest or is a suspect and is not yet a prisoner
and is beaten up
ii). Slander by Deed if the person under arrest is paraded with a note on his body saying ―I
am a drug pusher‖
iii). Violation of the Anti Torture law if the purpose is to compel the person under arrest or
suspect to confess or to make incriminatory admissions
C. Anticipation, Prolonging and Abandonment
1. Anticipation of duties (Art. 236): the crime by a person who shall assume the performance of the
duties and powers of the public office without first being sworn in or given bond.
2. Prolonging Performance of duties and powers: (Article 238) the crime committed by a public
officer who continues to exercise the duties and powers of his office beyond the period provided by
law, regulations or special provisions applicable to the case
a). Exercise of powers ceases upon termination of the fixed term or when the purposes is
achieved (functus officio) or the office is abolished
b). Except when the officer is allowed to continue in a hold over capacity
3. Abandonment of Office or position: the crime committed by a public officer who before the
acceptance of his resignation, shall abandon his office to the detriment of the public service.
a). It is essential that the officer has filed a formal resignation to the appointing power
b). Resignation to be effective requires an intent to relinquish the position, the act of
relinquishment and the acceptance by the appointing authority. Hence the resignation must be
accepted, even if the resignation says ―Effective immediately‖ and meantime the officer must
continue discharging the functions of his office.
c). If the officer simply goes AWOL without filing any formal resignation, he maybe held liable
under the Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. This is abandonment as a ground for dismissal
but is not the crime of abandonment.
d) The penalty is higher if the purpose is to avoid prosecuting or acting on a crime.
D. Usurpation of Powers: These crimes refer to the interference by an officer of one department with
the functions of the officials of the other departments of government in violation of the principle of
separation of powers. They are different from the crime of Usurpation of Authority which is usually
committed by private persons.
1. Usurpation of Legislative Powers (Art. 239)

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a). Committed by any executive or judicial officer who:

(i). make general rules or regulations beyond the scope of their authority
(ii). attempts to repeal a law or suspend the execution thereof
b). Example: A Mayor who in the guise of an Administrative Order establishes a curfew hour; or
directs the Municipal Treasurer to release money to fund a certain project
2. Usurpation of Executive Functions
a). Committed only by a Judge who assumes a power pertaining to the executive or who
obstructs the latter in the lawful exercise of their powers.
b) Such as accepting official visitors and presenting them the key to the city. Maybe committed
by the issuance of baseless injunctions against purely administrative matters,
3. Usurpation of Judicial Functions Powers (Art. 241)
a). committed by executive officers who: (i) assumes judicial powers (ii) obstructs execution of
any order or decision rendered by any Judge within his jurisdiction
b). Example: (i). A Mayor who arbitrates and decides conflicts between his constituents (ii) The
Mayor sends his bodyguards and policemen to stop the execution of a writ of execution or prevent
the service of warrants
E. Disobeying Request for Inhibition (Art. 242)
1. Committed by any officer who has been formally asked to inhibit or refrain from taking action
upon a matter but who continues with the proceeding after having been lawfully required to refrain
2. The offender is an officer before whom there is pending a judicial quasi-judicial or administrative
proceeding and the issue of jurisdiction ( can he hear the case?) has been raised and is still under
consideration but he continues with the proceeding. This does not apply when the officer is asked to
inhibit due to personal bias or loss of trust and confidence in him.
F. Orders or request by executive officer to any judicial authority ( Art. 243)
1. Crime consists of an executive officer giving an order or suggestion to any judicial authority in
respect to any case or business within the exclusive jurisdiction of the judicial authority
2. Also punished under RA 3019
3. Example: Suggesting who to be appointed as Clerk of Court or how much bail bond to require or
who to appoint as de oficio counsel
G. Unlawful Appointments ( Art. 244)

1. By any public officer who shall knowingly nominate or appoint to any public office any person
lacking the legal qualifications
2. But the mere act of recommending is not covered as it simply an act of presenting whereas
nominating is vouching for the qualifications of a person
3. To stop political patronage
4. The Civil Service Law however serves as a deterrent
Art. 245. ABUSES AGAINST CHASTITY

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. Introduction. This is different from Crimes Against Chastity which are private crimes and require a
complaint from the offended party for the crimes to be prosecuted.
There are three situations when the crime is committed and in all three a woman is the victim.
B. First: by soliciting or making immoral advances to a woman interested in matters pending before the
public officer, or with respect to which he is required to submit a report to or consult with a superior
1. The offender is any public officer including a female officer

2. To solicit is to demand, suggest, proposed or ask for sexual favors. It must be characterized by
earnestness and persistence, not just a casual remark even if improper. Mere solicitation
consumates the crime even if the solicitation or advances had been rejected.
3. If as a consequence the officer succeeds in committing an immoral act, the same is a separate
offense
D. Second: The solicitation is upon a woman prisoner

1. The offender is any person who is directly charged with the care and custody of prisoners, or
persons under arrest such as Jail Guards and law enforcers who have arrested a woman who
has not yet been turned over to the jail. Female guards and law enforcers are included as
accused.
2. If the woman succumbs or consented the jailer is liable
E. Third: Upon a female relative who is the sister, daughter or relative by affinity in the same line, of a
prisoner. Note the mother is not included.
QUESTI0N: what are the crimes or offenses involving jail guards?
ANSWER: They are the following:

1. Delay in the Release of Detained Persons Under Article 126
2. Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners under Articles 223 and 224
3. Maltreatment of Prisoners Under Article 235
4. Abuses against Chastity under Article 245
:
R.A. 7877: The Anti Sexual Harassment Act
A. General concept: Sexual harassment is the act of a person:
1. Having authority, influence or moral ascendancy over another

2. In a work or training or education environment
3. Demands, requests or otherwise requires any sexual favor from another
4. As a condition to giving a benefit or doing some favor to the victim regardless whether the
demand is accepted
B. Kinds
1. In a work related or employment environment:

a). As a condition in the (i) hiring, employment, re-employment of the victim (ii) for granting

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
favorable terms or compensations, or as condition for promotion or grant of privileges (iii) if the
refusal results in limitations, segregating or classifying the employee which would discriminate,
deprive or diminish employment opportunities
b). Would impair the employee‘s right or privileges under existing labor laws
c). Would result in an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment
2. Education or
3. Training environment
a). Victim is under the care, custody or supervision of the offender, or one whose education or
training or apprenticeship is entrusted to the offender (such as coaches of sports teams)
b). The demand is a condition to giving of a passing grade, granting of scholarships, payment of
a stipend, allowance or other benefit
c). or results to an intimidating or hostile or offensive environment for the student, trainee or
apprentice
TITLE 8. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
A. Introduction: They are classified into three general categories:

1. Destruction of Life
2. Physical Injuries
a. Mutilation
b. Serious
c. Less Serious
d. slight
3. Rape
a. Simple
b. Qualified
B. Destruction of Life in general.
1. Death and its inevitability has been the subject of inquiry: philosophical, religious, biological and
legal approaches. The code simply deals with it as an offense.
2. Homicide - when used in its general sense it denotes that the death of a person was not due to a
suicide or because of an accident or to natural causes but because of the act of a person. The term
―homicidal death‖ refers to a death which was caused by another either intentionally or by
negligence.
3. The following are the terms used depending on who the victim was:
a). Parricide- the killing of one‘s father

b). Matricide- the killing of one‘s mother
c). Filicide- the killing of a child
d). Fratricide- the killing of one‘s brother or sister
e). Uxoricide- the killing of one‘s wife

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
f). Prolicide- the killing of one‘s offspring

g). Hosticide- the killing of an enemy
h). Hospiticide- the killing of one‘s host or guest
i). Feminicide- the killing of a woman
j) Infanticide- the killing of an infant
k). Suicide- the killing of one‘s self
l) Regicide- the killing of a king or queen
m). Genocide- the massacre of a people
C. Classification Under the Revised Penal Code
1. Factors Which Determine What Offense Arose from the Death of a Person
a). The presence of qualifying aggravating circumstances

b). The relationship between the accused and the victim
c). Whether the victim is born or still a fetus
d). The age of the victim
2. Classification of Crimes Resulting from the Death of a Person

a). Destruction of Life: the killing of a human being. Question: X killed Y. What are the possible crimes
which arose due to the killing? They may either be:
(i). Parricide
(ii). Murder
(iii). Homicide which includes (a) Under Exceptional Circumstances (b) In a tumultuous Affray (c) In a
duel
(iv). Giving Assistance to a Suicide
(v). Infanticide
(vi), Abortion
Crimes Involving Destruction of Life
Art. 246: Parricide
A. Concept: The crime committed by a person who kills his:

a). Father or mother
b). Child whether legitimate or illegitimate
c). Legitimate ascendant
d). Legitimate descendant
e). Lawful spouse
B. The spouse must be the lawful spouse
1). The spouses maybe separated by judicial decree or separated in fact

2). The fact of marriage must be alleged in the Information otherwise the killing is homicide or
murder as the case maybe, even if the fact of marriage was proved in the course of the trial.
(penalty is the same)
3). The best evidence would be the marriage contract but even in the absence thereof, testimony
witnesses may show the lawful relationship as the presumption of marriage also applies, or if the
accused does not object to the claim of marriage.
4). In case of Muslim marriages Article 27 of P.D. 1083‖ The Muslim Code of Personal Laws‖

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
allows a Muslim to validly contract marriage with four wives, but the killing of the 2nd, 3rd or 4th wife
will not constitute parricide because a Muslim would be punished and penalized more than a non-
muslim by reason of a marriage which the law allows him to contract.
C. The child may be legitimate or illegitimate but should not be less than 3 days old. The father or
mother maybe legitimate or not, but in case of other ascendant or descendant, they must be legitimate
1). Question: GF has a bastard son named BS who has a legitimate son named L. Is parricide
committed if: (a) GF kills L (b) L kills GF
2). Question: Suppose BS is legitimate but L is illegitimate, would the answer be the same?
D. The basis of the classification is the blood relationship in the direct ascending and descending lines
hence:
1). Killing of siblings (brother/sister) and other collateral relatives is not parricide
2) Non-relatives or strangers who participate in the killing will be liable for homicide or murder as
the case may be
E. The killing maybe through negligence as when a father plays with his gun which went off and killed
the wife
F. If the accused is not aware that the victim is his relative, he will be charged for the actual crime
committed but Article 49 will be applied to determine his penalty
G. The crime may be aggravated by the circumstances which qualify murder but they will be
considered as ordinary aggravating circumstances. For example: The husband may poison the wife or
kill her by means of fire, or resort to treachery. Said circumstances will be appreciated as generic
aggravating circumstances.
Art. 247. Death or Physical Injuries

Under Exceptional Circumstances
A. Introduction.
1. Concept: It is the killing or wounding by one who surprised the spouse in the act of sexual
intercourse with another, (called euphemistically Criminal Conversation or any illicit sex for that
matter) or the minor daughter of the accused spouse and living with the accused spouse, in the act
of sexual intercourse with her seducer
2. Article 247 does not define a crime but grants a privilege or benefit amounting to an exemption
from punishment. Thus the commission of the crime under the situation contemplated would
constitute an Absolutory Cause.
3. The killing or wounding is regarded as a justifiable outburst of passion.
4. The accused will be charged for parricide, Murder or Homicide or Physical Injuries, and it is up to
the accused to prove the killing or physical injuries were under the circumstances conceived by
Article 247. This is a matter of defense.
5.The sexual intercourse must be voluntary on the part of the offending spouse or daughter,

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
otherwise the intercourse would constitute rape and the killing would become the justifying
circumstance of defense of a relative.
B. Requirements for the Application of Article 247:
1. The spouses must be legally married. If not the situation may only give rise to the mitigating
circumstance of Passion or Obfuscation
2. In case the accused is the husband, he should not have promoted or facilitated the prostitution of
his wife or daughter, or that the accused spouses had not consented to the infidelity of the other
spouse.
3. The accused must have surprised the victim in the act of sexual intercourse. Meaning of the
phrase‖ having surprised‖ (or element of surprise):
a). They were the offending spouses with the partner or the daughter and her seducer who were
caught by surprise. The phrase does not refer to the accused spouse
b). This includes the situation where the offended spouse had prior suspicion or knowledge of
the infidelity but simply resorted to a strategy to catch the guilty parties spouse in flagranti
c). The surprise must take place in the very act of sexual intercourse, during the criminal
conversation, not during the preparatory acts or after the sexual act
d). contextually, ―surprise‖ is to be understood as ―caught in flagranti delicito‖
d). QUESTION: Must the guilty spouse and partner be aware that they were ―discovered‖ as to be
literally surprised, or does Article 247 include situations where the offending spouses and partners
were killed without them being aware they were discovered and caught in flagranti?
4. The accused killed or injured the victim. At what point must the killing of wounding take place? It
must be either:
a). During the act itself: i.e simultaneously with the discovery and not before even if the
circumstances convinced the accused that the victims would surely engage in illicit sex
b). Or immediately thereafter:
(i). The strict traditional view held that there be no lapse of time from the discovery to the killing.
(ii). However, the better view is that Article 247 applies so long as there was no unnecessary
interruption or break from the time of discovery to the pursuit and then to the moment of the
killing or wounding. The discovery, pursuit, and killing must be one continuous process.
(iii). In the case of PP. vs. Abarca ( 153 SCRA 735) (one hour passed from the time of discovery
to the time the accused went to look for a weapon, returned to look for the accused until he
saw him inside a house playing mahjong) Article 247 was applied because although an interval
of time elapsed, the law however does not require the killing to be instantly or simultaneous
with the discovery, so long as the killing was the proximate result of the outrage which
overwhelmed the accused or that the killing was when the accused was still acting under the
influence of the infidelity.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
5. With respect to the killing of the daughter and her seducer, the daughter must be a minor and the
sexual intercourse must be in the dwelling of the accused parent and not elsewhere
C. Effect if third persons are killed or wounded:
1. Per PP. vs. Abarca, a complex crime does not arise if a third person is killed or wounded from the
act of the accused in shooting at the guilty spouse or the latter‘s partner, but the accused may be
held liable for reckless imprudence
2.Example: The accused shot at the offending spouse and partner but the bullet exited and killed a
Peeping Tom. If it was proven the killing falls under Article 247, the accused will be liable for the
death of the Peeping Tom only if it was proven his presence was known to the accused and who did
not take precautions to see that other people will not be hit by the bullet.
D. Penalty:
1.If death or serious physical injuries resulted, the accused will be imposed the penalty of destierro,
which is intended more to protect him from the retaliation of relatives of the victim, than as a
punishment.
2. If what were inflicted were less serious or slight physical injuries, there is no criminal liability hence
he must be acquitted.
ART. 248. Murder
A. Concept: It is the crime committed by the killing of a human being which does not constitute parricide
or infanticide and where it is both alleged and proven that the killing was attended by any of the
qualifying aggravating circumstances under Article 248.
B. The concept of the qualifying circumstances is the same as in Article 14. They are:
1. Except for ―outraging or scoffing at the person or corpse‖, which occurs after the victim is already
dead, all the other circumstances occur either prior to or simultaneous with the act of killing. Scoffing
or outraging includes doing any act upon the corpse which adds to the mental suffering or humiliation
of the heirs of the victim or which offends the public.
Examples: (i) dismembering the corpse by cutting off the head (ii) urinating on it (ii) putting it on a
sack and throwing the sack in a garbage pit (iv) stripping if off the clothes
2. Where the circumstance pertains to the means, methods or forms, it is usually treachery which is
preferred and the rest are absorbed; such as night time, advantage of superior strength, aid of armed
men.
3. Where treachery is present with other circumstances not relating to the means, methods or forms,
(e.g. price, reward or promise) it is treachery which will be used to qualify and the rest will be
considered as merely generic aggravating, provided they were duly alleged in the Information.
4. Where fire is used, the death of the victim must be the purpose or objective of the accused, such
as burning his person, throwing him into a fire or pouring gasoline on his body and lighting it. If the
intent or purpose was to destroy property by means of fire and it was incidental that a person was

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
killed, the result is the special complex crime/composite crime of Arson Resulting in Homicide.
5. My means of a motor vehicle, means the vehicle in motion is the weapon or the instrument to kill.
E.g. bumping or running over the victim.
6. Murder cannot be committed by negligence
Art. 249. Homicide
A. Concept: The unjustified killing of a human being which does not constitute murder, parricide, or
infanticide. The accused will be convicted of Homicide in the following instances:
1. When in the commission thereof, there is absent any of the qualifying circumstances of
murder or
2. None of the qualifying circumstance has been alleged in the Information or
3. Even if a qualifying circumstance is alleged but it was not proved.
B. Principles involved:
1. This may be committed by negligence. However where the victim does not die, the crime is either
Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Physical Injuries (Serious, Less Serious or Slight). There is no
crime of Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Frustrated or Attempted Homicide because intent is
incompatible with negligence.
2. Where there are two or more persons who inflicted injuries on the person, all are liable for the
death if:
a). There is conspiracy
b). There is no conspiracy but the wounds inflicted by each of the assailants are mortal wounds
c). There is no conspiracy but it cannot be determined who inflicted the mortal wounds
3. As in all other killings, the accused may be convicted of homicide even if the body of the victim
has not been found, so long as the corpus delicti has been proven
Art. 250. Penalty for Frustrated Parricide, Murder or Homicide
A. Concept: Article 250 is the authority for the court to impose a penalty one degree lower the
impossible penalty for frustrated or attempted murder, parricide or homicide. This is in the court‘s
discretion considering the facts of the case. ( Meaning: Instead of a penalty one degree for the
frustrated stage, it imposes a penalty 2 degrees lower. Instead of 2 degrees for the attempted stage,
it imposes a penalty 3 degrees lower)
Art. 251. Death Caused in a Tumultuous Affray

Art. 252: Physical Injuries in a Tumultuous Affray
I. Concept: Death or physical injuries caused in a tumultuous affray takes place when a quarrel or fight
breaks out among several persons, who do not belong to distinct groups, in a confused manner in the
course of which a person is killed or wounded and the author thereof cannot be ascertained.
II. Principles Involved:

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. The tumultuous affray must be a free-for-all fight ( labo-labo or ―to-whom-it-may-concern‖) and it

must involve at least four persons who fight against each other and not against another person or
group.
B. The participants do not belong to distinct groups otherwise all will be liable under the principle of
implied conspiracy.
C. The resulting harm is either death, serious or less serious physical injuries, but not slight physical
injuries and the order of priority as to who shall be liable is as follows:
1. The author thereof i.e. the one who inflicted the fatal blow or who caused the injury
2. Anyone who employed violence against the victim
D. The participants may also be liable for Disturbance of the Public Order and for Malicious Mischief
if they destroyed property.
Art. 253: Giving Assistance to Suicide
I. Two ways of commission: lending assitance
A. By assisting another to commit suicide, whether the suicide is consumated or not. Examples:
giving the means such as the poison, the knife, the gun or the rope. It may also include such acts of
giving moral and psychological assistance such as encouragement, suggestions as to how and
where to commit suicide. The penalty is Prison Mayor if the person died and it is Arresto Mayor
medium-maximum if the person does not die.
B. Lending assistance to the extent of doing the killing himself. The penalty is that of homicide.
II. Principles:
A. The person wanting to commit suicide is not liable

B. If the act is the second mode i.e the accused does the killing himself, and the person does not
die, the crime is frustrated
C. If in the course of the act of suicide a third person is killed or injured, or a property is destroyed,
the crime is a complex crime but the suicidee is not liable. Example: The accused shot the suicidee,
the bullet exited and killed another, the crime is Giving Assistance to Suicide with Homicide.
III. Euthanasia or mercy killing is a medical concern in that it refers to the act of ending the life of one
who is terminally ill in a relatively painless manner.
A. Does the law recognize the ―Right to Die with Dignity‖ on the part of hopeless patients?
Medically Assisted suicide?
B. Are the relatives liable if they remove the life sustaining gadgets to a brain dead patient?
C. What about killing a wounded comrade in arms to prevent his capture by the enemy and the
possibility of torture, or to prevent vital information from being forced from him?
Art. 254: Discharge of Firearms.
I. Concept: the crime committed by any person who shall discharge a firearm at another without intent
to kill, and for any undisclosed personal purpose.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
II. Principles involved:
A. The person fired at should not die because if such be the case, the crime is homicide where
intent to kill is immediately presumed and lack of intent becomes merely mitigating
B. If there is intent to kill the crime is either attempted or frustrated homicide
1. The lack of intent to kill may be inferred from the fact that the gun was fired from a distance;
or was between the legs, above the head, or to the sides, but not to the body
C. The reasons should not be known else there would be a different crime based on the reason.
Example: coercion (if the purpose is to compel the doing of an act or to prevent an act) or threats
(threatening the commission of a wrong)
D. If no bullet came out as the gun jammed, the crime is frustrated discharge of firearm
E. If however injuries were suffered by the person fired at, the crime would be a complex crime,
slight injuries would be separate offenses
F. If the gun was not pointed at a person or at his general direction, the crime is alarm and scandal
R.A. 10591 : THE COMPREHENSIVE FIREARMS AND

AMMUNITION REGULATION ACT
I. The following acts are punished:

1. Unlawful acquisition or possession of firearms and ammunitions
2. Carrying a registered firearm outside residence without a Permit to Carry
2. Engaging in the Unlawful manufacture, importation, sale or disposition of firearms or
ammunitions or parts thereof
3. Unlawful taking, sale or disposing of parts of firearm or ammunitions by a laborer or worker or
employee of licensed firearms dealer; buying or possessing the stolen parts
Q. i). Is this separate from qualified theft under the RPC ? ii).
Is buyer also liable as accessory to theft or as a fence?
4. Arms smuggling
5. Tampering, Obliteration, or alteration of firearms identification: including parts of the firearm,

name of maker, model, serial number or replacing parts of the firearms as well as individual or
peculiar characteristics essential in forensic examination of the FA or light weapon
6. Planting Evidence: any overt or covert act to insert, place and/or attach, directly or indirectly, any
firearm or ammunition, or parts thereof in the person, house, effects, or in the immediate vicinity
of an innocent individual for the purpose of implicating or incriminating the person, or imputing
the commission of any violation of the firearms law to said individual.
II. Factors that determine the penalty:
B. The act engaged in by the accused

C. The type of gun or article possessed
C-1.Light weapons (viz heavy weapons i.e cannons, mortars, tanks)
a). Class A: self-loading pistols, rifles and carbines, submachine guns, assault rifles and
light machine guns not exceeding caliber 7.62 which have fully automatic mode. The
penalty is prision mayor maximum

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
b). Class B: weapons designed for use by two or more persons serving as crew, or
rifles and machine guns exceeding caliber 7.62 mm. The penalty is reclusion perpetua
C-2.Small Arms (viz machine guns, anti-aircraft, rocket propelled): firearms intended to
be or primarily designed for individual use or that which is generally considered to mean a
weapon intended to be fired from the hand or shoulder, which are not capable of fully
automatic burst or discharge, which includes:
a). revolver
b). rifle
c). shot gun
The penalty is prision Mayor Medium
C-3. Major part of a small firearm, Class A light weapon or Class B light weapon
C-4. Ammunition for small arm or class A or class B light weapon unless the accused is
also charged with possession in which case possession of ammunition is absorbed
C-5. Major part of a Class A light weapon
B. Qualified Possession:
1. If three or more small arms or class A light weapons are unlawfully acquired or
possessed: reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua
2. One degree higher if:
a). if firearm is loaded with ammunition or inserted with a loaded magazine
b). fitted or mounted with laser or any gadget used to guide the shooter to hit the target
c). accompanied with an extra barrel
d). fitted or mounted with sniper scopes, muffler or silencer
e). converted to be capable of firing full automatic bursts
C. Use as an Aggravating Circumstances

1. THE Use of a loose firearm ( an unregistered firearm, obliterated or altered FA, or FA
which has been lost or stolen, illegally manufactured, registered FA in the possession of
an individual other than the licensee and those with revoked license), when inherent in
the commission of a crime punishable under the Revised Penal Code or other special
laws shall be considered an aggravating circumstance provided:
a). if the crime committed with the use of a loose firearm is penalized by the law with a
maximum penalty which is lower than that under (the firearm law) for illegal possession,
the penalty for illegal possession shall be imposed in lieu of the penalty for the crime
charged (Higher Penalty Rule)
Example: Convicted for Grave threat with the use of a small firearm: penalty for illegal
possession shall be imposed i.e. prision mayor minimum not arresto mayor which is the
penalty for grave threats
Example: alarms and scandal by firing a gun shall be penalized by Prision Mayor
minimum not arrresto menor
b). if crime committed with the use of a loose firearm is penalized with a maximum
penalty which is equal to that imposed (by the firearm law) for illegal possession of

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
firearms, the penalty of prision mayor maximum shall be imposed in addition to the penalty
for the crime punishable under the RPC or other special laws ( Additional Penalty for
Equal Penalty Rule)
c). Meaning of “inherent‖ : (i) if as an indispensable element, then there are only two
crimes under the RPC covered i.e. (a) alarms and scandal and (b) illegal discharge. The
possessor cannot anymore be charged under the firearms law. Thus an accused may
escape the higher penalty for possession by firing the gun in the air to be charged with
alarm.
(ii) as ―facilitated‖ to cover any and all crimes where a firearm was used even if not
necessarily fired, such as physical injuries, threats, coercion, robbery.
d). Querry: (i). Did the law establish a ―single Crime Rule‖ and the other crime is
preferred over the possession? (ii) If the accused is charged with two separate offenses
i.e the other crime and possession or is charged with possession but not the other crime:
what is the remedy? (iii) If the other crime was dismissed or accused was acquitted, can
he be charged with illegal possession?
III. Absorption if in furtherance, or, or incident to, or in connection with the crime of rebellion or
insurrection, or attempted coup d‘ etat
IV. Separate Crime Rule: if the crime committed is without using the loose firearm, the violation of
(The firearm Law) shall be considered as a distinct and separate offense
V. Possession to be punishable must not just be a temporary, incidental, or casual or harmless

possession or control. There must be an ―Intent to Perpetrate the Act ― or animus possidendi- the
prohibited act is done freely, consciously with knowledge that it is prohibited.
VI. There should be as many separate Informations to be filed corresponding to as many unlicensed
firearms which were possessed by the accused. Thus if two unlicensed armalites were possessed, then
there be two separate charges. However this is modified by the new provision on qualified possession
i.e. 3 or more FAs
VII. When an amnesty period is granted to holders of unlicensed firearms to surrender their firearms or
apply for a license: (i) there can be no violation of P.D. 1866 during the period of amnesty and (ii) to be
liable it must be alleged and proved that the possession was not to surrender the firearm, but that the
accused intends to use it to commit another crime ( Zuno vs. Dizon (1993) and PP. vs. Asuncion, 161
SCRA 490)
VIII. R.A. 9516 (approved on December 22, 2008) Penalizing acts relative to explosive and incendiary
devices
A. Amended the provisions of PD 1866 with respect to explosives, or incendiary devices

which are capable of producing destructive effect on contiguous objects or causing injury
or death to any person, including but not limited to hand grenades, rifle grenades, pillbox
bomb, Molotov cocktail bomb, fire bomb

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
B. The acts punished include:

1. Unlawful manufacture, sale, acquisition, disposition, importation or possession of (i)
explosives and (ii) a part, ingredient, manufacturing tool or instrument used or intended
to be used for the manufacture, construction, assembly, delivery or detonation.
Where the subject are explosives or incendiary devices, the law require that the accused
must have knowledge(scienter) of its (i) existence and of (ii) its explosive or incendiary
character.
It provides that mere possession of any explosive or incendiary devise shall be prima
facie evidence that the person had knowledge of the existence and explosive or
incendiary character of the device.
Likewise mere possession of any part, ingredient, machinery, tool or instrument directly
used in the manufacture, construction, assembly delivery or detonation of any explosive
or incendiary device by any person whose business activity or employment does not
lawfully deal with the possession of such article shall be prima facie evidence that such
article is intended to be used in the unlawful manufacture, construction, assembly,
delivery or detonation of an explosive e or incendiary device.
C. Defenses recognized by the law:

1. Lack of knowledge as to the existence and explosive or incendiary character of the
device.
2. Temporary, incidental casual, harmless or transient possession or control of any
explosive or incendiary device for the sole purpose of surrendering it to the proper
authorities
3. Absence of animus possidendi
4. Double jeopardy in that the conviction or acquittal of dismissal of the case for violation
of this decree shall be a bar to another prosecution for any offense where the violation
of the Decree was a necessary means for committing the offense or in furtherance of
which, incident to which, in connection with which, by reason or which, or on occasion
of which, the violation of this Decree was committed, and vice versa.
a). apparently therefore the law established a ―Single

Crime Rule‖.
D. Provides that when the violation (i.e. manufacture, possession) is a necessary means for
committing any of the crimes under the RPC or special laws, or is in furtherance of,
incidentaI to or in connection with, by reason or on the occasion of any of the crimes under
the RPC or special law, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua and a fine ranging from
P100,000.00 to P1mil shall be imposed
E. Punishes acts by public officials

1. Refusal or failure to appear, intentionally or by negligence, to appear as witness for the
prosecution or defense despite due notice and without nay valid reason shall be
punished by reclusion temporal and a fine not less than P500,000.00
2. Failure on the part of a superior officer to exert reasonable effort to present a

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
subordinate to the court shall be punished by prision correctional and fine of not less
than P10 thousand but not more than P50 thousand
3. Failure of a superior officer to notify the court within 24 hours of the order to transfer or
reassign a witness outside the territorial jurisdiction of the court (same penalty as
above)
4. Planting of Evidence : the willful act of maliciously and surreptitiously inserting, placing,
adding or attaching, directly or indirectly through any overt or covert act, whatever
quantity of any explosive, incendiary device or part ingredient, machinery, tool or
instrument of any explosive or incendiary device, in the person, house, effects, or in
the immediate vicinity of an innocent individual for the purpose of implicating,
incriminating or imputing the commission of any violation of this Decree. equipment
Art. 255. Infanticide
I. Concept: the crime committed by killing a child less than 3 days old.
(Question: why 3 days, not 5 or 10?)
II. Principles:
A. The child must be born alive and is viable or capable of independent existence. But if it was born
dead which fact is not known, the act may be considered as the Impossible Crime of Infanticide
B. Pursuant to the Heinous Crime Law, the penalty is Reclusion Perpetua to Death
C. Even if the accused are the parents, the name of the killing is still Infanticide not Parricide
D. Creates the special mitigating circumstance of ―Concealment of mother‘s dishonor‖ to benefit
the mother or the maternal grandparents if they are the accused, provided the mother is of good
reputation.
Art. 256. Abortion
I. Introduction:
1. Concept: The expulsion of the fetus from the mother‘s womb in order to kill it. The crime is
against the fetus and not against the mother.
2. Question: Does the Philippines recognize ―The reproductive freedom of a woman‖? ( Pro-Life vs
Pro Choice)
3. Under Philippine Law, there is no legal abortion except only if it is necessary to save the
mother‘s life (Therapeutic abortion) under Article 4 of Article 11 ( State of Necessity)
II. Kinds:
A. As to the manner of commission:
1). Intentional under Article 256. The accused knows the woman is pregnant and does an act
whereby the fetus dies in the womb or dies after having been expelled there from. For purposes
for determining the penalty, intentional abortion is further classified according to the mode as
follows:
a). By using violence upon the pregnant woman which connotes an actual physical contact by

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
the woman with an outside object, such as by boxing, kicking or pressing , throwing, pushing
b). No violence is employed but the accused acts without the consent of the woman, such as
the administration of drugs or substances or mixing of abortives with the food or drinks
c). The accused acts without violence but with the consent of the pregnant woman. Abortives
are given with her consent
2). Unintentional under Article 257. There is violence actually applied against the woman, the
purpose of which is not to cause her to abort, but which nevertheless results to the death of the
fetus in the womb or after it is expelled there from.
a). The knowledge by the accused that the woman is pregnant is immaterial
b). The violence may have been inflicted intentionally or by reckless action
c). If both the mother and fetus are killed, the crime would be homicide/murder with
unintentional abortion
d. Examples: (i) pushing a pregnant woman causing her to fall down so that her stomach hits
an object causing her to abort (ii) a reckless driver caused his jeepney to hit a post whereby a
woman passenger aborted
B .As to who caused the abortion:
1. Abortion by the mother herself

a). If the mother attempts to commit suicide but does not die but the fetus is killed, she is not
liable for unintentional abortion
b). If the purpose is to conceal her dishonor, this is a special mitigating circumstances and the
penalty is one degree lower
2. Abortion by a stranger but with the mother‘s consent
3. Abortion by the woman‘s parents but with the consent of the woman.
4. Abortion by a physician or a midwife. The penalty is higher than the abortion by others.
III. Principles
1. When the mother is killed, her death is complexed with the killing of the fetus either as (i) Homicide
with Intentional Abortion if the killing of the fetus is intentional or (ii) Homicide with Unintentional
Abortion if the killing of the fetus is unintentional.
2. But if there was no violence employed but the woman was intentionally frightened which resulted
to abortion:
a). If grave threats were employed precisely to cause the woman to abort the crime is Grave
Threats with Intentional Abortion
b). If only light threats were employed, the two are separate offenses
c). If there was no intention to cause her abort the crime is simply threats
3. If abortives are given to a woman to cause her to abort in the belief she is pregnant when in truth
she is not, the crime is the Impossible Crime of Abortion. The same is true if the abortives were
inherently inadequate or ineffectual. But if the abortives are capable of inducing an abortion but was
prevented by medical intervention, the crime is Frustrated Abortion
4. Suppose the woman was purposely placed in such an emotional, mental and psychological
depression so that she will abort? Personal opinion: The crime is Intentional Abortion under the
second mode
DUELS

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 260. Responsibility of participants in a Duel
A. Concept of a Duel: This is a ―Gentlemen‘s Fight‖.
1. It is a formal man-to-man combat with weapons between two persons who fight according to
certain terms and conditions previously agreed upon which govern the conduct of the combat.
2. The combatants are assisted by so called ―seconds‖ who arrange the terms of the combat, such
as the place, time, the weapons to be used, whether it is a fight to the death or a fight for honor
B. Acts Punished:
1. Killing the adversary: this is punished with the penalty of homicide
2. Inflicting serious or less serious physical injuries
3. Merely engaging in combat if no injuries or only slight injuries, are inflicted
4. Acting as seconds ( punished as accomplice)
5. Challenging, inciting, accepting a challenge to a duel, or scoffing at publicly at another for
refusing a challenge to a duel
C. Notes:
1. This kind of fights is already passé
2. Neither one of the combatants can claim self-defense
3. If there are no formal conditions, the fight is an ordinary fight and the laws on crimes against
persons will apply
4. One who challenges another to a fight maybe liable for threats
PHYSICAL INJURIES
A. Introduction:
1. There are four kinds: (a) Mutilation (ii) Serious Physical (iii) Less Serious and (iv) Slight
2. The essence is the infliction of physical pain or discomfort
2. How inflicted:
a). By wounding, beating, mutilating, assaulting. This connotes physical contact. This may be
with or without a weapon.
b). By administering injurious substances or beverages, such as drugs, spoiled food
(c) By taking advantage of the weakness of the mind or credulity of the victim, such as
convincing a person of low intelligence that he can fly, or inducing him to contort his body, or to
punch a wall, whereby he injures his ownself.
3. The Principle of Absorption applies. (i). If the victim dies, the injuries are absorbed if they were
inflicted by the same accused but if by third persons who are not in conspiracy with the one who
inflicted the mortal wound, the said injuries are separately punished (ii). If several types of injuries
are inflicted on the same victim, the charge is for the most serious injury as the lesser are absorbed.
B. Always in the consumated stage and there are no attempted or frustrated stages.
1. Physical Injuries is a crime based on the result, specifically on the gravity of the injury. If there is

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
no injury, not even the infliction of pain, then there is no crime of physical injuries.
Art. 262: Mutilation
A. Concept: To mutilate is to chop off, to clip, to lop off, to amputate a portion of the body, an external
organ, which protrudes.
B. Kinds:
1. Mutilation of an essential organ for reproduction ( castration which means the amputation of
whatever organ is necessary for generation or conception)
2. Mutilation of any other part of the body such as the arms ears, legs, nose
C. The purpose must be precisely to deprive the victim of the use of the organ or part of the body which
was mutilated. If not the offense would be ordinary physical injuries. Hence this cannot be committed
by negligence.
1. Example: (a) The case of Mr. Bobbit (b). Cutting off the arm of a champion bowler so he can not
bowl anymore. (c). Cutting off the legs of a swimmer so he cannot make use of them.
2. In Aguirre vs. Secretary of Justice ( March 03, 2008) where a mental retardate underwent an
operation for vasectomy and the physician was charged for mutilation, the issue was whether or not
the male sterilization procedure known as vasectomy constitute mutilation ( the vas deferens or
tubular passage are divided and the cut ends are tied), it was held that the cutting of the vas deferens
does not divest or deny a man of any essential organ of reproduction for the simple reason that it
does not entail the taking away of a part or portion or the male reproductive system.
PHYSICAL INJURIES PROPER
QUESTION: When will the infliction of injuries constitute attempted/Frustrated Homicide or physical
injuries?
ANSWER: The absence or presence of an Intent to Kill determines what crime was committed.
Such intent must be proven clearly and maybe inferred from:
1. The motive of the accused
2. The nature, kind, and type of weapon used
3. The location, number and nature of the wounds of the victim
4. The time, place and manner of the attack as when it was treacherous
5. The persistence of the attack
6. Utterances of the accused accompanying the attack
Art. 263. Serious Physical Injuries
A. Introduction: The Serious Physical Injuries are subdivided into four kinds for purposes of
determining the penalty to be imposed
B. First Kind: The Injured becomes insane, imbecile, impotent or blind.

1. The blindness must be total in both eyes
2. The impotence ( inability to have engage in sex) be total and not just a sexual dysfunction
C. Second Kind: Loss of a Principal Member /Organ of the Body

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. Total loss of the senses of speech, hearing and smell or

2. Loss of an eye, a hand, foot, arm or leg or loss of the use thereof
3. Incapacity for work in which the victim was habitually engaged
D. Third Kind:
1. Deformity or disfigurement: a permanent, visible ugliness which cannot be cured by the action of
nature. These must be inflicted on parts of the body which are normally exposed and not usually
covered by clothes.
The crime remains even if the victim undergoes surgery latter or face lift or artificial means cover
up the ugliness.
Examples: A scar on the face; loss of a front tooth not the molars or the front baby tooth as this can
be replaced; slicing off the earlobe;
2. Loss of a non-principal member of the body such as loss of a toe

3. Incapacity for any work for more than 90 days
E. Illness or incapacity for labor for more than 30 days, whichever is longer between the two.
1. Illness includes the healing period and not just the actual number of days of confinement in the
hospital.
F. The penalty is higher if (1) it is committed against the relatives who maybe victims of parricide
(conformably with the principle that the alternative circumstance of relationship is aggravating in grave
or less grave offenses) and (2) attended by the qualifying circumstances of murder. But these provisions
will not apply if the injury of a child was caused by excessive chastisement by a parent.
G. If the victim is a child and the accused is the parent, even if the child did not suffer any injury but the
cruel and unusual punishments were inflicted or he was subjected to humiliation, the crime is Child
Abuse under R.A. 7610.
Art. 265. Less Serious Physical Injuries
A. Concept: The crime which result when injuries are inflicted upon a person which (1) shall
incapacitate him for labor ten days to 30 days or (2) shall require medical attendance for the same
period
B. The penalty is qualified thus:

1. A fine of P500.00 is imposed if there is manifest intent to insult or offended party or there are
circumstances which add ignominy to the offense
2. The penalty is higher if the victims are parents, ascendants, guardians, teachers or persons of
rank
Art. 266. Slight Physical Injuries and Maltreatment
A. Kinds:
1. Where it incapacitated the victim from labor or required medical attendance from one to nine
days

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
2. Where the victim is not incapacitated from his habitual work or do not require medical
attendance. Example: boxing him on the stomach
3. Ill treatment of another without causing injury but the intention is to cause physical pain, such as
pulling the hair
Related Laws.
1. R.A. 8049. ( The Anti Hazing Law)
A. Meaning of hazing: an initiation rite or practice as a prerequisite for admission into membership in a
fraternity, sorority or any organization which places the neophyte in some embarrassing or humiliating
situations or otherwise subjecting him to physical or psychological suffering.
B. Requirements: (1) A written notice to the school authorities from the head of the organization seven
days prior to the rites (2) should not exceed 3 days in duration (3) presence of 2 representatives of the
school or organization
C. Persons liable:
1. Officers and members who actively participate
2. Owners of the place as accomplice if the he has actual knowledge but failed to take action to
prevent
3. Parents of officers or members where the hazing took place who have actual knowledge but
failed to prevent
4. School authorities who have knowledge but failed to take action are liable as accomplices
5. Officers, former officers, alumni who planned the initiation
6. Officers or members who induced the victim to be present at the hazing
7. Advisers who failed to prevent the hazing
D. Penalties: If there was death, rape, sodomy or mutilation the penalty is reclusion perpetua. For other
injuries, the penalty is higher than those provided under the Revised Penal Code. Lack of Intent to
commit so grave a wrong is not allowed as a mitigating circumstance.
2. RA. 7610 (The Child Abuse law)
1. Includes any form of physical, psychological, or sexual abuse, and criminal neglect
2. If the victim of the Mutilation or Physical Injuries (Par. 1) is under 12 years old, the penalty under the
Penal Code is higher, it is Reclusion Perpetua.
3. If the act upon the minor is already punished by the RPC, it cannot be penalized by RA 7610. Per
Araneta vs. People ( 556 SCRA 2008, June 27, 2008):
a). The definition of child abuse has been expanded to encompass not only those specific acts of
child abuse under existing laws but also includes ―other acts of neglect, abuse, cruelty, or
exploitation and other conditions prejudicial to the child‘s development‖.
b) Section 10 of Article VI punishes:
a) those enumerated under Article 59 of P.D. 603 as amended
b). and four distinct acts i.e. (i) child abuse (ii) child cruelty (iii) child exploitation and (iv) being
responsible for conditions prejudicial to the child‘s development. Child abuse, cruelty and
exploitation are distinct from each other and distinct from the act prejudicial to the child‘s

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
development. An accuse can be convicted under Section 10 (a) if he commits any of the four acts
and it is not necessary to prove the acts resulted in the prejudice of child because an act prejudicial
to the development of the child is different from the former acts.
4. Under section 5(b), Article III of RA 7610 in relation to RA 8353, if the victim of sexual abuse ( which
includes coercing a child to engage in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct, per PP. vs. Malto, 535
SCRA 659) is below 12 years of age, the offender should not prosecuted for sexual abuse but for
statutory rape… if the victim is 12 years or older, the offender should be charged with either sexual
abuse (sexual intercourse with a child subject to child abuse) under section 5(b) of RA 7610 or rape
under Art. 266-A… the offender cannot be accused of both crimes for the same act ( PP. vs. Roberto
Abay (580 SCRA 235)
a). parental abandonment giving rise to child abuse requires an act showing the purpose to forego all
parental duties and relinquish all parental claims. Physical estrangement alone, without financial and
moral desertion, will not tantamount to abandonment ( dela cruz vs. dela cruz 130 Phil. 324 ( 1968)
Art. 266-A Rape
I. Introduction: Rape used to be a under Crimes Against Chastity as Article 335 and a private crime.
R.A. 8353 has made rape a Crime Against Persons as Article 266-A. It is a public crime hence: (1)
There is no need for a prior denunciation by the victim to start criminal proceedings and (2) Any person
may bring the crime of rape to the attention of the authorities, which will be the basis for police
investigation into the crime and subsequent filing of charges.
II. Expanded Concept of Rape: There are two kinds of Rape:
1. The Traditional or Conventional Concept which is the Penile Penetration into the female sex
organ and which can be committed by a male only and where the victim is a female only
2. Rape Through Sexual Assault either a penile insertion into the mouth or anus or a non-penile
insertion into the sex organ or anus
III. How Conventional Rape (Penile Penetration) is committed
1. Where the Sex Is Objected to or Unconsented Sex:
a). Through Force, threat, or intimidation

(i). This presupposes that there was resistance and not just an initial reluctance but there must
be a physical overt act manifesting resistance. Mental or verbal resistance is not sufficient. The
old doctrines requiring tenacious resistance is no longer followed.
(ii). There is no degree of force required to overcome the resistance as any degree of force,
intimidation to compel the victim‘s submission to the desire of the accused is sufficient
(iii). Where the accused is the father or in case of incestuous rape, resistance is not required
due to the moral ascendancy exercised by the father over the daughter
(iv). If at any moment the victims manifest, through overt acts that she does not want sex, any
sex with her against her will is rape

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
b). When the victim is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious
Partial deprivation of reason is sufficient which may be due to reasons which are organic, or
due to lack of sleep, or fatigue, or was induced by drugs. As when the victim is in a coma or
was in that stage of being ―half-asleep-half awake‖.
Insane persons are included in those deprived of reason.
Question: Suppose substances (Female Viagra) were administered to the victim, without her
knowledge which incited her passions and aroused her sexually, which thus made it easier for
the accused to have sex with her?
2. Where there was no objection to the sex or it was consented to:
c). By means of fraudulent machinations or grave abuse of authority

Fraudulent Machination is the use of artifice or deceit to obtain the consent of the victim. The
woman consented to the sex by virtue of the artifice or deceit. There was a seduction.
(i). The most common form of artifice is a false promise of marriage which is the excuse to
have sex with the woman. However the solicitation must be shown to be persistent as to
overcome the woman‘s defenses
(ii). If the artifice is a promise of money or material things, there is no rape
Grave abuse of authority connotes that the accused enjoyed a position of influence or ascendancy
over the victim which he gravely abused to secure the consent of the woman to have sex with
him. The relationship or position of influence or ascendancy may be due to :
(i). Blood relations
(ii) Human relations as officer of an organization over members
(iii) Education as a teacher over a student
(iv). Employment as the boss seducing the secretary
(iv). Religion as the minister over his church member
(v) Public office as a congressman over a poor girl
d). in cases of Statutory Rape
(i). The victim is under 12 years of age. This refers to the biological age.
(ii) The victim is demented. This includes the imbecile, feeble minded or mental retardate
provided their mental age must be that of a woman below 12 years of age.
IV. Rape Through Sexual Assault, The circumstances are the same as in the case of Conventional
Rape but the accused:
a). Inserts his penis into another person‘s mouth or anal orifice.
(i). The accused is any person with a penis and the victim may be a male or female
(ii) The person with a penis actively initiates the insertion and not when the person is the passive
participant, as when he was asleep in which case, if the act was without his consent, he may file
a case of acts of lasciviousness
b) Or any object or instrument into the genitalia or anal orifice of another (Object Penetration)
(i). The accused maybe a female or male and the victim may also be a male or female

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
(ii). The insertion must be with ‖lewed design‖ i.e to obtain sexual gratification, otherwise it may
either be physical injuries or slander by deed.
(iii). This absorbs the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness
(iv). The term object includes parts of the human body like a finger, tongue or toe. ―The insertion
of one‘s finger into the genetalia or anal orifice of another constitutes rape by sexual assault and
not merely an act of lasciviousness ( PP vs. Fetalino, 525 SCRA 170)
V. Classification of Rape for Purposes of Penalty
1. Simple Rape: the penalty is Reclusion Perpetua

2. Qualified:
a). Where the Penalty is Reclusion Perpetua to Death as in the following:

(i). Rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons
(ii). When by reason or on the occasion of rape the victim became insane
b). Where the penalty is death
(i). when by reason or on the occasion of rape a homicide is committed
(ii). when any of the 10 qualifying aggravating circumstances are alleged specifically in the
Information and duly proven
VI. Special Complex Crimes/Composite Crimes
1. Rape Resulting to Insanity

2. Rape with Permanent Physical Mutilation or Disability
3. Attempted Rape with Homicide
4. Rape with Homicide
Note: In Nos.(1) and (2) the person who became insane or suffered mutilation is the victim of the
rape whereas in Nos. (3) and (4) the victim of the homicide may be any person and not
necessarily the victim of the rape.
VII. Defenses which may extinguish criminal liability or criminal action:
1. The subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the offended party extinguishes (a) the
criminal action i.e the case will be dismiss which presupposes the marriage took place before or
during the filing of the case or (b) the penalty i.e. the accused if convicted, will no longer serve the
penalty which presupposes the marriage took place after conviction
2. Subsequent Forgiveness by the Wife Upon the husband which maybe given before, during the
case, or after conviction of the husband
VIII. Question: Is there Marital Rape or, can the husband be guilty of raping the wife?
Personal opinion. No, as to rape in the traditional concept.
1. The marital union maintains the husband‘s right to the physical access to the wife ie. Right of
Consortium based on connubial relations
2. There was prior marital consent as contained in that absolute answer to the question: ― Do you

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
give yourself to him as your lawful husband?‖ (Note also the Biblical admonition that Woman
should submit to their husbands)
3. There is absolutely no attempt to define and categorically create marital rape as a crime
4. There can be no crime by implication (Principle of Legality)
5. The women sponsors did not insist on it although originally they conceived of it. They left it for
the courts to determine.
At most the husband will be guilty of coercion, unless he acted in conspiracy, or was a principal by
inducement, or acted as an accomplice or accessory.
However, the husband maybe guilty of rape (i) if there is legal separation between the spouses,
and (ii) rape by sexual assault, this being unnatural.
IX. Principles:
1. Rape has only two stages, the attempted and consummated.

2. The principle that rape is consummated by the slightest penetration applies to both types of
rape
3. The character of the victim is immaterial as rape maybe committed even against a prostitute
4. Rape is not a continuing offense
a). The single occasion rulings ( several sex acts in one occasion by the same accused
constitutes only one crime of rape) have been superseded by Pp. vs. Lucena (717 SCRA 389)
where the accused was convicted of three counts of rape which were committed every after 5
minutes. This is to be distinguished where the accused ordered the victim to change position for
three times, the three different penetrations constitute but one continuing act of rape there being
but one criminal intent. ( PP vs. Aaren (389 SCRA 520)
b). But Sex on different occasions constitutes different and separate crimes.
c). Where there are two or more rapists who acted in conspiracy, all are liable for each act of rape
committed by each one of them and for those committed by their co-accused. Thus if 3 raped the
same girl, all will be liable for 3 separate rapes.
d). If there be several victims, there are as many rapes corresponding to the number of victims
5. For purposes of conviction the following principle is observed:
a). a rape charge is easy to make, difficult to prove but more difficult for the accused, though
innocent, to disprove.
b). In view of the intrinsic nature of rape where generally only two persons are involved, the
testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution ( HELL HATH NO FURY
LIKE A WOMAN SCORNED).
c). The evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot draw strength
from the weakness of the defense evidence
X. Indemnity: for the fact of rape alone

1. Simple rape is P50,000.00 for each and every conviction for rape, for each and every
accused
2. Qualified: P75,000.00

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
3. This is in addition to moral damages which has been set at P50,000.00 and P75,000.00
respectively for simple and qualified rape, without need of evidence since, when a woman is
raped, it is presumed she underwent moral suffering
4. In incestuous rape, the court pegged P25,000.00 ―to set an example for the public good‖
Title Nine: Crimes Against Personal

Liberty and Security
Introduction: These crimes are committed principally by private persons. If a public officer participates,
the crime must come from a private person as the principal accused, otherwise the crime would be a
crime against the fundamental laws of the state.
Art. 267. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention
I. Introduction: Art. 270 lays down the penalty for kidnapping and enumerates when the detention
becomes serious. The concept is of American origin
1. To kidnap is to forcibly take a person from where he has a right to be ( such as his place of work,
residence, rest and recreation, school, street, park or public place) and bring him somewhere else.
The taking is always without the consent of the victim. Kidnapping need not be followed by detention
as where the talking was only to briefly restrain the victim. It is usually for ransom.
2. To ―detain‖ is to deprive a person of his liberty or restrict his freedom of locomotion or
movement, and may not involve a kidnapping. This includes the following situations:
a). Lock up or actual physical deprivation of the personal liberty by confinement in an enclosure
b). physically immobilizing the victim though he has not been placed in an enclosure
c). by placing physical, moral or psychological restraint on his freedom of locomotion or
movement
Example: The Mayor confronted a DENR Inspection team, calls for reinforcements, refuses their
request to leave, orders them to go with him and allows them to leave only the following day.
Held: ―The curtailment of the victim‘s liberty need not involve any physical restraint upon the
victim‘s persons. If the acts and actuations of the accused produced such fear in the mind of the
victim sufficient to paralyze the latter, to the extent that he victim is compelled to limit his own
actions and movements in accordance with the wishes of the accused, then the victim is detained
against his will‖ ( Aslega vs. People, Oct. 01, 2003)
d). The detention may either be Serious Art. 267 or Slight ( Art. 268)
II. Persons Liable.

A. The offender is a private person and not a Public Officer else the crime is Arbitrary Detention,
unless the latter has no duty to arrest or order the detention of another.
B. One who furnished the place of detention is liable as an accomplice unless he was in conspiracy
with the other accused.
III. The circumstances which make the detention serious are:

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. The kidnapping or detention shall have lasted more than 3 days

2. It is committed by simulating public authority
Example: a person represents himself to be a police investigator who tells victim he will bring him
to the police station, but brings him elsewhere
3. If serious physical injuries were inflicted or threats to kill were made
4. If victim is a minor, female or public officer. In case of minors, when the kidnapper is the parent,
is kidnapping committed?
IV. Kidnapping for Ransom. The victim is held hostage until demands of the kidnapper are met.
1. The penalty is death
2. Ransom is any consideration, whether in the form of money, articles of value, or services or
favors, for the release of a person.
3. It need not be given or received it being sufficient that a demand was made
4. Examples: (i).The son of the Judge will be released if the Judge dismisses a case or allows the
bail to be reduced (2) The grandson of a physician will be released if the physician will perform an
operation on the mother of a friend of the kidnappers (3) The wife of a politician will be released if
the husband makes a public apology (4) The pupils of a school will be released if the school lowers
its tuition fees (5).immediate review of a case by the DOJ and reinstatement into the service.
V. New Special Complex/Composite Crimes
1. Kidnapping/Serious Illegal Detention with Homicide

a). The person killed is the victim of the kidnapping or illegal detention. If the person killed is a
third person, such as the bodyguard, the driver or an innocent person, it is article 48 which applies
and the crime is an ordinary complex crime.
b). Hence previous decisions which say the crime is either murder or kidnapping depending on
the intention of the accused do not anymore hold water. It is enough the victim was killed whether
the original intention was to kill or to detain. ―Where the person kidnapped is killed, regardless
whether the killing was purposely sought or was merely an afterthought, the kidnapping and
murder or homicide can no longer be complexed, nor be treated as separate crimes, but shall be
punished as a special complex crime…‖ ( PP. vs. Montanir ( 647 SCRA 170)
2. Kidnapping/Serious Illegal Detention with Rape. The victim of rape is the victim of kidnapping
and not a third person else the rape is a separate offense.
a) Includes a situation where several rapes are committed
b) The taking way must not be with lewd designs else it becomes forcible abduction with rape
3. Kidnapping /Serious Illegal Detention with Physical Injuries as a result of torture or

dehumanizing acts
(i). Question: A Woman was kidnapped, ransom was demanded, and then later was killed. What
crime was committed? (Answer): Kidnapping for Ransom with Murder. ( PP. vs. Ramos: Oct. 12,
1998)
(ii). Question: Suppose the victim was also raped before being killed? (Answer). It is still
Kidnapping for ransom with Murder. The rape will be considered as an aggravating circumstance
(iii). Question: The robbers held hostage the customers of a bank as human shield against the

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
police. Are they also liable for detention? (Answer) The detention in robbery is absorbed unless the
victims are detained to compel delivery of money
VI. Distinguished from Other Crimes Which Involved Detention and Taking Away of a Person
1. From coercion- where there is no intent to detain or deprive a person of his liberty. Examples:
a). dragging a woman to a waiting car but was let go due to her remonstrations or because she
was able to wrest herself free.
b). a debtor was forcibly taken from his store and brought to a house to compel him to pay
c). A woman was taken to a house and kept there in order to break her will and agree to marry
the accused
d). Where a woman was seen dragging along a missing boy who was crying and refusing to go
with her
2. Abduction- where the taking away of the woman against her will (Forcible Abduction) or by artifice
upon a minor girl (Consented Abduction)) was with lewd designs, which was present at the very
moment of the taking away, as it was the purpose thereof.
QUESTION: DOES THE PRINCIPLE OF CONTINOUS CRIME APPLY IF THERE ARE

SEVERAL PERSONS KIDNAPPED?
Art. 268. Slight Illegal Detention
I. Concept: The crime committed by a private person who detains another without the attendance of
any of the circumstances under Article 267. The penalty therefore is the same penalty imposed upon
one who furnished the place of detention.
II. Special Mitigating Circumstances (1). If the victim is released within 3 days (2) without the purpose
having been attained and (3) before institution of criminal proceedings. Note that this special mitigating
does not apply if the detention is serious.
Thus if the woman victim was released after one hour, the same is not mitigating since the detention is
already serious.
Art. 269. Unlawful Arrest
I. Concept: It is the crime committed by any person, whether a private person or public officer, who
arrest or detains a person without reasonable ground therefore, for the purpose of delivering him to the
proper authorities.
A. The public officer is one who has no power to arrest or order the detention of another, else it is
arbitrary detention.
B. The situation is that the arrest is not a valid warrantless arrest but the victim is brought before
the police or prosecutor‘s office or court, for the purpose of filing charges against the victim.
C. If the purpose is otherwise, the crime may be detention or coercion or abduction.
D. The term is not ―Illegal Arrest‖.
E. This maybe complexed with Incriminatory Machination. E.g. A person placed a knife in the bag
of another and then arrests him and brings him to the police station
Art. 270. Kidnapping and Failure to Return a Minor

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
I. Concept: The crime committed by a person who was entrusted with the custody of a minor person
who shall deliberately fail to restore the latter to his parents or guardians.
1. The term: Kidnapping‖ is not accurate since the gist of the offense is the failure to return the
minor to his parents or guardians
2. The accused maybe a parent. Example, a wife is separated from the husband. The husband was
awarded custody of their the child. The wife was allowed to bring the child to her house on a
Friday but to return him on Monday. She failed to do so.
a. Question: Suppose the husband took away the children without the wife‘s knowledge
and consent?
Art. 271. Inducing a Minor to Abandon His Home.
I. Concept: The crime committed by any person who shall induce, or convince, a minor to abandon
the home of his parents or guardians or persons entrusted with his custody. This includes a parent.
1. The Home includes the temporary boarding house or dorm.
2. There must be no force employed threat or intimidation but through the use of false
representations. Such as making him believe to become a star in Manila.
Crimes Involving Involuntary Servitude:
Note : These crimes must be deemed to have been amended and subsumed by the Anti
Trafficking in Persons Act
1. Slavery Proper under Art. 272.
A. Concept: The crime committed by a person who shall purchase, sell (kidnap) or detain a human
being for the purpose of enslaving him i.e. to compel a person to work or perform labor against his
will, usually under terms and conditions not allowed by law.
B. If the purpose is to assign the person to some immoral traffic, the penalty is higher. This is referred
to as White Slavery ( Why the term white? To distinguish it from the slavery of Black Africans the
purpose of which is to make them work as field hands, laborers, house-helps, against their will and
without compensation)
Note: There are two kinds of White Slavery or ―pimping‖ ( supplying women as partners for sex)
1. That under Article 272 where the accused is not engaged in prostitution
2. That under Article 341 where the accused is engaged in the business of prostitution
C. There is a Flaw in the law: If the detention is not to enslave or to assign to immoral traffic, the
crime is serious illegal detention punishable by reclusion perpetua whereas, if the purpose is to
enslave the woman the penalty is prision mayor, and if it white slavery the penalty is prision mayor
maximum
2. Exploitation of Child Labor under Article 273
A. Concept: The crime committed by any person who shall retain a minor in his service as payment
of the indebtedness of the minor‘s ascendant, guardian or person entrusted with the custody of the

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
minor.
B. The accused is a creditor
C. This may now be Child Abuse by Child Exploitation
3. Services rendered under compulsion in payment of a debt

A. Concept: the crime committed by a creditor who compels the debtor to work for him as household
servant or farm laborer. If in some other capacity as office worker for example, the crime is coercion.
Question: What are the crimes committed by a Creditor in relation to the debt owed him?
Answer:
1. Exploitation of Child labor (Art. 273)
2. Services Rendered under compulsion as payment of debt (Art. 274)
3. Light Coercion ( Art. 287) seizing, by violence, a property of a debtor to apply as payment
of a debt
THE CRIME OF TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS
The present law is RA 10364 known as the Expanded Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2012‖. It
expanded the coverage of R.A 9208 (The Anti Trafficking In Persons Act of 2003) which is the basic
law punishing trafficking in persons.
The provisions of Articles 271 to article 274 must be read in the light of the provisions of this law.
I. Per Section 3 Trafficking In Persons means:
A. the recruitment, transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the
victim‘s consent or knowledge, within or across national borders by means of threat or use of force,
or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of position, taking
advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to
achieve the consent of a person having control over another person for the purpose of exploitation
which includes at a minimum, the exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual
exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs.
2. To traffick is to engage in business or transactions involving prohibited or illegal articles

such as drugs or firearms. Trafficking in persons refer to any form of unlawful transaction,
business or activity the subject of which is a human being and the purpose is (a) any form
of sexual exploitation of a person (b) forced labor or services or slavery
(c) servitude (d) removal or sale of human organs.
a). The phrase ―within or across national boundaries‖ connotes that the trafficking may
be wholly within Philippines or may involve or take place within the territories of two or
more foreign countries.
II. The recruitment, transportation, transfer, or harboring or receipt of a child for the purpose of
exploitation or when the adoption is induced by any form of consideration for exploitative purposes

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
shall also be considered as ―trafficking in persons‖ even if it does not involve any of the means set
forth in the preceding paragraph.
III. The following are the acts punished:
A. To recruit, obtain, hire, provide, offer, transport, transfer, maintain, harbor, or receive a person by
any means including those under the pretext of domestic or overseas employment or training or
apprenticeship, for the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation.
1. Debt bondage- the act of pledging of personal services or labor by the debtor or of any person
under his control as security or payment of a debt when the length and nature of services is not
clearly defined or when the value of the services as reasonable assessed is not applied toward
the liquidation of the debt
B. To introduce or match for money or profit or any other consideration, any person or Filipina woman
to a foreign national for marriage for the purpose of acquiring, buying, offering, selling or trading him/her
to engage in prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude
or debt bondage. (Marriage-matching)
C. To offer or contract marriage, real or simulated, for said purposes
D. To undertake or organize tours and travel plans consisting of tourism packages or activities for the
purpose of offering persons for PP or Sex (sex tours)
E. To maintain or hire a person to engage in prostitution or pornography
F. To adopt or facilitate the adoption of persons for said purposes
G. To recruit, hire, adopt or abduct, by any unlawful means, for the purposes of removal or sale of
organs of a person
H. To recruit, transport or adopt a child to engage in armed activities (child soldiers)
I. To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, obtain, maintain, offer, hire provide or receive a person for
purposes of forced labor, slavery, debt bondage, and involuntary services, including a scheme, plan or
pattern intended to cause the person either to believe that if the person did not perform such labor or
service, he or she or another person would suffer serious harm or physical injury (physical threats upon
refusal) or to abuse or threaten the use of law or legal processes (legal threats)
J. Same acts but subject is a child, for purposes of exploitation, or trading them, including but not
limited to the act of bartering or selling a child for purposes of exploitation such as (i) all forms of slavery
or practice similar to slavery, involuntary servitude, debt bondage, and forced labor, including
recruitment of children for use in armed conflict (ii) for prostitution production of pornography, or for
pornographic performance (iii) for the production and trafficking of drugs (iv) for illegal activities or work
which, by its nature or under the circumstances, is likely to harm their health , safety or morals ( Harmful
activities)
K. To organize or direct other persons to commit acts of trafficking

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
IV. Defines and punishes Attempted Trafficking in Persons, Accomplices and Accessories
V. Provides for Qualified Trafficking in Persons:

1. offender is a spouse, ascendant, sibling, guardian or person exercising authority over the victim
or is a public officer or employee
2. offender is a member of the military or law enforcement agencies
3. Victim dies, becomes insane, suffers mutilation or afflicted with HIV or AIDS
4. offender commits one or more violations under attempted trafficking involving a child over a
period of 60 days
5. offender directs or manages the trafficked victim if carrying out exploitative purposes of
trafficking
VI.
Crimes Against Security
A. Crimes Involving Abandonment of Persons

1. Abandonment of Persons in Danger (Art. 275)
3. Abandonment of One‘s Own Victim (Art. 275)
4. Abandonment of Minors
a). By one with temporary custody ( Art. 276).
b). By one entrusted with the education or care (Art. 277)
c). Indifference of Parents
B. Abandonment of Persons (Art. 275)
1. Of Persons Found in Danger:
a). The crime committed by a person who fails to render assistance to one he finds in an
uninhabited place who is wounded or in danger of dying provided he can render assistance
without detriment to himself
b). This is a crime by omission but there are two legal excuses or justifications which maybe
defenses:
(i). The place must be an ―Uninhabited place‖ which refers to places where there is remote
possibility of the wounded or dying person receiving help form anyone. Hence one who fails to
help a wounded person in the market alley is not liable.
(ii) The accused himself would be placed in an equal or more serious danger if he renders
assistance
2. Of one‘s own victim in an accident
a). The term ―accident‖ is that which constitute the exempting circumstance of accident under
Par. 4 of Article 12 and not to those arising from negligence or imprudence.
b). Thus if one runs over a person because of loose break and he abandons his victim, the
abandonment is absorbed in the crime of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide. But if a
hunter tripped in a forest causing his gun to fire and his companion is hit and he abandons the

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
wounded man, the hunter is liable for abandonment.
3. Failure to deliver to the authorities or to the family, or failure to bring to a safe place, an
abandoned child who is under 7 years.
Example: The personnel of the airport who found an abandoned baby would be liable if they left
the baby where they found it or simply placed it elsewhere.
C. Abandonment of Minors:
1. By one with custody of a child below 7 years of age but without intent to kill (Art. 276)
a). Example: The housemaid brought the child to a park but left him there to go window
shopping. The mother who gave birth in the lavatory of the plane and left it there is liable.
b). The crime is qualified if the minor died as a result or the child was in danger of dying when
abandoned, like abandoning him on a busy street.
2. By a person entrusted with the education or /rearing care (Art. 277)

a). The offense is committed by delivering the minor to a public institution or to another person,
without the consent of the parent‘s of the minor, or proper authorities.
b). The purpose is to evade the responsibility of rearing the minor or educating him
c). Example: The uncle to whom the child was left by the parents brings the child to a foster
home
3. Indifference of parents- the crime by a parent who neglects his children by not giving them the
education which his financial condition permits.
a). The liability of a parent does not depend on whether the other parent is also guilty of neglect.
The irresponsible parent cannot exculpate himself from the consequences of his neglect by
invoking the other parent‘s faithful compliance with his/her parental duties
b). The charge cannot however be made in relation to section 10 (a) of R.A. 7610 (i.e. Child
Abuse) ( De Guzman vs. Perez 496 SCRA 474)
ABONDONMENT BY A PARENT may be punished under R.A. 7610 as constituting conduct

prejudicial to the best interest of the child. Be it noted though that to constitute parental
abandonment, there must be proof showing a purpose to forego all parental duties and relinquish all
parental claims. Physical estrangement alone, without financial and moral desertion, is not
tantamount to abandonment ( Dela Cruz vs. Dela Cruz, 130 Phil. 334)
Note: Art. 278. Exploitation of Minors, involving employing minors in activities inimical to them ( like
in circuses) is now superseded by R.A. 7610 ( The Child Abuse Law)
The Crime of Trespass

(Unauthorized Entry)
I. Kinds:
1. Trespass to dwelling which, depending upon the mode of entry, may be either: (a). Simple which
is entry without violence or (b) Qualified which is entry with violence

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
2. Trespass to Estate or to Property
II. Trespass to Dwelling: this connotes that a stranger i.e. one who is not an occupant, actually enters
the dwelling of another against the will of the owner or lawful occupant, whether express or implied.
1. Dwelling: the place where a person habitually stays for rest, comfort and peace of mind.
a). It includes the basic structure and the dependencies.
b). It may be owned by the victim or is merely leased by him or he is a guest or works thereat as a
stay-in.
c). The occupant need not be present at the time of entry
2. The accused is a private person else the crime is Violation of Domicile.
3. In Qualified Trespass, the entry is by means of violence or intimidation
a). The violence or intimidation may be either immediately before, during or immediately after the
accused has gained entry
b). It may be against persons or against things
c). The prohibition may be express or implied, in any form, and made at any time, not necessarily
at the time of entry.
d). Examples: (i) Pushing aside the victim who is blocking the door (ii) cutting the string used as
temporary lock (iii) removing the bolt (iv) kicking the door open
4. If there is no violence it is simple trespass

a). This includes surreptitious entry
b). When the accused entered by pushing open a door with his finger, the crime is simple
trespass. But if upon entering an occupant pushes him out and the accused boxed, kicked or
fought against the occupant, the crime is qualified trespass.
c). A consented entry does not become unconsented thereby giving rise to trespass just because
the entrant performed an act whereby he is ordered to leave but he refused.
Example: The maid allowed the accused to enter. When the father learned his intention was to
court the daughter, he got mad, berated the accused and told him to leave. The accused
refused not until he can see the daughter. Before being forcibly pushed out, the accused
answered back and argued with the father. Did the accused commit trespass? Answer: No,
because he was allowed to enter by a lawful occupant.
But if the father had previously already told the accused he was not welcome into his house
and instructed the maid not to let the accused enter but the maid later allowed the accused to
enter, the accused is guilty of trespass.
5. The entry must not be to commit a more serious crime inside the dwelling because:
a). The entry maybe absorbed as an element of the crime, such as in robbery
b). It may constitute the aggravating circumstance of unlawful entry or dwelling, as when the
accused entered the dwelling in order to kill or injure an occupant.
c). Where a person was found inside a dwelling, and upon discovery he kills an occupant, there
are two separate crimes: (i) trespass and (ii) homicide or murder

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
6. The accused may be the owner of the building so long as the occupancy was voluntarily given to
the victim. Example: the lessee may file Trespass against the lessor who enters the leased premises
against the will of the lessee.
7. Justified trespass: If the entry is: (a) to prevent serious harm to himself, to an occupant or to a
third person (b). to render some service to humanity or justice (c). in case of public houses while
they are open.
Example: X snatched the wallet of Y who gave chase. X ran inside an apartment and Y followed
inside and collared the snatcher. X is liable for trespass but Y is not.
Example: A traveler climbed through a window and entered a house the occupants of which are
absent. The traveler had no place to sleep and a typhoon was raging. He is not liable for trespass.
III. Trespass to Fenced Estate or Closed Premises ( Trespass to Property)
A. This requires:
a). The estate or closed premises must be uninhabited and within a definite area
b). There is a manifest prohibition against entry, such as a sign, or perimeter fence even if only a
strand of barbed wire
c). The permission of the owner or caretaker or administrator has not been secured
B. This includes unauthorized entry into commercial establishments and private offices
Threats and Coercions
I. These are considered as crimes against security because they disturb the peace of mind of a person.
II. Threats: Declarations of an intention to inflict a future wrong upon the person, honor or property of
another or the latter‘s family.
As a rule, the acts or words must be so efficacious as to amount to moral pressure and thus produces
fear, or mental disturbance. Or it was made under circumstances as to induce a reasonable belief on
the part of the victim that the threat is serious and will be carried out.
A. Grave Threats under Article 282 - the act threatened to be done is a crime e.g. to kill, to burn or
destroy property, to box or to inflict injuries
1. Conditional: the accused makes a demand so that he will not do what he threatened, such as
a demand for money or another condition which may not be unlawful. E.g. ―I will stone your car if
you will fail me‖. If the condition was achieved, the penalty is one degree lower than that provided
for the crime threatened to be done.
2 Unconditional- there is simply a declaration to do wrong or harm amounting to a crime. E.g.: ―I
am tired of looking at your face. I might as well kill you‖. The penalty is two degrees lower than
that provided for the crime threatened.
3. But if the threat was made in the heat of anger and the accused did not persist, it is Light
Threats. E.g: In a heated quarrel the accused uttered: ― Uubusin ko kayong magpapamilya‖ but

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
did not do anything more. If he however gets a weapon and moves towards his opponent, the
crime is grave threats.
B. Light Threats which may either be:

1. Where the act to be done does not amount to a crime, but it disturbs another. This may be
subject to a condition or not. (Article 283) Examples:
(a). ―I will fail you if you will not be introduce me to your sister‖
(b). ― I will report your absences to your father if you do not let me copy your answers‖
(c). ―I will tell your boyfriend about your dating other men‖
2. Other Light Threats (Article 285)

a). Threatening another with a weapon, or drawing such weapon in a quarrel
b). Orally threatening another with a wrong which may amount to a crime but he accused did
not persist in the idea involved in the threat
III. If there is an intimidation and threat to inflict an injury is coupled with a demand for money, when is
it threats and when is it robbery?
1. In threats the harm/injury is still to be inflicted in the future (future harm) whereas in robbery
the harm is to be inflicted right then and there, or that it is actual and immediate ( immediate
harm)
2. In threats, the harm maybe committed upon the person or honor of the victim or that to his
family, or to his property whereas in robbery the harm is to be inflicted does not include the
honor of the victim
3. In threats the doing of the harm may be communicated through an intermediary where as in
robbery the doing of the harm is generally communicated directly and personally to the victim
4. In threat gain is not immediate whereas in robbery the gain is immediate.
IV. Threats as constituting blackmailing- (blackmailing is the act of extortion under threat of exposure
of something about the victim or his family which may embarrass, humiliate or place the victim or his
family in a detrimental situation) when the doing of a wrong which does not constitute a crime ( Light
threat) is subject to a demand for money or other valuable considerations. Examples:
1. ― I will report your cheating to the Dean unless you take charge of my back rentals‖
2. ―I will inform your best friend that you are dating her boy friend. However, If you let me have
your bracelet, then I will not say anything‖.
NOTE; there are two forms of blackmailing. The second is under the law on libel
V. Threats maybe made in any form: orally or in writing or by deeds and actions; personally or through
an intermediary, or via modern facilities of communications, such as by texting or E-mail. But if made
in writing or through a middleman, the penalty will be in its maximum period. The crime is consummated
once the threat is made known to the person threatened and he suffers mental disturbance.
Problem: X was told that the accused would kill him if he persists in demanding payment of the debt of
accused. X just laughed it off. Two weeks later, when the accused refused to pay his debt, it was then
that X filed a case of grave threats. Will the complaint prosper?

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
VI. Threats are absorbed when they are made in connection with another crime, or are used as the
means to commit another crime. Thus the threat to kill is absorbed in armed robbery, as the threat to
injure is absorbed in rape.
VII. The principle of Continued Crime ( delito continuado) applies to threats
VIII. Bond for Good Behavior: this is the amount of money to be deposited by the accused charged
with threats to ensure that he shall not molest the person threatened. If he refuses to put up the Bond
for Good behavior, he shall be sentenced to destierro. This is separate and different from the bond
which the accused is require to put up in order not to be detained pending trial.
Coercion
I. Concept: when a person takes the law into his own hands i.e in that he is without authority of law or
has no right to act, and by means of violence, threat or intimidation, he either:
A. Compels another to do something against his will, whether it be right or wrong, or
B. Prevents another from doing something not prohibited by law. If the act prevented is prohibited
by law, the accused is not violating but complementing the law
II. Principles:
A. The violence must be actual and immediate else if the violence is a future harm, it is threat
B. The purpose of the accused need not be attained
C. Examples: Applying force, violence, or intimidation in order to:
1. Compel a suspect to make a confession, now it is Torture
2. Compel the driver to change course
3. Stop a person from making a construction
4. Prohibit a student from leaving the classroom
5. Force a tenant into leaving the leased premises coupled with padlocking the door
6. Compel a person to board a vehicle even if after some distance she was able to break free
and ran away
7. Break a girl‘s spirit so that she will agree to marry the accused, even if she was taken from
her house and brought elsewhere
8. Take back or recover one‘s own property from another even if said property has been
previously unlawfully taken away (Note that this is not an impossible crime of robbery)
D. The penalty is higher if the coercion relates to:

1. the exercise of suffrage, as preventing a voter from voting
2. exercise of religion, such as pointing a gun at another to prevent him from making the sign of
the Cross
III. Distinguished from other crimes:
A. From robbery: where property is taken. It is coercion if the taking is not with intent to gain but to
prevent the doing of an act Example: The accused took away the bolo of another to prevent the latter
from continuing to cut down the pine trees.
B. From threats: if the harm to be done is direct and immediate, it is coercion but if the harm is to

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
be inflicted later, it is threats.

1. ― I will kick you if you will not leave this room‖. This is coercion as the kicking is to be done
right then and there. It is actual and imminent.
2. ― If you will not leave this room, I will kick you‖. This is threat as the kicking will be later.
C. From Illegal Detention: In coercion the intention is not to deprive a person of his liberty or to
restrain his liberty. Example: A guest who refuses to vacate his room for violations of hotel rules even
after he was ordered to leave, was forcibly taken out from the room and guarded in the Office of the
Hotel Security Force. He was released only after all his things were taken out and the room was
locked. The crime is coercion not detention.
IV. Coercion is either :
A. Grave Coercion if there is use of force, violence, or intimidation as punished by Art. 286
B. Light Coercion under Art. 287 which may also be either:
1. Coercion by a creditor- the crime committed by a creditor who, with violence, shall seize
anything belonging to his debtor for the purpose of applying the same to the payment of his debt
a). If the purpose is not to apply as payment for the debt the crime is robbery
b). If there was no violence employed, but the property was taken without the knowledge of the
debtor, the crime should be theft
c). If the taking was by deceit or misrepresentation, as when the creditor says he will just
borrow the property but applied it to the debt, the crime is unjust vexation.
d). If the creditor pretends there is a debt to be paid which was why the thing was given,
when truth there is no debt, the crimes is estafa by means of deceit
2. Unjust Vexation- any conduct which annoys, vexes, disturbs or irritates another, provided there
was no force, threat, violence or intimidation.
a). This is always in the consummated stage
b). This is a crime of last resort
c). The same act may constitute either slight physical injuries, acts of lasciviousness, slander
by deed, or unjust vexation, depending upon the intention of the accused. Example: holding
the testicles of a man or embracing a woman may give rise to several crimes.
d). For the crime of unjust vexation to exist, it is not necessary that the offended party be
present when the crime was committed by the accused- it is enough that the offended party
was embarrassed, annoyed, irritated, or disturbed when he/she learned of the overt acts of the
accused ( Maderazo vs. PP 503 SCRA 234)
3. Other similar coercions. Crime by any person who shall force or compel his laborer or
employee to: ( a) purchase merchandise or commodity of any kind sold by said employer or (b)
accept tokens or objects, other than the legal tender, as payment of wages, unless expressly
requested by the employee. Example: compelling wages in the form of casino chips, sweepstake
tickets, lotto tickets, or goods or merchandise
Discovery and Revelation of Secrets
I. Introduction. These are crimes against personal security because they likewise result to irritation,
consternation and similar mental disturbance.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. These crimes may be referred to as involving the revelation of private secrets by private persons.
The secrets involved are private secrets in that they do not pertain to matters affecting the
government and only private persons are the accused. However, public officers are also liable if they
did not acquire the secrets in their official capacity.
B. The constitution protects several Zones of Privacy one of which is the privacy of correspondence
and communication. These crimes intrude into this zone.
C. They are classified into:
1. Discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence (Art. 290)

2. Revealing Secrets with abuse of office (291)
3. Revelation of industrial secrets ( Art. 292)
II. Discovery through Seizure of Correspondence.
A. The gist of the crime is the act of seizing the papers or letters of a private individual in order to
discover the contents thereof.
B. The penalty depends on whether the accused revealed the contents or not.
C. The crime is committed even if it turns out the papers are blank
D. Persons exempt: (i) parents, guardians, or persons in custody of minors in respect to the letters
of said minors and (b) spouses with respect to the correspondence of either of them. However, in
Zulueta vs. Zulueta, it was held that a married person has a right to the privacy of letters in his private
office and if these are seized by his spouse without his consent, the documents are inadmissible as
evidence.
E. If the seizure is not to know the contents but to prevent the addressee from receiving the letter,
the crime may be malicious mischief.
QUESTION: Does this include grabbing the cellphone to learn the messages stored in it?
III. Revealing Secrets with Abuse of Office
A. This is the crime committed by a manager, employee, or servant, who in such capacity, learns the
secrets of his principal or master, and shall reveal such secrets.
B. Secrets refer to any matter which ought not to be known. It need not destroy the reputation of the
principal. Example: the fact that the husband and wife do not sleep together; or that the husband is
irresponsible.
C. If the secrets pertain to illicit matters, such as the principal being a jueteng lord, there is no liability
if the revelation is made to the proper authorities.
D. Question: Why is there no corresponding penal provision if they were the masters who reveal the
secrets of their employees or servants?
IV. Revelation of Industrial Secrets. This was already superseded by the Intellectual Property Code
THE CRIME OF VOYEAURISM

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
R.A. 9995: The Anti Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009
Salient Features:
Defines Photo or Video Voyeurism as the act of (i) taking photo or video coverage of a person or group of
persons performing sexual act or similar activity or (ii) of capturing an image of the private area of a person
or persons without the latter‘s consent, under circumstances in which such person/s has/have a reasonable
expectation of privacy, or (iii) the act of selling, copying, reproducing, broadcasting, sharing, showing or
exhibiting the photo or video coverage or recording of such sexual act or similar activity through VCD/DVD,
internet, cellular phones and similar device without the written consent of the person/s involved,
notwithstanding that consent to record or take photo or video coverage of same was given by such
person/s.
―under circumstances in which the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy‖ means belief that the
person could disrobe in public, without being concerned that an image or private area of a person has been
captured; or circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that a private area of a person
would not be visible to the public, regardless of whether that person is in a public or private place.
a). example: dressing areas in department stores

b). how about taking pictures in the CR?
c). Urinating against the wall/tree?
d). taking pictures of women lying on the beach?
Prohibited Acts:
1. To take photo or video coverage of a person or group of persons performing sexual act
or similar activity or to capture an image of the private area of a person/s such as the
naked undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks or female breast without the
consent of the person involved under circumstances in which the person has/have a
reasonable expectation of privacy.
a). capturing image of stage performers or exhibitionist not included
b). the accused maybe a participant in a group sex activity
c) recording of sounds not included
d). similar sexual activity includes kissing, embracing, masturbating
2. To copy or reproduce, or cause to be copied or reproduced, such photo or video or

recording of sexual act or similar activity with or without consideration
a). how about sharing the image in the internet?
3. To sell or distribute, or cause to be sold or distributed, such photo or video recording

of sexual act whether it be the original or reproduction thereof
4. To publish or broadcast, or cause to be published or broadcast, whether in print or

broadcast media, or show or exhibit the photo or video coverage or recordings of such
sexual act or any similar activity through VCD/DVD, internet, cellular phones and
similar means or devices.
Exemption: Use of the record or copy thereof by any peace officer as evidence in any civil,
criminal investigation or trial of the crime of photo or video voyeurism if authorized by a written

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
order of the court issued after a written application and examination under oath or affirmation of
the applicant and the witnesses he may produce, and upon a showing that there are reasonable
grounds to believe that photo/video voyeurism has been committed or about to be committed,
and that the evidence to be obtained is essential to the conviction of any person for, or to the
solution or prevention of such, crime.
(Note: The procedure for a written order to record or copy is similar to applying for a search
warrant.)
Inadmissibility of Evidence: (Exclusionary Provision) any record, photo, or copy thereof, obtained
or secured by any person (without a written court order), shall not be admissible in any judicial,
quasi judicial, legislative or administrative hearing or investigation.
Title Ten. Crimes Against Property
I. Introduction: The major classification includes the following:
1. Robbery:
a). With Violence or Intimidation Against Persons ( Hold-up)
b). With Fore Upon Things ( Break-In)
2. Theft
a). Simple
b). Qualified
3.Estafa
4. Malicious Mischief
a). Ordinary
b). Special Cases
5. Arson
6. Violation of the Chattel Mortgage Law
Article 293: Robbery In General
I. Concept: the taking, with intent to gain, of personal property belonging to another, by means of
violence against or intimidation of persons, or by using force upon things.
A. The two major classifications are based on the manner by which the robbery was committed.
The first is commonly called ―hold-up‖ while the second is robbery by ―breaking –in‖
B. If none of these two methods are used, the taking will constitute theft.
C. If both methods were used, the result is complex a crime i.e. robbery with Force Upon things
complexed with Robbery with Violence.
D. In robbery with violence, the violence need not be present at the start of the taking so long as it
was resorted to before the taking was complete.
II. Elements Common to Robbery and Theft
A. The subject matter must be a personal property

1. These include licit as well as illicit articles such as drugs and unlicensed firearms as well as
stolen articles

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
2. The term‖ Personal Property‖ does not follow the meaning provided for by the Civil Code. It
means such property, whether tangibles or those with physical appearance and form or
intangibles, as long as they maybe subject of appropriation and may be carried away without
altering its nature.
a. Thus this includes those considered as Real Property by ―Immobilization or destination‖ or
those attached to the soil or building for so long as they were detached there from and carried
away. Such as trees, machineries, statutes, soil, stones and rocks
b. Accessories of real properties such as fruits of trees, fishes, paintings
3. In theft the article must have a value because the penalty, and jurisdiction over the offense, is
based on the value of the article taken
a. The value must be proved as courts will not take judicial notice thereof. If no value is proved,
the court uses the lowest value in the law as basis.
B. The property must belong to another
1. This means the property does not belong to the accused. Hence there is no robbery or theft of
one‘s own property. The offenses are either Grave Coercion instead of robbery and Impossible
Crime of Theft instead of the ordinary crime of theft.
2. The victim need not be the owner. He may be a mere possessor or even a robber or thief
himself. Thus robbery or theft may be committed against another criminal robber or thief. It is
enough that the accused is not the owner of the property.
C There must be an act of taking or ―apoderamiento‖, which is the physical act of divesting another
of the possession of a thing, or to separate and remove the property from the actual or constructive
possession or custody or control of the victim.
1. The accused must hold the thing in a manner sufficient to enable him to dispose of it had he
wanted to
2. The possession may be permanent, temporary or transitory
D. There must ―Animus Lucrandi‖ or intent of gain
1. The gain need not be in terms of financial or material gain as this includes: intent to obtain
some utility, enjoyment, satisfaction, or pleasure. Example: X boxed Y so that Y will hand over the
magazine for X to see the nude pictures. X returned the magazine thereafter.
2. If there is no animus lucrandi but force was used to get an object, the crime is coercion.
3. Robbery and theft maybe a continuous offense (SINGLE LARCENY DOCTRINE) as in the
case of robbery of several persons. The accused entered a classroom and robbed the 20 students
of their money at the point of a gun or when one robbed the passengers of a bus. Or, when the
several robberies are component parts of a general plan to rob within a specific place or area.
Example: Robbery of several houses in subdivision or robbery of the various stalls inside the
shopping mall.
Art. 294. Robbery with Violence
I. Introduction:
A. The penalties are determined and based on the extent or gravity of the violence employed, its

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
degree of intensity, and the resulting injury or harm

B. There are several special complex crimes ( also known as Composite Crimes or Special
Indivisible Crimes) involving consummated robbery, which according to the order of severity are as
follows:
1. Robbery with Homicide
2. Robbery with Rape
3. Robbery with Intentional Mutilations
4. Robbery with Arson
5. Robbery with Physical Injuries
6. Robbery with Unnecessary Violence
C. In cases where there was death, rape, or physical injuries inflicted, the foregoing Order of
Severity must be followed in giving the name of the crime. There will only be one crime and one
specific penalty but the rape and lesser injuries will be utilized as aggravating circumstances.
II. Robbery with Homicide
A. This is committed ― When by reason or on the occasion of robbery, the crime of homicide shall
have been committed‖. This phrase requires that there is a causal connection between the robbery
and the death, had it not been for the robbery, there would have been no death.
B. Both the robbery and the homicide should be consummated to be penalized by Reclusion
Perpetua to Death.
1. If it was the Robbery which was not consummated, but there was a killing, it is still a special
complex crime of Attempted Robbery with Homicide but the penalty is as provided for under Article
297
2. If both the robbery and the killing are either attempted or frustrated, the result is either a
complex crime of Attempted/Frustrated Robbery with Attempted/Frustrated Homicide under
Article 48, or as separate crimes depending on the circumstances
3. If the Robbery is consummated but the homicide is attempted or frustrated, they may be
ordinary complex crimes or separate crimes depending on the circumstances
C. The term ―Homicide‖ is used in its generic sense and it includes any kind of killing whether it be
murder, parricide or infanticide, and irrespective of how many killings were there. The following are
not proper terms:
1. Robbery with Murder: if there is any qualifying circumstance which was present, such as
treachery, it will be considered as an ordinary aggravating circumstance
2. Robbery with Double, Triple or Multiple Homicide:
D. The killing may be intentional, or accidental. The killing may be by the acts of the robber, or by
the act of the victim, or act of a third person. The person killed may be the victim of the robbery or
his friend, or family member. The person killed may even be one of the robbers themselves, or a
person wanting to assist or even a total stranger.
E. The following will constitute robbery with homicide:
1. The robber fired his gun upwards to frighten the victim but the bullet killed a person who was
hiding in the ceiling

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
2. The victim drew a gun to defend but his aim was deflected and instead hit his companion
3. It was a responding policeman who was killed by a robber.
4. The responding policeman fired a shot but missed and killed the victim of robbery
5. The several robbers fought over the loot and one killed another, even if this took place after
the taking had taken place and the robbers had fled the scene of robbery
6. One of the victims suffered a stroke due to the tension and dies
7. The gun of a robber accidentally fell and killed a person outside the house
F. The killing may be before, during, or immediately after the taking provided that the original intent
of the robbers must have been to rob and not to kill, which need not be the sole motive either.
Example: X pointed a knife at Y and divested him of his cell phone. X turned and ran whereupon
Y chased him so that X stabbed and killed Y.
G. If the original intention was to kill and the idea of taking came only thereafter, there results two
separate crimes of theft and murder or homicide. Example: The accused shot to death his enemy.
Then he decided to take the victim‘s necklace.
H. All those who conspired in the robbery will be liable for the death unless he proved he endeavored
to prevent the killing. Physical absence in the place where the killing took place is not a defense, or
that the accused was not aware his co-accused would resort to a killing.
Example: A, B, C and D conspired to rob a house with D acting as look-out at the road. Jose, an
occupant refused to give money so A leveled his gun at him. B shielded Jose with his body as he
did not like any killing A pushed B aside and shot Jose. C was then at the rooms ransacking it. A,
C and D will be liable for Robbery with Homicide, but not B, who tried to prevent it.
I. I. The aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation is inherent in robbery, but may be

appreciated if there is premeditation to kill.
III. Robbery with Rape: “When the robbery shall have been accompanied by rape”
A. The rape maybe committed before, during, or after the robbery so long as it was
contemporaneous with the robbery and so long as the original intention was to rob.
B. If the original intention is to rape and not to rob so that if the taking came only after the rape
because the opportunity presented itself, the taking is theft.
C. The victim of the rape may be any person including one of the robbers
D. Both the robbery and rape must be consummated otherwise the there are two separate offenses.
E. If there are two or more rapes, the others will be considered as aggravating circumstances of
ignominy.
F. Illustrations:
1. If the girl is robbed, raped and then killed, the crime is Robbery with Homicide aggravated by
rape
2. If the girl is raped, then robbed and then killed the crimes are (i) Rape with Homicide and (ii)
Robbery
3. If the girl is raped and then a personal property is taken the crimes are (i) rape and (ii) Theft
IV. Robbery with Intentional Mutilation: ―when the robbery shall have been accompanied by

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
…intentional mutilation‖
A. The injury resulted to insanity, imbecility, impotency or complete blindness
B. The victim may be any person including one of the robbers also
V. Robbery with Arson: ―when the robbery shall have been accompanied by… arson‖
A. The victim should not be killed, raped or mutilated
B. The arson is a separate act from the taking as when the accused held up the occupants of a car
after which they burned the car
VI. Robbery with Unnecessary Violence and other serious physical injuries: (1) if the violence or
intimidation shall have been employed in the commission of the robbery shall have been carried to a
degree clearly unnecessary or (2) when in the course of its execution the offender shall have inflicted
any of the physical injuries under subdivision 3 and 4 of Article 263.
A. The injuries referred to are deformity loss of a non-member part of the body or clearly
unnecessary violence, should be inflicted prior to the consummation of the crime or before the taking
is complete other wise the injuries are separate offenses
VII. Simple robbery- where there is only an intimidation or where the injuries sustained are less
serious or slight
A. The act known as ―extortion‖ or ―mulcting‖ is simple robbery such as:
1. by law enforcement agencies known as ―kotong cops‖
2. by public officers without the consent of the victim. If it the giving is consensual it is bribery
3. by persons pretending to be authorities and threatening to arrest unless money is given
4. by one falsely accusing another of a crime and making a demand for money
VIII. Special Aggravating Circumstances with respect to Robbery with Violence or Simple Robbery
Only
A. Art. 295 creates the following circumstances which cannot be offset: by any mitigating
1. Uninhabited place (despoblado)

2. band ( cuadrilla)
3. attacking a moving vehicle or airship or entering the passenger‘s compartment in a train
4. intimidating the passengers in their compartment in their conveyance with firearms or using
the firearm in a street, road, highway or alley
B. If the crimes are Robbery with Homicide, with Rape, with Serious Physical Injuries, with Arson,
and the foregoing are present, they will be treated only as ordinary aggravating circumstances
IX. Robbery in Band: when more than 3 armed malefactors take part in the crime of robbery
A. The ―arms‖ may refer to any object capable of inflicting a bodily injury
B. If the weapon happens to be an unlicensed firearm, this becomes a special aggravating
circumstance to the penalty committed by the band
C. Effect of a ―band‖: a). all will be liable for the crime they agreed to commit b) if they merely
agreed to commit robbery but a homicide, rape or physical injuries were committed, those present
in the assault and who did not prevent the additional crime will be liable for the additional crimes.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
X. Attempted Robbery with Homicide
A. A special Complex Crime punished under Article 297.

B. The term ―homicide‖ is not used in its generic sense and does not include murder, parricide, or
infanticide. If so there will be two separate crimes because these crimes have higher penalties. The
person killed must be a victim of the robbery and the killer is the robber.
Art. 298. Execution of Deeds by Means of Violence
I. Concept: this is the crime committed by a any person who, with intent to defraud another, shall
compel him to sign, execute or deliver any public instrument or document.
II. Principles:
1. This is a special kind of committing robbery

2. The document must be capable of producing legal effect and the victim is under a lawful
obligation to execute and deliver the document
3. The document may be public or private
4. If the document is void the crime is coercion
5. The purpose of the accused is to defraud the accused, to divest him of his property, else it is
coercion
6. Examples: Using violence to compel one to execute a deed of sale of his vehicle or to execute a
last will and testament, a mortgage
Robbery By the Use of Force Upon Things.

(Break-In)
I. General Principles:
A. This is of two kinds. The first is where the robbers broke-into or entered an Inhabited house, public
building or edifice devoted to religious worship and the second is where the entry or break in is into
an Uninhabited House or a private building.
B The force refers to the mode or manner by which the entry was made. It connotes some kind of a
trespass inside where the robbery was committed. It may be actual physical force, such as breaking
a wall door, or floor; or it may consists of constructive force, such as use of false keys or using any
fictitious name, or pretending the exercise of public authority
C. Necessity of Entry: there must be proof that the accused actually physically entered, i.e the whole
body was inside and not just the arms or upper part. In case there was no total entry, the crime is
theft if a property was taken or attempted trespass if none was taken.
D. To constitute consummated robbery, the article or thing must be brought out of the house or
building
Question: Suppose one accused is inside dropping articles to a co accused who was outside the
building, collecting them. They were caught. Is the crime consummated?
Art. 295. Robbery In an Inhabited House, Public Building

or Edifice devoted to religious worship.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
I. Place of Commission. The robbery must be inside:
A. An Inhabited House. Art. 301 defines it as ― any shelter, ship, or vessel constituting the dwelling
of one or more persons ‖
1. If the ship was for transporting persons or goods and it is sea worthy, the crime should be
piracy. Thus the term ship under article 301 must refer those which are not longer sea worthy but
are used as dwellings instead.
2. They include dependencies, which refer to structures which are contiguous, and with interior
entrances connected, to the house. The yards, orchards and lands for cultivation are not included.
B. A Public Building. One owned by the government or by a private person but was leased, rented
or actually being used, by the government.
C. An Edifice devoted to religious worship. This does not include private houses or commercial
buildings, rented by, leased to, or actually used, for religious services.
II. The manner of entry must be through any of the following modes, otherwise the crime is theft.
A. Through an opening not intended for entrance or egress by the occupants.

1. The only opening for entrance is through an outside door, except in cases where the inside
door refer to the door of separate units or rooms used as separate dwellings.
2. The entry then may have been through an open window, a break in the wall or roof or floor,
sliding down the fireplace
B. By breaking any wall, roof, floor or breaking any door or window

1. The term ‖door‖ refers to the outside door of the dwellings and not to doors of rooms inside
the house
2. To ―break the door‖ is not just ―forcing the door open‖ or prying it loose from its grooves.
3. When the padlock was destroyed, the Supreme Court says the crime is robbery because the
padlock is an integral part of the door. The Ct. of Appeals says it is theft
4. If what was destroyed is the key, it is theft
5. The term ―wall‖ is not the dividing wall between rooms, unless the rooms are separate units
constituting separate dwellings
C. By using false keys, pick locks or similar tools
1. The crime of Possession of Picklocks under article 304 is absorbed

2. The key is that used to enter the house and not to open a wardrobe or room inside.
3. Under Art. 305 the term ―false keys‖ refer to:
a). Those specifically adopted for the commission of robbery i.e to open locks
b). Genuine keys stolen from the owner, or forgotten or lost by him
c). Any key other than those intended by the owner for use in the lock, such as a duplicate
made by the accused based on the wax impression of the genuine key borrowed from the
owner
D. By using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of public authority. This is not limited to

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
the use of aliases but extends to any misrepresentation about the identity of the accused in order
to misled an occupant into allowing the accused to enter.
1. This presupposes that at the time of entry there were persons in the house or building. This is
the reason why this mode of entry does not apply to Robbery in an Uninhabited House
2. Examples: pretending to be sheriffs of the court; inspectors of the NPC or as detectives, or as
messengers, classmates and the like.
Note: In the two following situations the accused entered the house properly but the taking of
property is still robbery.
.
E. By breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests or any other kind of locked or sealed furniture or
receptacles
1. The term ―door‖ does not refer to the inside or interior doors, or door of rooms or
compartments, but to the doors of furniture, aparadors, closets, cabinets
F. By taking such furniture or objects away to be broken or forced open outside the place of
robbery
a) The taking of small receptacles, such as jewelry boxes, or piggy banks, even if broken
outside is merely theft
III. The penalty of the accused is determined by the following factors;
1. Value of the property taken

2. Whether the accused was armed. But if the firearms were used against or, to intimidate the
occupants or victims, the crime is Robbery with Violence. Under the firearm law, the use of the firearm
will aggravate the offense.
3. In case of a house, whether it was in the main house or in a dependency
4. Whether it was a mail matter in which case the penalty is one degree higher and
5. If committed by a band and in an uninhabited place. Example four armed malefactors robbed a
house built in an isolated place.
Art. 302. Robbery in an Uninhabited Place

or in a Private Building
I. Principles:
1. Although the law uses the word ―uninhabited place‘ what this actually means is uninhabited
house- those fixed enclosures not used as residences or dwellings.
a). These would include warehouses, stores, offices, commercial buildings and establishments,
department stores, banks, market stalls.
2. The mode of entry is the same as in an Inhabited house except for the use of fictitious names or
pretending the exercise of public authority.
Art. 303. Robbery of Cereals, Fruits or Firewood
I. The term cereals refer to seedlings or unhulled grains in their original states

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
II. These are taken from inside a house, or building whether inhabited or uninhabited
III. The penalty is one degree lower because it is presumed the acts were impelled by economic
necessity or hunger. Would the rationale apply if what were taken were bread, cooked rice, viand or
gasul?
Art. 304. Possession of Picklocks or similar tools.
A. Acts punished:
1. Possession of these picklocks or similar tools specially adopted for robbery is a mere
preparatory act which is punished
2. The manufacture of said picklocks or similar tools.
3. A master key or skeleton key is a picklock
4. If a key was entrusted to a confidential employee, as a secretary or body guard, for safekeeping
but the latter used them to open and take property, the crime is qualified theft.
5. If the accused used said keys to commit theft or robbery, for example: in the so-called bukas-
kotse, the possession is absorbed
BRIGANDAGE and HIGHWAY ROBBERY

Arts. 306, 307and P.D. 532
I. Introduction: Article 306 defining and penalizing brigandage has been modified by Pres. Decree 532
defining and punishing ― highway robbery and brigandage‖ As thus modified the term ―brigandage‖
and ―highway robbery‖ are used synonymously and they mean:
A. The seizure of any person for ransom, extortion or other unlawful purposes ( Is not the seizure
of persons the crime of kidnapping ? If for exploitation, it must be trafficking)
B. Or the taking away of property of another by means of violence against or intimidation of person
or force upon things or other unlawful means
C. Committed by any person on any Philippine Highway
1. Highway refers to the roads connecting distant barrios or towns to one another and not to
those located within a city or town.
II. a) Highway robbery requires that commission of robbery is not an on the spur of the moment decision
by the accused; it requires habituality or regularity and the commission thereof is indiscriminate and not
against a predetermined victim i.e. against any traveling person. If not, the crime is plain robbery
committed in the highway.
b) Mere formation of a band to commit highway robbery is punished under the RPC but if the crime
is actually committed, the band is merely aggravating.
III. Those who help or assist the highway robbers are guilty of the crime of Aiding or Abetting Brigands
Note: the brigands were formerly called the highwaymen or tulisans who waylay travelers or attack and
pillage villages as a way of living. They have their own hideouts in the mountains. They are the
equivalent of pirates in the seas.
Art. 308. ( Simple)Theft

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
I. Concept: Theft is committed in four ways.

A. The first way defines the ordinary, simple, or common crime of theft as the crime committed by
any person who, with intent to gain but without violence against or intimidation of persons nor force
upon things, shall take personal property of another without the latter‘s consent.
B. Theft of lost property
C. Theft after a malicious mischief
D. Theft after a trespass
II. Common Elements
A. That there be a taking (apoderamiento) or there be a physical act of divesting a person of his
possession of a property and bringing it under one‘s control; an act separating the property from the
owner or possessor and without animus revertendi.
Taking means the act of depriving another of the possession and dominion of movable property
without his privity and consent and without animus revertendi, of physically separating the
property from its possessor
a) The owner or juridical possessor does not give his consent

b) or the consent was vitiated
c) may occur at or soon after the transfer of physical possession when an act done by the receiver
soon after the actual transfer of possession results in unlawful taking ( PP vs. Tan 323 SCRA 30)
1. It is not necessary that the property be actually carried away out of the physical possession of
the lawful possessor or that the thief should have made his escape with it. Neither asportation or
actual manual possession of property is required. Constructive possession of the property is
enough ( Laurel vs. Abrogar, 483 SCRA 243)
2. The taking maybe by the offender‘s own hands, by his use of innocent persons without any
felonious intent, as well as by any mechanical devise such as access device or card, or any
agency, animate or inanimate, with intent to gain ( Laurel vs. Abrogar) or the property is received
or physically delivered to him
3. The taking is complete once the thing is placed under one‘s possession or control even if only
for a short time and even if there was no opportunity to dispose off the article. The thing need not
be carried away. Hence there is no frustrated theft even of bulky items.
a). The decisions in PP. vs Dino and PP. vs Espiritu concerning frustrated theft of bulky items
have been reversed in Valenzuela vs. PP. June 21, 2007 This case expressly declared that theft
has no frustrated stage.
B. However, if the property was not taken but was received or that it was voluntarily delivered to the
accused, and thereafter not returned, the crimes committed are:
1. Theft if what was transferred to the accused is mere physical possession.

a). The rule is that if a person, to whom a thing was delivered, was under obligation to return
the same thing, but does an act amounting to appropriation or conversion, he commits theft

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
b) Examples: one who ran away with a ball pen after borrowing it; or one who sells a borrowed
cell phone or refused to return the article he borrowed
2. Estafa if what was transferred is both physical and juridical possession i.e the right to possess
the thing such as a thing given as collateral for a debt
3. In the following cases, where property was received, the crimes were determined to be theft:
a). where the accused was allowed to get and receive from a contractor the payment due to
the subcontractors with the assurance that he will first pay off the cost of materials used, and
then give the balance to the subcontractors, but he misappropriated the balance. (Pideli vs.PP
545 SCRA 236)
b). in the leading case of U.S. vs. De Vera (1921) where the accused received a gold bar to
have it be examined and bank notes to be exchanged for silver coins, but which he took and
appropriated for himself
c). where the accused received a ring to be pledged but which he sold instead ( PP. vs Trinidad
(50 Phil. 65)
d). where the bank teller took the deposits received by him it is qualified theft since the teller
occupies a position of confidence; juridical possession remained with the bank (PP. vs. Lacson,
57 Phil. 325)
e). where a jeepney driver failed to return the jeepney he received under the boundary system
( PP. vs. Isaac 96 Phil. 931)
f). where a branch manager failed to remit the proceeds of a sale to the corporation, which
were in the form of checks, which he deposited in his own account, the crime committed is
qualified theft. The duty to collect is imposed on the accused because of her position as branch
manager. Because of this employer-employee relationship she cannot be considered an agent
of the employee. ―Money received by an employee in behalf of the corporation is only in the
material possession of the employee‖ ( PP. vs. Mirto, 659 SCRA 796).
C. The property is a personal property which belongs to another: ie. it does not belong to the
accused otherwise the crime committed would be the Impossible Crime of Theft.
1. They include illicit articles such as drugs, unlicensed firearms, or property stolen from another
and in the possession of the victim
2. Is a co-owner liable for theft of the property owned in common? Yes if he takes more than his
lawful share. His liability is for the excess.
a). A and three others co-owned P20,000.00 kept in a box. A took away P5,000.00. He is not
liable because the amount corresponds to his share.
b). A took the whole P20,000.00. He is liable for theft of P15,000.00
c). A finder of lost treasure who appropriates everything is liable for theft of one-half thereof as
the same belongs to the government
3. Personal property is that which can be appropriated and can be carried away without
changing its nature.
a). They include tangible movable properties which have physical or material existence and
susceptible of occupation by another; or to movables which can be taken and carried from the
place where they are found and brought under the possession of a person. The following

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
are examples:
(i). jewelries, money, food, clothing,
(ii). Papers, documents, certificates of title
(iii). Commercial papers such as checks, promissory notes
(iv). Rocks, soil, flowing water, water, trees
b).Those Intangible properties which are capable of being appropriated or diverted from their
original purpose, such as electricity and other forms of energy are proper subject of theft
(i). ―Electricity, like gas, is a valuable article of merchandise, bought and sold like other
personal property, susceptible of being severed from a mass or larger quantity and of being
transported from place to place. Electrical energy may likewise be taken and carried away‖ (
Laurel vs Abrogar)
(ii). Intangibles such as rights and ideas are not subject of theft because they are without form
or substance and cannot be ―taken‖ from the place they are found. A naked right existing merely
in contemplation of law, although it may be valuable to the person who is entitled to exercise it,
is not the subject of theft. They include these: right to produce oil, good will or interest in
business, right to engage in business, credit or franchise, a credit line represented by a credit
card.
(a). Plaggarism:
(b). Trafficking in Persons- theft of body organs
©. If what was stolen are feelings and emotions or people, while they maybe stolen in
songs, are not subject of theft
(ii). Example: Laurel vs. Abrogar 483 SCRA 243, Feb. 27, 2006)
Facts: BAYNET Co. sold phone cards which enabled buyers to make calls in the Philippines
through the telephone lines, equipments and facilities of the PLDT without the knowledge of
the PLDT such that it evaded the charges which would have been paid to the PLDT.
ISSUE: Whether PLDT‘s business of providing telecommunication services is a proper subject
of theft
HELD: No. The international telephone calls placed by the BAYNET card holders, the
telephone services provided by PLDT and its business of providing said services are not
personal properties. Personal property subject of theft cannot be interpreted to include ―
telecommunication or telephone services‖ or computer services for that matter. A service is not
generally considered property and theft of service would not constitute theft since there can be
no possibility of asportation. (Laurel vs. Abrogar Feb. 27, 2006)
(v). NOTE: The acts complained of in Laurel vs. Abrogar maybe penalized under RA 8484,
The Access Devices Regulations Act of 1998.
(vi). NOTE: Theft of electricity by the use of jumpers is penalized by R.A. 9832, The Anti
Electricity and Electric Transmission Pilferage Act of 1994)
(vii). QUESTION: Juan used a stolen credit card of Pedro to pay for his hotel
accommodations. What crimes may be filed against Juan?

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
ANSWER: The crimes are: (i) Theft on complaint of Pedro as to the taking of the credit card
(ii) Violation of R.A. 8484 for using the card to obtains services and (iii) Estafa on complaint of
the hotel for pretending and misrepresenting himself to be the owner of the credit card.
(viii). QUESTION: JUAN used a ―splitter‖ and was able to watch cable programs provided by
ABC Co. Did he commit theft?
(ix). Identity theft is a cyber crime not covered by the RPC
D. The property is capable of pecuniary valuation or estimation. This is necessary for purposes of
determining the penalty of the accused and consequently what court has jurisdiction over the theft.
They include the following:
1. Basis of the valuation is either: (i) the value of the thing itself (ii) its intrinsic value, as in theft of
gold (iii) that which is represented as in checks or commercial papers.
2. It does not matter that the article is of no value to the accused as when he stole a person‘s
Community Tax Certificate, or sales invoices or I.D. cards.
3. If the article is valueless, as for example checks which have already been encashed, they will
be valued at the lowest valuation set by law i.e it ―does not exceed P5.00‖
E. There is intent to gain or ―Animus Lucrandi‖. The taking is for the purpose of obtaining financial
or material gain; utility, satisfaction enjoyment and pleasure.
1. If there was an act of taking but without intent of gain, some other offense may be committed.
Thus: (a) A took the notebook of B and hid it so that B has nothing to review. The crime would be
unjust vexation. (b) If A threw the notebook in a pool of water the crime is malicious mischief
(c) But if A took the notebook so that he can study and review and then returned the notebook the
crimes is still theft as there was gain.
2. Joy ride is included ( Villacorta vs. Insurance Co. Oct. 28, 1980)
F. There is no violence against or intimidation of persons (not a hold-up) nor force upon things
(break-in)
1. If there was force employed, it is not upon the person but upon the property. However the
force on the property must not be to gain entry into a dwelling, public building or religious edifice.
2. Thus where the accused applied force to pull at the shoulder bag, the crime is theft. If the victim
pulls away the bag so that the accused pushed down the victim to make him loss his hold, the
crime is robbery.
3 If they are the windows or door of a vehicle or display rooms or cabinets which are broken to
get the things inside, the crime is theft
III. Principles:
1. Theft is consummated once the taking is complete even if the accused was immediately
apprehended, or that it was snatched back from him, or that he had no opportunity to dispose off the
thing.
2. There is no frustrated stage. Was there possession of the thing or not? If there was it is
consumated
3. There as many crimes of theft as there are several occasions of taking, even if the victim is one
and the same person.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a). There is only one crime even if there be several victims- a continuous crime of theft- if the
things were taken at the same time and place. Example: the theft of two roosters belonging to
different persons
b). The ―single larceny doctrine‖, that is, the taking of several things whether belonging to the
same or different owners, at the same time and place constitutes but one larceny ( Santiago vs.
Garchitorena, 228 SCRA 214)
4. It may be complexed with falsification
5. There is a presumption of theft against one found in possession of a stolen article who cannot
explain away his possession. Likewise the possession of some part of the stolen property raises the
presumption that the possessor stole the whole property
IV. Theft of Lost Property
A. The crime committed by any person who, having found lost property, shall fail to deliver the
same to local authorities or to its owner.
1. This is a crime by omission but the failure must not be due to valid reasons. Hence it is no
defense that the finder did not profit from it
2. It is not necessary that the accused knows who the owner is. It is enough that he knows or
ought to know, that the property was lost. It is his duty to turn it over to the authorities.
3. Suppose he turned it over to persons other than to the authorities? He may or may not be liable
depending to whom he turned over the property. If it was turned over to one whose employment
or position is such that through him the property can be returned to the owner o possessor, then
the finder is not liable. Thus the delivery to a radio station for announcement to the public does
not give rise to criminal liability.
4. To be liable the failure to deliver must be after the lapse of a sufficient time. Thus: if the accused
found a valise which he failed to deliver within 41/2 days. When the owner came to get it, he
surrendered it. He is not liable.
5. Question: The taxi driver had it be announced over the radio that he found a bag left by a
passenger. He advises the owner to get the bag at his house but to bring identification papers
with him. After two weeks the owner comes to claim but the bag was stolen from the house of the
taxi driver. Is the Taxi Driver liable for theft?
6. The property must not be res nullius
B. The term ―lost property‖ is used in its generic sense in that it was separated from the owner or
possessor without his consent and this includes property which were stolen or subject of robbery.
C. The persons liable are either:
1. The Finder- in- Fact: this is the actual finder of the property such as the taxi driver who finds a
wallet left by a passenger
2. The Finder-in-Law or the transferee, or the person to whom the Finder-in-Fact turned over or
transferred the lost property.
Question: The taxi driver turned over the wallet left by a passenger to the Police Desk Sergeant.
The latter spent the money. What crime did the policeman commit? (Ans) It is theft. He is the
Finder-in-Law ( PP. vs. Avila 47 Phil. 720)

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
V. Theft After a Malicious Mischief: ―Any person who having maliciously damaged the property of
another, shall remove or make use of the fruits or objects of the damage caused by him‖
1. The malicious destruction is absorbed in the taking
2. Ex: Shooting a dog and then eating it; or cutting down the neighbor‘s fruit tree and then
gathering its branches as firewood
3. If there was no intent to gain the crime is simply malicious mischief
VI. Theft after a trespass: ―By hunting, fishing or gathering fruits, cereals, forest or farm products after
committing trespass‖. The act of trespass is absorbed. The property trespassed refers to lands and
not to buildings.
Art. 310. Qualified Theft
A. Provides that the penalty shall be 2 degrees higher than that for simple theft if theft is committed
under any of the circumstances enumerated there under.
1. These circumstances are categorized according to their nature thus:

a). Circumstances pertaining to the accused himself, such as the accused is a domestic servant
b). Those arising from the offended party, such as when he reposed trust and confidence in the
accused
c). Those based on the nature of the object stolen such as mail matters
d) Those arising from the circumstances of time, place and occasion of the taking
B. If committed by a domestic servant. The theft is always qualified theft. The time period of
employment is immaterial. The circumstances of the taking must however have a direct relation to the
accused being a domestic. A maid pickpocketed her employer while both were doing marketing. Is the
taking qualified theft?
C. If committed with grave abuse of confidence.

1. This presupposes that there should be a relation of dependence, guardianship or vigilance
between the accused and the victim which created a high degree of trust and confidence.
2. The trust and confidence should arise in special relations of intimacy and confidence between the
offender and the accused. It should be proven that the victim reposed trust and confidence and it
was this which enabled the accused to commit the crime.
a). Theft by an employee against his employer such as confidential secretary, a bodyguard, or a
warehouseman or cashier, salespersons, a bank teller, by a personal chauffeur
b). Theft by a one living with the victim as a guest or a stay-in or a room mate
c). Theft by a driver as to the gasoline of trucks driven which they are allowed to draw
d). Theft by a close or best friend, by a teacher against a student, or by a janitor who enters
classrooms
3. Liability of strangers: Since the trust and confidence which was abused is purely personal
between the accused and the victim, strangers who participate in the taking are liable for simple theft
only.
E. When the property stolen is a motor vehicle.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. This is modified by R.A. 10883 or the New Anti-Carnapping Law of 2016‖ which defines the
crime of carnapping as ― Taking, with intent to gain, of a motor vehicle belonging to another without
the latter‘s consent, or by means of violence against or intimidation of persons, or by using force
upon things‖
a). The act of carnapping includes both ―theft‖ and ―robbery‖.
b). Suppose it was the juridical possession of the motor vehicle which was delivered? The crime
is estafa and not theft therefore R.A. 6539 does not apply.
(i). What crime was committed by a driver on the ―boundary system‖ who brings the vehicle
elsewhere and does not return it?
(ii). What crime was committed by one who was entrusted with the possession or custody of
a motor vehicle, such as a mechanic, who thereafter sells it? (ans.) Estafa
(iii). What crime was committed by one who is given the motor vehicle to test drive it but
drives it away and does not return it?
2. Motor vehicle refers to any vehicle transporting people and/or goods propelled by any power or
energy (such as solar energy) other than muscular power of humans or animals and using the public
highway.
a). The following are not motor vehicles: road rollers, trolley cars, bulldozers, street sweepers,
graders, forklifts, traction engines of all kinds used in agriculture. Taking of these kinds of vehicles
will be qualified theft
b). If a motor is attached to a bicycle, it becomes a motor vehicle
3. R.A. 6539 creates the special complex crimes of (a). Carnapping Resulting to/Accompanied by
Homicide and (b) Carnapping Resulting to/Accompanied by Rape if the owner, driver, or occupant is
killed or raped in the course of the commission of the carnapping or on the occasion thereof. This is
also referred as Qualified Carnapping or Carnapping in an aggravated form.
The homicide and rape must be simultaneous/contemporaneous with the taking i.e. committed
at the time and place of the carnapping.
E. When the property is a mail matter.
1. If by the Post Master the crime is Infidelity in the Custody of Documents. If by mail carriers, it is
qualified theft
2. Should the mail be unopened? Suppose it has already been read by the addressee? If so the
crime is simple theft.
3. Suppose the mail is sent by commercial couriers who take the mail or the contents of letters or
packages? It is qualified theft because of grave abuse of confidence
G. When the property taken is a Large Cattle
1. This has been modified by P.D. 533 or the Anti Cattle Rustling Law
2. Cattle Rustling is defined as ― the taking, by any means, method or scheme, with or without intent
to gain, with or without violence or force upon things, if without the consent of the owner, of any large
cattle‖
a). Large cattle refers to a horse, bull, ass, carabao, other domesticated members of the bovine
family. A goat is a small cattle.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
b). The acts punished by P.D. 533 include:

(i). the act of theft and robbery, acts of deception which ordinarily might result to estafa, or
any other scheme such mingling one‘s bull with the herd of another and thereafter not
returning the cows which follow the bull
(ii). mere killing, hence there is no malicious mischief of large cattle
(iii). the taking of the meat or hide
(iv). the spreading of poison among the herd
c). If homicide results, the killing is absorbed and becomes an aggravating circumstance. The
crime becomes the special complex crime of Cattle Rustling Resulting in/Accompanied by,
Homicide
d). But if it was the physical possession of the cattle which was received by the accused who
appropriated it for himself, the crime is Qualified Theft of Large Cattle. For example: the neighbor
took his cow to the accused to be mated with the bull of the accused. That night the accused
butchered the cow.
e). If the cow was entrusted to the accused for him to bring to another but the accused ate the
cow, the crime is estafa
H. When the property taken is a coconut. The coconut must be taken from a plantation whether they
are still in the tree or on the ground. The reason for the law is to protect the coconut industry of the
Philippines.
I. When the property taken is a fish. The taking must be from large fishponds or those ponds for
commercial purposes.
J. When the taking is on the occasion of a calamity, vehicular accident, or civil disturbance. Example:
The accused took the valuable items of the passengers of a bus which fell down the ravine.
K. When the property taken is timber from a logging concession.
Art. 312. Theft of Property of the National Library and Museum
A. This is a special kind of theft and is set apart from the others in order to protect the historical and
cultural treasures.
1. The accused should not be the museum curator or the librarian because what they commit is
malversation
2. Question: suppose the artifacts were taken from their natural habitat, such as theft of the
Kabayan mummies? Yes If they were constituted as part or extension of the Museum
Other Offenses Penalized as Theft
A. Violation of P.D. 133. The laborer/employee who shall steal any material, spare part, produce, or
article, he is working on.
Example: (a). a silversmith who steals the silver given him to work on (b). A shoemaker who steals
the leather used to make shoes
B. Violation of the Forestry Code which punishes, as qualified theft, the act of cutting, gathering or
removing or smuggling timber or other forest products from any public or private forest in violation of

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
existing rules, regulations or laws
C. Violation of P.D. 581 which punishes ―High Grading‖ or the taking of gold-bearing ores or rocks
from a mining claim or camp.
Usurpation ( of real property)
A. This is of two Kinds:
1. Occupation of real property or usurpation of real rights in property ( Art.312)
a). The act of taking possession, by means of violence against or intimidation of persons, of any
real property or shall usurp any real right in property belonging to another.
b). This is akin to robbery of real property.
c). There must be animus lucrandi otherwise the act is coercion
d). This includes the act of squatting
e). There are two penalties imposed: (i) The first is for the act of usurpation which is based
either on the gain or a fine, and (ii) the penalty for the injury inflicted
f). The land should not be public agricultural lands as it is R.A. 947 which applies
2. Altering boundaries or landmarks ( Art. 313)
a). The boundaries may refer to boundary marks or monuments of towns, provinces or private
estates or other marks intended to designate the boundaries of the same, such as trees planted
or fences placed around the perimeter.
b). This includes titled lands
Culpable Insolvency
Art. 314. Fraudulent Insolvency
A. Concept: the act of a person who absconds with his property to the prejudice of his creditors, i.e. in
order that they cannot collect from him.
1. The accused must be a debtor
2. The term‖ abscond‖ means to conceal one‘s self or one‘s property, with intent to avoid legal
processes
a). Hiding so as not to be served with a complaint, summons or notices or orders
b). The property may be real or personal. Concealing one‘s property means transferring to
another to prevent the creditor from running after that particular property but there must be a real
consideration.
c). Simulated sales or transfers ( i.e there is no real consideration as ownership remains with
the debtor), are punished under estafa
d). Creditors must be prejudiced in that they are unable to collect
e). It is not necessary that insolvency proceeding should have been filed first.
ESTAFA OR SWINDLING
(EMBEZZLEMENT OF PRIVATE FUNDS OR PROPERTY)

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
General Principles:
1. Generally there are only two ways of commission:
A. By misappropriation or abuse of confidence or unfaithfulness

B. By False pretenses or by means of deceit
If one is charged under one mode, he cannot be convicted under the other mode. Each mode is
distinct so that one cannot be said to include the other.
II. Estafa by deceit cannot be committed by negligence. It is always intentional in that the accused (a)
knowingly asserts or assures the existence or truth of a fact or the doing or performance of an act, or
(b) he intentionally omits or conceals or suppresses an important fact or (c) he intentionally fails to do
an act which aids in the deception of the victim.
Example: The seller of a car who did not inform the buyer that the car had previously been involved
in an accident and was damaged so that certain parts had to be repaired, replaced or welded,
was found guilty of estafa by deceit.
―Concealment which the law denounces as fraudulent implies a purpose or design to hide
facts which the other party ought to know. Failure to reveal a fact which the seller is, in good faith,
bound to disclose may generally be classified as a deceptive act due to its inherent capacity to
deceive. Suppression of a material fact which a party is bound in good faith to disclose is
equivalent to a false representation. Moreover, a representation is not confined to words, or
positive assertions; it may consist as well of deeds, acts or artifice of a nature calculated to mislead
another and thus allow the fraud-feasor to obtain an undue advantage.
Fraudulent nondisclosure and fraudulent concealment are of the same genre. Faudulent
concealment presupposes a duty to disclose the truth and that disclosure was not made when
opportunity to speak and inform was presented, and that the party to whom the duty of disclosure
as to a material fact was due, was induced thereby to act to his injury‖.( Guinhawa vs. People, 468
SCRA 278)
III. It may be (a) an instantaneous or a continuing offense in that the acts constituting estafa were
executed not in an instance but within a span of time and (b) it may be localized or transitory in that the
essential elements took place in different jurisdictions.
Question: X, who is in Manila, convinced Y who is in Baguio, to send money to X as purchase price of
goods which Y was in need. The agreement was through text messages, and sometimes through the
use of cell phones and at times through the internet. The money was sent through the Western Union.
X misappropriated the money. Can Y file estafa charges in Baguio City?
IV. There must be damage to a third person to bring about consummated estafa which damage may
either be:
A. Actual or material damage such as in the loss of a certain amount of money, or a specific
property

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
B. It may consist in the mere disturbance of property rights.

Example. Mr. X presented misrepresented himself as the President of a company in whose favor
certain sums of money were due and payable from Juan. He demanded payment whereupon Juan
issued a check made payable to: ―The President of the company‖. Even if Mr. X is unable to
encash the check, Juan cannot also make use of the amount covered by the check.
C. Temporary Prejudice.
Question: Juan handed P10,000.00 to Pedro for Pedro to give to Juan‘s brother at the end of the
month. Pedro‘s allowance did not yet arrive so he spent the money in the expectation that he will
replace it with his allowance which is due by the end of the month. He did replace it with his
allowance and gave the money to Juan‘s brother. Juan learned about it. Can Juan file charges of
estafa against Pedro?
V. The damage must be capable of pecuniary valuation because the penalty includes a fine which in
turn is based on the amount of damage. Likewise the penalty of imprisonment is based on the amount.
The exception is syndicated estafa under P.D. 1689 where the penalty is fixed: life imprisonment to
death, regardless of the amount involved. A syndicate exists if committed by” five or more persons
formed with the intention of carrying out the unlawful or illegal act, transaction, enterprise or
scheme”
VI. Novation may be a defense in that it may prevent the rise of criminal liability or it may cast doubt on
the true nature of the original basic transaction between the accused and the offended party.
A. It is not a defense once the Information was filed in court

B. Examples:
(i). A contract of agency may be converted into a debtor-creditor relationship. Thus the agent and
the principal may agree that the agent assume the payment of the value of the article supposed
to be sold on consignment. If the agent failed to pay, there can be no charge of estafa.
(ii). X discovered that the land sold to him is non-existent and when he informed the seller, the
seller offered X an option of either reimbursement of the money or that be given another land in
substitution. X agreed but found the land given in substitution was not to his liking. The subsequent
agreement which is a novation is a good defense to a charge for estafa.
VII. The Principle of Multiple Estafa:
A. There are as many separate charges for estafa as there are different and separate acts of
misappropriation committed on different dates or occasions.
B. For each amount belonging to a different person i.e there as many separate charges of estafa as
there are persons damaged because the damage to one is different from the damage to another
person.
C. QUERRY: Does the principle of continuous crime apply to estafa?

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
ARTICLE 315
SWINDLING AND OTHER DECEITS
Note: This article defines the 2 ways by which estafa in general is committed. It provides the penalty
which is dependent upon the amount of fraud or damage involved. However the maximum penalty of
imprisonment is 30 years which is to be called as reclusion perpetua.
FIRST MODE OR KIND: With Unfaithfulness or

by Abuse of Confidence
I.. ―By altering the substance, quantity or quality of anything of value which the offender shall deliver
by virtue of an obligation to do so, though based on an immoral or illegal consideration‖
A. There was an agreement as to the kind, quantity or quality of the thing to be delivered
B. The accused misrepresented that the thing he now delivers is of the same kind, quality or
quantity agreed upon when in truth it is not
1. The accused received money and claims the goods he is giving is the 10 kilos agreed upon
when in truth it is only 8 kilos; it is the white sugar when in truth it is brown or that it is the 5 kilos
of shabu for which he received payment but what he gave is 3 kilos only
2. The accused claimed there were 100 sacks of palay in his warehouse which he used as pledge
when in truth there as only 90 sacks.
II. ―By misappropriating or converting money or goods or other property received by the offender
under an obligation to make delivery or to return, or by denying receipt thereof ―
This is what is referred to as ―Estafa by Conversion/Diversion‖
A. Element No. 1. The personal property was received or voluntarily delivered to the offender
under any form of contract or arrangement so long as there was an obligation on the part of the
offender to deliver the property to another or to deliver to the offender party, or to return the same
property.
1. These contracts give juridical possession to the offender which means the transfer or delivery of
the property to the accused was made by virtue of an obligation created by a valid contract which
was mutually consented to, or created by law, which gives the offender a right to the possession
which he can set up even as against the transferor. It may be with or without consideration.
Thus in the following examples note that property was received:
(a). For safekeeping or for deposit such as goods delivered to the hotel management
(b). In trust for delivery to another
(c). On commission as in articles given to sales agents to be sold and the agent receives a
commission, or to be returned if unsold.(referred to as goods received on consignment)
(d). For administration or for the accused to look after

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
(e). Receipt by an agent from the principal

(f). Received as pledge or property leased to the accused
3. In all the foregoing the same property received given is the same property to be returned. (
Identity of the Article).
4. Does the Principle of Identity of Article apply to money bills or coins?

a). Where the bills, coins or check were delivered by way of deposit or subject to
reimbursement, such as with the bank, school as tuition fees, or to a lessee, the use of said
bills or money by the recipient does not constitute estafa. The very same articles are not the
same or identical articles to be returned.
b). Where the money were however given in trust for a specific purpose, conversion thereof
constitutes estafa. Example: spending money given merely to be used as ―Show Money‖ is
estafa (Asejo vs. Pp: July 24, 2007)
B. Element No. 2. There was a conversion or diversion i.e after receipt of the property, it was used
or disposed of by the accused as though it were his own, or that he deviated or used the property to a
purpose different from that agreed upon.
1. Conversation includes personal appropriation although it is not necessary that the accused
personally benefited. It includes as well denying the receipt of the property.
2. Examples of diversion:
(a). The article was to be sold in cash but the accused sold it on credit
(b). Article is to be sold but the agent pledged it and failed to account for the money received
(c). Note however that if the article is to be sold for a fixed amount but it was sold for less, there
is no estafa. But if the agent misappropriates the proceeds there is estafa
(d). If the article is only to be pledged but it was instead sold, the crime is theft.
3. In case of delay in the fulfillment of a trust: as when the money entrusted to Juan for delivery to
Pedro was given to Pedro belatedly. There is no estafa but only civil liability
4. Rules If the accused retained or deducted his commission from the proceeds of the sale of the
goods:
(a). There is estafa if retention was not authorized or agreed upon

(b). Even if not authorized there is no estafa if the purpose is as a protection against possible civil
controversy as where there is a pending mutual accounting; or the principal failed to pay the
accumulated commissions in an amount larger than that retained
(c). If the accused was given the option to either return or pay the value of the article, the liability
is only civil
5. If the thing was delivered to a third person
(a). If to a sub-agent there is no estafa even if the reason for the non-return is due to acts of the
sub-agent, unless delivery to a third person was expressly prohibited
(b) Delivery to a sub agent should not however be a mere subterfuge to explain the non-

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
production of the article
6. If the thing was leased and was sold during the period of lease there is estafa or if the lessee
asserts ownership and refuses to return.
QUESTION: X rented the taxi of Y and used it as a public transport. X thereafter sold the taxi.
What crime was committed?
C. Third element: that the act resulted to damage or prejudice
1. The person damaged need not be the legal owner of the goods as the damage may befall a
person other than the owner.
D. Is demand an element in estafa by conversion?
The case of Lee vs. People ( 455 SCRA 256), reiterated in Manantan vs. PP (531 SCRA 364) settled
the question:
Facts: The accused failed to remit to the corporation the amount he received and collected. He was
charged for estafa with abuse of confidence under Article 315 Paragraph 1 (b). He moved to have
his conviction be reversed arguing that there as no prior demand made on him to account and remit
the money.
Held: Demand is not necessary.
1. Demand is not an element or a condition precedent to the filing of a complaint for estafa. Indeed
the accused maybe convicted of the felony under Article 315 (1-b) if the prosecution proved
misappropriation or conversion by the accused of the money or property subject of the Information.
In a prosecution for estafa, demand is not necessary where there is evidence of misappropriation or
conversion.
2. However, failure to account upon demand for funds or property held in trust, is circumstantial
evidence of misappropriation. This demand may be formal or verbal. Even an inquiry as to the
whereabouts of money is tantamount to a demand.
3. NOTE: It be understood therefore that demand is not required if there is evidence if

misappropriation or conversion. Suppose there is no direct evidence of the misappropriation or
conversion, and there was no prior demand made on the accused, will a charge for estafa still
prosper? Yes. The effect of this absence of prior demand is that proof of misappropriation is more
difficult to obtain. To make the proof easier, a demand may be made so that if the accused failed to
account, then this will be circumstantial evidence of actual misappropriation.
III. ―By taking advantage of a signature in blank and by writing any document above a signature in
blank without the knowledge or consent of the victim‖
A. This presupposes that: a paper which bore the signature of the victim was voluntarily delivered to
the accused; that there was a specific instruction on what the accused was supposed to write; but
the accused wrote something different.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
B. If the document was not voluntarily delivered, the crime is falsification, so also if there was a
writing which was altered.
C. If however the signature was procured through fraud, the crime is estafa by deceit.
D. Example: (1) X handed a signed check to Y with the agreement that Y place the amount of
P10,0000.00 but Y wrote P20,000.00. (2) X gave a bond paper already signed by him with the
instruction for Y to fill up the paper by placing thereon the conditions agreed upon. Y added other
conditions. Y committed estafa.
ESTAFA BY MEANS OF FALSE PRETENSES OR DECEIT

EXECUTED TO OR SIMOULTANEOUSLY WITH
THE COMMISSION OF THE FRAUD
I. Introduction:
A. Deceit assumes so many hues or forms. It so broad as to include any falsehood, or lie, false
assertion, or presenting something which the accused knows is untrue. Making assurances of doing
an act, giving or delivering, which accused knew he has no capability or intention of fulfilling. (Glib
tongue or sweet words). It includes an intentional omission to disclose a material fact.
B. The victim must not know or be aware of the true state of things and he must have relied on the
misrepresentation of the accused. Had it not been for what the accused told him, the victim would
not have transacted with the accused.
1. The deceit, must be prior or simultaneously committed with the act of defraudation
2. The deceit must be the efficient cause or primary consideration which induced the offended
party to part with his money or property
3. It need not be of things possible
II. ―By using fictitious name, falsely representing to possess power, influence, qualifications, property,
credit business, or imaginary transactions‖.
A. Fictitious name is not necessarily an alias but it covers every situation where the accused
misrepresents himself in order to be able to catch the victim unaware and therefore willing to deal
with the accused. Thus one who projected himself as a Volunteer Teacher and thereby gained the
trust of the students, after which he was able to convince them to give their money to him, used a
fictitious name.
B. Illustrations
1. Illegal Recruitment where accused represents their capacity to work for a person‘s‘ visa and to
secure a job abroad; or that they have contacts who can facilitate the issuance of visas or the
procurement of jobs abroad. This includes the scheme of advertising one‘s business as ―Visa
Consultancy‖ as front for illegal recruitment.
2. Offering Get-rich-quick schemes or pyramiding or promising big return of investments under

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
the ― Ponzi scheme‖; or to invest in U.S. Treasury Warrants.

3. Hiring a vehicle with assurance to pay when actually he has no money
4. Pretending the assured is dead in order to collect the insurance
5. Encashing a forged check by misrepresenting one‘s self to be the payee giving rise to estafa
through falsification
6. Selling a non existing property
7. Placing orders on a COD basis but thereafter making excuses for not paying on cash basis
8. Pretending the ability to locate buried treasures
9. Putting up a bank then running away with the deposits
10. Enticing people to invest in a business which does not exist or where the accused had no
intention of operating successfully.
12. Advertising as real estate developers when in truth the accused does not have the capability
to fulfill his promises of a house and lot.
13. Those who represented themselves as members of a religious group and convinced people
to make donations to them.
Problem: Money was given on a promise by the accused for approval of certain documents which
the accused did not succeed in having be approved. Is there estafa? (Answer).None. There is
only a contract of services unless the accused had no intent to perform the services at that time,
or if he made representations which were false.
III.‖ Altering the quality, fineness, or weight of anything pertaining to his art or business‖
A. This has been supplanted by the law on Weight and Measurements which includes the
manipulation of weighting scales.
IV. ―By pretending to have bribed a government employee ―.
A. The claim of bribery is a mere pretense to obtain money from a person.

B. The public official may charge the accused for libel or slander
C. Example: To facilitate the release of papers or for a favorable decision, the accused obtained
money from complainant supposedly to be given to the officer.
V. ―By Issuing or Postdating a check without or against insufficient funds.‖

A. The deceit is in the act of issuance of a check since there is implicit an assurance that the check
will be backed up by funds when presented to the drawee bank.
B. Elements:
1. The accused postdated or issued a check in payment of an obligation contracted at the time
of issuance ( kaliwa-an)
2. At the time of issuance, the accused has no funds in the bank or the funds were insufficient
3. The payee has been defrauded or damaged
C. Important considerations:
1. The check was issued for the purpose of contracting or creating an obligation to pay. It was
not issued for a pre-existing obligation or one already existing prior to the issuance of the check.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
(a) Issuing a bad check to pay purchases is estafa

(b) If the check is to pay a loan there is no estafa
(c) Rediscounting a check is estafa
(d) Check issued to pay the installment due on a deed of sale is not estafa
2. The payee did not know or was not informed of the lack or insufficiency of the funds at the
time the check was given him
3. The check was issued as payment i.e. to be encashed by the holder, and not as guaranty
check or as security check or memorandum check or as an accommodation check
4. If there was no consideration, there is no estafa
5. Is the payee liable if he negotiates the check which turned out to be without funds? Yes if he
was in conspiracy with the drawer, or under paragraph 2(a) i.e. (by pretending an imaginary
transaction, or by means of deceit).
6. Exercises
(a). Question: X gave his check to Y for Y to show his creditors that he ( Y) be given time to
pay . But Y negotiated the check to Z which check bounced. Who is liable? (Ans.). It is Y.
(b). Y gave his check to X as payment and X negotiated the check to Z. The check bounced.
Question: Can Z file estafa charges against either X or Y?
7. If the maker or drawer stops the payment of the check for a valid reason, he is not liable.
Examples: that the check was stolen or the goods sold to him were defective, are valid reasons
for stopping payment.
8. Presumption of deceit constituting false pretense or fraudulent acts

a). Deceit is presumed from the failure to deposit the amount necessary to cover the check
within three days from receipt of notice from the bank or payee/holder that the check has been
dishonored. Proof of receipt of notice, not just the sending, is essential for the presumption to
arise.
b). If within the 3 day period the victim accepted another check as replacement for the original
check which was dishonored, but the replacement check in turn bounced, the accused is not
liable for estafa upon the first check as he was not any more obligated to fund the first check
within the 3 day period. The presumption of deceit does not apply any more. ( PP vs. Juliano
448 SCRA 370).
VI. Acts punished: under Paragraph (e)
A. Obtaining food, refreshment and accommodation in a hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house,
lodging, house or apartment houses without paying therefore (Crime known as Eat, drink, sleep and
run)

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. The accused impliedly represents that he has the means to pay
B. Obtaining credit at a hotel, inn, restaurant, boardinghouse, lodging house, or apartment house,
by the use of any false pretense.
C. Surreptitiously abandoning or removing any part of the luggage after obtaining food,
refreshments or accommodations from said establishments without paying
a) Refers to transients and not where there is a contract of lease unless false pretenses applies.
VII. Through any of the following fraudulent means:
A. By inducing another, by means of deceit, to sign any document

a) Not by violence else it is either coercion or Execution of Deeds by Means of Violence
b). If the victim is willing to sign but a different document is prepared the crime is falsification
B. By resorting to some fraudulent practice to ensure success in a gambling game

1. There be honor among gamblers
2. Examples: ―pikit‖, using cards with signs (readers), secret connivance among several to win
over another
C. By removing, concealing or destroying, in whole or in part, any court record, office files,
documents or other papers
1. The purpose must be to defraud else it is malicious mischief
2. Not by the custodian else it is infidelity
3. Example: concealing the receipt of a deposit or cash bond
j\\
VIOLATION OF B.P. 22
I. Purpose: To prevent the proliferation of worthless checks in the mainstream of daily business and to
avert not only undermining of the banking system, but also the infliction of damage and injury upon the
trade and commerce occasioned by the indiscriminate issuance of such checks. (They are referred to
either as ―watered checks‖, ―bouncing checks‖, or ―worthless checks‖)
B.P. 22 is constitutional and does not violate the prohibition against non-imprisonment for non payment
of a debt. In truth it is not the non-payment of the debt which is punished but the act of issuing a
worthless check.
II. Acts Punished
A. The making, drawing or issuance of any check to apply on account or for value, knowing at the
time of issue that the drawer does not have sufficient funds in, or credit, with the drawee bank. In
this case the check is a worthless check at the time it is issued.
1). If issued by a juridical person those liable are those who signed the check. But a mere
employee tasked to sign corporate checks in blank may not be deem to have knowledge of the

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
insufficiency of funds.
2). One who co-signs without knowledge of lack or insufficiency of the funds is not liable.
B. Failure to keep sufficient funds or to maintain a credit to cover the full amount of the check if
presented within a period of 90 days from the date appearing thereon. The check may be good at
time of issue but not at the time of presentation.(worthless at the time of presentation)
1). The fact that the check was presented beyond the 90 day period is of no moment. The 90 day
period is not an element but merely a condition for the prima facie presumption of knowledge of
insufficiency of funds
2). Under Banking practices the check may be presented within 6 months from its due date,
thereafter it becomes stale.
III. Penalty. Imprisonment of 30 days and a fine of not less than but not more than double the amount
of the check but not to exceed P200,000.00
A. Supreme Court Adm. Circular No. 12-2000 authorized judges to impose fine only as a penalty in
lieu of imprisonment, depending on the circumstances, thus:
―The circular does not decriminalize B.P. 22 but merely lay down a rule of preference in the
application of penalties. Where the circumstances of the case, for instance, clearly indicate good
faith or a clear mistake of fact without taint of bad faith, the imposition of fine alone maybe
considered as the more appropriate penalty. The rule of preference does not foreclose the
possibility of imprisonment… neither does it defeat the legislative intent behind the law… the
determination of whether the circumstances warrants the imposition of a fine alone rests solely
upon the discretion of the judge‖
B. The court may impose subsidiary penalty for failure to pay the fine
IV. Necessity of Written Notice of Dishonor
A. The notice of dishonor must be in writing. Verbal notice is not enough. (Marigomen vs. People,
May 26, 2005), (Ongson vs. PP, Aug. 12, 2005)
B. The presumption of knowledge can not arise‖ if such notice of non payment by the drawee bank
is not sent to the maker or drawer, or there is no proof as to when such notice was received by the
drawer, since there would simply be no way of reckoning the crucial 5 day period ( Dico vs. C.A. (
Feb. 28, 2005) Ongson vs. PP ( Aug. 12, 2005)
C. The notice may be sent by the offended party or the drawee bank ( Dico vs. CA, Feb. 28, 2005).
V. Re: presentation of drawee bank representative as witness
A. It is not required, much less indispensable, for the prosecution to present the drawee bank‘s
representative as a witness to testify on the dishonor of the check. The prosecution may present….
Only the private complainant as witness to prove all the elements of the offense. Said witness is
competent to testify and qualified to testify that upon presentment for payment, the subject check
was dishonored by the bank ( Recuerdo vs. PP, 443 Phil. 770 ; Ongson vs. PP ( Aug. 12, 2005)

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
VI. Requirements for Liability and Defenses Allowed
A. Vergara vs. People ( February 04, 2005)
Facts: The accused issued a check which was dishonored. She was verbally informed of the
dishonor. She then replaced the check with six (6) other checks. Payments were made after the
dishonor but the payments were applied first to the interests. Three years later the accused was
charged for Violation of B.P. 22.
HELD:
1. The requirements for conviction of B.P. 22 are:
a). The fact of the issuance of a check

b). The fact of dishonor the check
c). Knowledge at the time of the issue of the insufficiency of funds
(i) It maybe actual knowledge or
(ii) Presumed Knowledge if (a) the check was presented within 90 days from the date of the
check; (b) the maker /drawer received written notice of the dishonor and (c) he failed to make
arrangements within five (5) banking days from receipt of the written dishonor, for the
payment of the check
2. The defenses include:
a). There was no written notice of dishonor
b).There is no proof of the receipt of the notice and the date thereof. ―Absent proof that the
accused received such notice, a prosecution for violation of (B.P. 22) cannot prosper… (as) there
is no way of determining when the five day period prescribed in Section 2 of BP 22 would start
and end‖ ( Bax vs. PP, Sept. 5, 2007)
c). Arrangements were made for the payment of the checks including replacement with new
checks, within five days from receipt of notice
d). The Utilitarian Theory if there was a full payment despite which a criminal case is filed as a
collection suit
― The accused cannot be penalized for the issuance of a check which has already been
satisfied.
B.P. 22 … was devised to safeguard the interest of the banking system and the legitimate
public checking account user. It was not intended to shelter or favor or encourage users
of the system to enrich themselves through the manipulation and circumvention of the
noble purpose and objective of the law. Under the Utilitarian Theory or protective
theory in criminal law, the primary function of punishment is the protection of the
society against actual or potential wrong doers.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
The accused can hardly be classified as a menace against whom the society should be
protected. From the time the accused was informed up to the filing of the case, she made
payments which covered the value of the checks.‖
(Note: In Griffith vs. CA (379 SCRA 94) the accused was acquitted of a charge filed 2 years
after the complainant collected more than the value of the check. Ratione Cessat Lex, et
Cessat lex)
(e). In Macalalag vs. People ( 511 SCRA 400; Dec. 20, 2006) the court held: the principle in
Medel vs. CA ( 299 SCRA 481) as reiterated in Ruiz vs. CA (401 SCRA 410) applies to a
prosecution for Violation of B.P. 22. ( In Medel the court ruled that if the stipulated interest is
excessive, iniquitous, unconscionable and exorbitant, said interest may be declared illegal and
the interest is set at 12% per annum). The trial court may thus determine whether the interest of
the loan covered by the check is unconscionable or not. It may then declare that a check has
been fully paid if the interest is unconscionable and hold the accused not liable for
violation of B.P. 22 if said amount was paid prior to the presentation of the check with the
bank or within the 5 days after notice of dishonor.
f). ―There is no violation of B.P. 22 if the complainant was actually told by the drawer that he has
no sufficient funds in a bank‖ ( Macalag vs. PP, 511 SCRA 400)
g). If there is a variance or discrepancy in the identity of the check described in the Information
with the check presented in court as this violates the right of the accused to be informed of the
offense charged and can not thereby be convicted ( Dico vs. CA, Feb. 25, 2005)
h). That the check was issued merely to accommodate the complainant is not a defense ( Steve
Tan vs. Mendez, June 06, 2002)
3. Other defenses include:
a). Prescription of the crime

b). Forgery, or that the accused did not voluntarily part with the check
c) The check became stale when presented
VII. QUERRY: Is wife liable if only the husband signed the check given as security for a loan?
1. Ladonga vs. PP ( Feb. 17, 2005)
This involves the application of the Revised Penal Code in a suppletory character pursuant to
Article 10. Thus the following principles apply: a). Provisions on subsidiary imprisonment. b).
Principle of Conspiracy as analogous to the provisions on principals. There was however no proof
the wife performed an overt act in pursuance of the complicity which overt act may either be active
participation in the actual commission of the crime, or it may consist of moral assistance to the co-
conspirator by moving them to execute or to implement the criminal design.
VIII.. May a person be held liable if he issues a check which is drawn against the account of another
person?

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
Yes. The law includes within its coverage, the making and issuing of a check by one who has no
account with a bank, or where such account was already closed when the check was presented for
payment even if the owner of the said account consented to the making of the check.
IX. Distinction From Estafa
1. Violation of B.P. is malum prohibitum a crime against public interest whereas estafa is mala in se
2. Violation of B.P. 22 does not require intent and damage as elements which matters are the
elements of estafa
3. Violation of B.P. 22 applies to all kinds of checks whereas estafa applies only to checks issued
as payment for a simultaneous obligation
4. In Violation of B.P. 22 the drawer is given 5 days to pay or make arrangements for the payment
of the check as against 3 days for estafa
Note: The accused may therefore be prosecuted both for Estafa and for Violation of B.P. 22 over the
same check. Further, acquittal or conviction under one law will not give rise to a double jeopardy if
the accused is prosecuted under the other law.
X. Venue of the criminal action for Violation of B.P. 22
1. In the place of issue i.e where the check was actually made or drawn
2. In the place of effective delivery in the event the check is personally given to one to deliver to the
payee but the recipient is not acting as the agent of the payee ( Lim vs. Rodrigo ). If the recipient is
the agent, delivery to him is delivery to the payee as the principal.
3. In the place of dishonor i.e. where the drawee bank is located
Note: Violation of B.P. 22 may be a transitory crime
XI. There is no independent civil action allowed and no reservation is allowed as the civil liability
arising from the crime is mandatorily determined in the criminal case.
XII. How many charges ought to be filed if there were several checks issued and dishonored?
(Personal Opinion): If the checks were issued simultaneously for one and the same transaction,
against the same account, and all are dishonored, there should only be one offense of violation of
B.P. 22.
ESTAFA AGAINST REALTY

ARTICLE 316. Other Forms of Swindling
NOTE: As a rule estafa involves only personal properties. However Article 316 provides the situations
when estafa may involve real properties.
I. Any person who, pretending to be the owner of any real property, shall convey, sell, encumber or
mortgage the same.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. The property must actually exist but it does not belong to the accused. The latter simply pretends
he is the owner.
2. If the property does not exists but the accused pretends it exists, or the property is a personal
property, the crime is estafa under article 315 (par. 2-a) i.e. pretending to possess property
3. Examples: selling a public land; mortgage of a land/building which the accused has already sold
to another; second sale of the same property to the victim
II. Disposing off encumbered property as if it were unencumbered.
A. The real property has been mortgaged or is under any other valid encumbrance, as when it has
been used as property bond, or was attached. If the prior encumbrance is but a verbal agreement,
the same is not enforceable hence no estafa is committed.
B. The accused must expressly misrepresent that the property is free from any lien or encumbrance.
Mere failure to disclose even if intentional, will not constitute a violation. This requires that there be
an express warranty that the property is clean.
1. But the failure or omission to disclose constitutes ― civil fraud‖ which may be the basis for
damages, but not for estafa under this article.
2. This express warranty is often contained in the body of the Deed of Sale itself
C. The rule on constructive notice concerning titled lands does not apply
III. The owner of a personal property who shall wrongfully take it from its lawful possessor to the
prejudice of the later or to a third person
A. The taking should be by deceit and not by force else it is coercion.
Example: the debtor enticed the creditor to handover the watch used as a pledge on the pretext that
the debt is to be paid. Upon being handed the watch the debtor does not pay and does not return
the watch.
B. If the possessor is not the lawful possessor, there is no estafa.
Problem: X saw his stolen cellphone in the possession of Y and pretends he wants to buy the cell
phone. After it is given to him by Y, he declares he is the owner and refuses to pay or to return it.
Did X commit estafa?
IV. By executing a fictitious contract.
A. The accused must be a debtor and the purpose is to prevent a creditor from running after the
property to collect the debt.
B. ―Fictitious contract‖ refers to a simulated contract i..e there is no real consideration such that the
ownership remains with the accused. If the ownership has been validly transferred, the crime would
be Culpable Insolvency.
V. By accepting compensation for services not actually rendered.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. The acceptance must be in bad faith in that the accused knows he has not performed any service
or labor. If he was in good faith the money may be recovered as this is a case of solution indebiti.
Ex: Impersonating a laborer and receiving the wages of the latter

.
VI. Selling or mortgaging of real property used as bond without judicial authority.
A. There be actual damage and not just temporary prejudice.
Art. 317. Swindling a Minor
I. This covers any form of deception where the accused took advantage of the inexperience or
emotion or feelings of a minor to his detriment and shall induce the minor to:
1. assume any obligation, such as borrowing money with high interest

2. give any release as by condoning any indebtedness due to the minor
3. execute any transfer of any property, such as exchanging his property with a less valuable
property
II. The property involved should not be a real property as minors cannot convey or encumber real
property without the consent of his parents or guardians, otherwise it would be estafa under Article 318.
ARTICLE 318. Other Deceits
I. The first paragraph punishes ― any person who shall defraud or damage another by any other
deceit ―
A. ―Any other deceit‖ covers any form of deception which is not punished under either article 315,
316 or 317. It is intended as the catchall provision for that purpose with its broad scope and
intendment.
B. Examples:
(i). Obtaining a loan on the promise that the accused shall mortgage a property which the
accused latter refused to do
(ii). A person presents herself as house help, requests for an advance, and then surreptitiously
leave
(iii) Bus conductor who issues a ticket for a lesser amount than what is actually collected which
ticket he then presents to the operator, and thereby pocketing the difference
(iv). The false or fraudulent representation by a seller that what he offers for sale is brand new (
when in fact it is not) ( Guinhawa vs. People, Aug. 25, 2005)
II. Any person who, taking advantage of the credulity of the public, shall interpret dreams, make
forecasts or tell fortunes, for a consideration.
A. This is called the ―Fortune Teller‘s Crime‖

B. Question: Suppose the prediction came true?

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
CHATTEL MORTGAGE
ART. 319. Removal, sale or pledge or mortgaged property
I. Two acts are punished:
A. knowingly removing to any province or city any property mortgaged under the chattel mortgage
law other than the one in which it was located at the time of the execution of the mortgage, without
the written consent of the mortgagee or his representative
a). the removal must be to defraud the mortgagee and not due to any valid reason, such as a
change of address, or if the properties are vehicles which travel from one place to another . The
purpose is so that the mortgagor cannot foreclose on the mortgage
b) But if the creditor chooses to collect by filing a suit, the debtor is relieved from liability under
Article 318
B. Double sale, pledge or mortgage of the property without the written consent of the mortgagee
written on the back of the mortgage and recorded in the Office of the Register of Deeds.
CRIMES INVOLVING DESTRUCTION
1. ARSON
I. Laws Involved
1. Pres. Decree No. 1613 which repealed Articles 320 to 326-B of the Revised Penal Code as to
Simple Arson
2. P.D. 1744 which revived Article 320
3. R.A. 7659 which amended Article 320 as revived as to Destructive Arson.
II. Concept: the crime committed by any person who destroys property by means of fire.
A. There are two categories of the crime of arson (per PP. vs. Malngan 503 SCRA 294) based on
their significance on the social, economic, political and national security implications
1. Destructive Arson under Article 320, as amended by R.A. 7659.
a). This contemplates the malicious burning of structures, both public and private, hotels,
edifices, trains, vessels, aircrafts, factories and other military, government, or commercial
establishments. The crime is considered heinous
2. Simple Arson under P.D. 1613 which contemplates the malicious burning of public and private
structures, regardless of size, not included in Article 320 as Amended. This contemplates crimes
with less significant social, economic, political and national security implications. But the crime
may be converted to destructive arson depending on the qualifying circumstances present.
a). These includes houses, dwellings, government buildings, farms, mills, plantations, railways,
bus stations, airports, wharves, and other industrial establishments.
B. In Buebos vs. PP ( March 28, 2008) it was held that it is the degree of perversity or viciousness of
the criminal offender which distinguishes

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
III. Property Subject of Arson
A. As to who owns the property burned:

1). Property of another, who may be a private person or the government
2). Property of the accused if the arson was under circumstances which exposes danger to the
life or property of another
Example: burning ones old house locate in a heavily populated residential
B. As to the kind of property: these may be real or personal, including plantation, farms, pasture
land, crops, forest land, plants and animals except large cattle ( as the latter is cattle rustling)
C. The value of the property is immaterial
IV. Penalty for Arson
A. For purposes of the penalty arson is classified into:
1). Destructive Arson where the penalty is Reclusion Temporal Maximum to Reclusion Perpetua
2). Other cases of Arson where the penalty is reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua
3). Simple Arson of another‘s property punishable by prision mayor and
4). Arson of one‘s property
B. Factors affecting penalty
1). Ownership of the property

2). The kind or nature of the property such as: whether it is a building or not, if a building whether
it is a public building or a private dwelling ; a religious building or one devoted to culture, education
or social service
3). The presence of the special aggravating circumstances of:
a) If with intent of gain, such as to collect the insurance premium
b). If committed for the benefit of another
c). If the offender is motivated by spite or hatred towards the owner or occupant of the
property burned
d). If committed by a syndicate i.e. if planned or carried out by a group of 3 or more persons (
syndicated arson)
4. If death results i.e if by reason or on the occasion of arson death results

a). This is the special complex crime of Arson Resulting in or accompanied by, Homicide. The
term ―homicide‖ is in generic sense and includes several deaths.
b) Death is not the purpose of the burning otherwise the crime is murder but this crime is
where the intention is to burn but a person was killed.
V. Principles
A. Arson is a continuous crime and a single offense is committed even if on the same occasion of
the burning, several properties are burned, even if belonging to several persons. But burning on
separate occasions are separate crimes.
B. The justifying circumstances of State of Necessity may be invoked.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
C. Conspiracy to Commit Arson is punishable as a crime
Art. 327. MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
A. Concept: the crime committed by any person who shall deliberately cause damage to the property
of another due to hate, revenge, jealousy, anger, or any other evil motive.
B. Principles
1. The destruction should not however be by means of fire otherwise the crime is arson
2. The property should not include large cattle else it is cattle rustling
3. If animal is killed to protect one‘s farm or property, the principle of defense of property may be
invoked
4. This is always intentional and cannot be committed by negligence. If destruction was due to lack
of foresight or skill, the nomenclature of the crime is imprudence resulting to damage to property.
5. If the property or part thereof is thereafter taken, the crime is theft and malicious mischief is
absorbed
6. For purposes of the penalty malicious mischief is sub classified into:
a) Ordinary Malicious Mischief: i.e. that of private property where the penalty depends on the
value of the property, hence the property must have a valuation i.e. does not exceed P200.00,
more than P200.00 but not more than P1,000.00 and over P1,000.00
Example: Writing graffiti or acts of vandalism
b). Special Malicious Mischief or Qualified Malicious Mischief

(i) intent is to obstruct public functions, such as destroying the stage to prevent the mayor
from speaking
(ii) by using poison or corrosive substances
(iii) property is that of the National Museum or library, archives or registry
(iv) if the property refers to things used in common by people, such as promenades, waiting
sheds, seats in the park.
Example: throwing human waste or urinating in a public street
c). Malicious Mischief to means of communication or transportation
(i). If the damage results to any kind of accident, such as derailment, collision, the penalty is
higher. This is in addition to the liability for the other consequences of his act.
Example: The accused destroyed the retaining wall of a road causing a jeep to fall down the
ravine killing the driver. He is liable for Malicious Mischief (for the destruction of the wall) and
a separate offense of Reckless Imprudence resulting in homicide and damage to property.
d). Malicious Mischief of public statues or of useful or ornamental monuments or of public

ornamental paintings.
Example: Painting the statute of the heroes in public parks

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY

FOR CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
Art. 332. Persons exempt from criminal liability.
I. Introduction:
A. Article 332 provides for an absolutory cause in the crimes of theft, estafa and malicious mischief
by directing that “No criminal but only civil liability, shall result” if the crimes are mutually
committed by the persons enumerated therein. This is based on the relationship between the
accused and the victim.
B. The exemption applies provided the crimes are not complexed with other crimes
II. Between Spouses; ascendants and descendants, or relatives by affinity in the same line
A. This includes between parents and children -in- law; step children and step parents; adopter and
adopted, including recognized natural children with their natural parents
B. Spouses include common-laws spouses but not those simply in a live-in-relationship. This is
because the property relations between common-law spouses is that of the co-ownership
C. Spouses who are legally separated are included so long as there was no dissolution yet of their
property.
D. Question: Suppose one of the spouses died, will the exemption continue to apply to the relatives
by affinity of the surviving spouse?
1. The Terminated Affinity View: No. The relationship by affinity terminates with the
dissolution of the marriage either by death or divorce exempt when there is a surviving issue
whereby the relationship is preserved because of the living issue of the marriage in whose veins
the blood of both parties is commingled
2. The Continuing Affinity View: Yes. The relationship endures even after the dissolution of
the marriage regardless of whether the marriage produced children not. This is the rule adopted
in the Philippines for the following reasons:
a). It is more appropriate to the purpose of the absolutory cause which is to be beneficial to
the specified relatives by affinity
b). The language of the law makes no distinction
c). The spirit of Article 332 which is to preserve family harmony and obviate scandal is in
accord with the constitutional provision of protection to the family
d). By reason of the principles of pro reo and lenity
( Intestate Estate of M. Gonzales vda. De Carungcong vs. People, Feb. 11, 2010, 612 SCRA
272)
E. The exemption does not apply if the estafa or theft is complex with falsification ( Intestate Estate
of Gonzales vs. Pp).
III. The widowed spouse with respect to the property which belonged to the deceased spouse before
the same shall have passed into the possession of another.
A. If the property is subject of judicial settlement, and is placed by the court under an administrator
after an inventory has been approved, the property is said to have passed into the possession of

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
another
B. QUESTION: Supposed the widowed spouse took and spent the legitime of the heirs, was
criminal liability incurred?
IV. Brothers and sisters, brothers/sisters-in-law, if living together.
A. Not if the accused is just a visitor or given temporary shelter by the victim
TITLE ELEVEN
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
I. Introduction:
A. ( Personal Opinion). In view of the provisions of R.A. 8353 ( The Anti Rape Law of l997), R.A.
9208 ( The Anti Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003) the only crimes against chastity should be :
1. Adultery (Art. 333)

2. Concubinage (Art. 334)
3. Acts of Lasciviousness
a). Forcible ( Art. 336)
b). Consented (Art. 339)
4. Abduction
a). Forcible (Art. 342)
b). Consented (Art. 343)
B. Rape ( Article 335) is now Article 266-A and 266-B as crimes against persons
C. Corruption of Minors under Article 340 and White Slave Trade under Article 341 are now
punished as Trafficking In Persons.
II. ( Personal Opinion). As to the crime of Seduction, a qualification has to be made because it appears
this crime has been modified by rape committed by means of fraudulent machination or by grave abuse
of authority.
In seduction the victim consented to the sexual intercourse.
A. In qualified seduction (Article 337) what makes the offense qualified is because of the character
of the accused, the excess of power or abuse of confidence. Thus the consent of the victim was
obtained because of any of the following:
(i). Abuse of authority such as by persons in authority, guardians, teachers, persons who are
entrusted with the education or custody of the victim
(ii). Abuse of the confidence reposed in them such as by priest, minister, house servants,
domestics i.e. one living under the same roof as the victim
(iii). Abuse of relationship such as by brothers or ascendants
1. Under the Anti Rape Law, there is rape by ―grave abuse of authority‖ hence it would seem
that if the accuse falls under any of the foregoing classification but if the abuse is not ―grave‖,

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
the offense would still be qualified seduction. But when is the abuse considered grave, so as to
give rise to rape, and when is it mild or not grave?
B. In simple seduction (Article 338) the seduction was ―committed by means of deceit‖.
1. Deceit was understood to be generally in the form of unfulfilled promise of marriage. Hence, it
would seem that if the consent to sex was by any artifice other than by a promise of marriage, the
offense would be rape by ―fraudulent machination‖.
C. Requirements for seduction or consented sexual intercourse:

1. The victim is a woman who must be over 12 years because if her age is below 12 the offense
is statutory rape
2. She must not be over 18 years (it is presumed that if over 18 years, she is of sufficient
understanding to take care of her virtue and chastity). However even if the woman is over 18 if
there was ―Grave Abuse of Authority‖ or ―fraudulent machination‖ the crime would be rape.
3. While the law requires the victim to be a ―virgin‖, this is to be understood as referring to a
woman of chaste character though she may not literally be virgin.
4. There must be sexual intercourse to be consumated
ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE
(Note: These two crimes are the crimes of

criminal conversation proper)
Article 333. ADULTERY
I. Concept: The crime committed by a married woman who shall have sexual intercourse with a man
not her husband, and by the man who has carnal knowledge of her, knowing her to be married‖
A. The gist is actual sexual intercourse and not just mere romantic dating, or petting or kissing
B. There is no frustrated stage: it is either that the accused were able to engage in sex or not.
C. It is not a continuing crime because each separate sex act on a different occasion is a different
and a separate crime.
D. This may be committed when a married woman marries a second time without the first having
been judicially annulled or voided. Her liability is in addition to bigamy.
II. The Judicial validity of the woman‘s marriage is not material. It is enough that there was a marriage
which has not yet been annulled or declared null and void.
III. Rationale:
A. The possibility of introducing spurious heirs (Criticism: this reason will not hold water if the
woman is proven to be sterile)
B. Violation of the marriage vows and the sanctity of the marriage based on the exclusivity of the
sexual partner.
III. Defenses in Adultery

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
A. Pardon by the offended spouse if (1) given to both the guilty parties and (2) prior to the
institution of the criminal action
B. Pardon may be express or implied, as by sleeping with the woman despite knowledge of the
adultery (Pardon of the Act)
C. Consent given prior to the adultery, such as in mutual agreement to separate and to live with
another partner
D. Recrimination or mutual infidelity is merely mitigating
E. The fact that the woman is legally separated from the husband is no defense.
F. Ignorance by the man that the woman is married
IV. Principles in the Prosecution of Adultery
A. Direct evidence is not necessary as adultery may be implied from the circumstances of time,
place and occasion
B. There may be a separate trial for the man and the woman
C. The man may be acquitted if he did not know the woman is married
D. If the man is married, he may also be liable for concubinage and the married woman man may
also be charged as a concubine
V. Special Extenuating Circumstance of Unjustified Abandonment
A. The penalty is at least one degree lower

B. The essence is that the woman was forced to commit adultery by reason of extreme necessity
which refers to economic necessity and the need for survival, such as providing for the shelter and
sustenance of her abandoned family.
Art. 334. CONCUBINAGE
I. How committed/Concept: The crime committed by a married man who:
1. Shall keep a mistress in the conjugal dwelling
a). the concubine must live in the conjugal dwelling even for brief periods of time, and not where
she occasionally comes for a tryst or to spend the night therein
2. Shall have sexual intercourse with her under scandalous circumstances

a). Proof of sex is not necessary but may be inferred
b). There be a public or open flaunting of the illicit relationship so that the public is scandalized,
shocked, or the conduct give rise to general protest, or that the relationship sets a bad example.
c). Example: being seen with the woman in social and public gatherings; introducing or treating
the woman as though she were the wife
d) Since public reaction is gauge of the scandal is there concubinage if:
(i) openly going out is in places where the two are total strangers
(ii) relatives and acquaintances accept the fact of the relationship, as when the wife left the
man who now is cared and loved by another woman?
3. Cohabit with her in any other place

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a). To cohabit is to live together as husband and wife.

b) QUESTION: Is concubinage committed by the man in providing the woman her own house or
apartment but does not live with her though he regularly visits her thereat, at which time they
engage in sex?
II. Unlike in adultery, the fact of criminal conversation or sexual intercourse with a woman does not per
se give rise to concubinage. Further, each sexual act is not a separate offense because concubinage
is treated as a continuing crime.
Note: In adultery the penalty is the same for both the woman and man (Prision correctional medium
and maximum) but in concubinage the penalty for the man is lower by one degree ( prision correctional
minimum and medium) while the concubine is given a separate penalty which is destierro.
III. The woman is liable if she knows him to be married (even if unhappily at that and even if her purpose
is to provide comfort and companionship)
IV. The defenses available in adultery also apply such as consent and pardon.
QUESTION: Can the man also claim, by analogy, the circumstance of unjustified abandonment
which led him to commit concubinage i.e. out of necessity and the need for survival?
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
A. Concept: the act of making a physical contact with the body of another person for the purpose of
obtaining sexual gratification other than, or without intention of, sexual intercourse.
1. The contact may be by the body of the accused such as by the lips, hands, foot; or by means of
any object or instrument. In either case there must be no form of insertion into the anus, mouth or
sex organ amounting to rape through sexual abuse.
2. It is distinguished from Attempted Rape in that there is no intent to have sexual intercourse with
the victim. The intent may be inferred from the circumstances of time, place, and occasion, or inferred
from the nature of the act itself.
3. It is distinguished from Unjust Vexation in that there is no lewd design in unjust vexation
Example: (i) The acts of an ardent lover such as kissing, embracing arising from his passion, are
unjust vexation merely. (ii). The touching of the private parts of a woman out of curiosity is unjust
vexation.
4. When Punished Under Section 5(b) of RA 7610:
a). If the acts of lasciviousness (including sexual intercourse) is performed upon a child exploited in
prostitution or other sexual abuse (i.e. abuse other than the acts of lasciviousness such as when the
child is the subject of an obscene publication or pornography or of indecent shows, or if coerced to
perform sexual acts) whether male or female, the acts would constitute sexual abuse

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
punished under R.A. 7610 ( The Child Abuse Law) ( Olivarez vs. C.A., July 29, 2006)
b). The law covers not only a situation in which a child, through coercion or intimidation, engages in
any lascivious conduct. The very title of section 5, Article III ( Child Prostitution and Other Sexual
Abuse) of RA 7610 shows that it applies not only to a child subjected to prostitution but also to a
child subjected to ―other sexual abuse‖. A child is subjected to sexual abuse when he or she
indulges in lascivious conduct under the coercion or influence if any adult. ( Navarrete vs. PP., Jan.
31, 2007)
c) An accused charged under an Information for statutory rape may be convicted of Acts of
lasciviousness under Section 5 or RA7610 where there is no evidence of penetration ( Navarrete vs.
PP)
B. Kinds:
1. Forcible (Article 336) if made under circumstances of forcible rape, i.e through force, threat,
violation, intimidation, the woman is rendered unconscious or deprived of reason
a. The accused may be any person and the victim may be a male or female
2. Consented: (Article 339) if made under circumstances of seduction whether simple or qualified
i.e.
a) victim is a female of chaste character

b) over 12 years but below 18 years, or a widow
c) there was deceit or abuse of authority, abuse of confidence or abuse of relationship
ABDUCTION
A. Concept: the taking away of a woman with lewd designs i.e. to obtain sexual gratification. It is the
abductor who entertains lewed designs and not another person, else the crime would be trafficking in
persons.
1. Forcible (Article 342): if the taking away is against her will.
a). This presupposes the use of force, violence threat or intimidation or any method to overcome
her resistance, or to deprive her of the ability to resist
.
b) If the woman was thereafter raped, it the crime is Forcible Abduction with Rape, and if there
be several rapes, the other rapes are considered as separate crimes.
c) From Kidnapping/Serious Illegal Detention
(i) In kidnapping, there is no lewd design but to either deprive or restrain the woman of her
personal liberty/freedom of movement, or the purpose is to demand a ransom
(ii) If several rapes were committed on the woman, the crime is kidnapping with rape and the
other rapes are absorbed and are aggravating circumstances while in Abduction, the other
rapes are separate offenses

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
d). It is Trafficking in Persons if the purpose is for sexual exploitation, forced labor or services,
slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage, or sale of organs
2. Consented (Article 343) the taking away of a woman of good reputation, 12 years or over but
under 18 years of age, carried out with her consent and with lewd designs.
a) There may or may not be deceit employed to get the woman to agree, as for example,
convincing the woman to elope with the man. The consent must be given freely and intelligently.
b) There be lewd design else the crime may be inducing a minor to abandon the home
ART. 344. PROSECUTION OF PRIVATE CRIMES
I. Necessity of a complaint i.e a formal denunciation indicating that the victim and her family opt not
to keep the incident a private matter but to bring it out in the open in order to prosecute the offender
A. In Adultery and Concubinage: the complaint can only be initiated by the offended spouse who
must still be married to the guilty spouse at the time of the bringing of the complaint, and not when
the marriage has already been annulled or voided at the time when the action was brought.
1. against both guilty parties if both are alive
2. provided there was no prior consent or pardon
B. In Acts of Lasciviousness, abduction, and seduction the complaint must be initiated by the
following enumerated persons.
NOTE: The enumeration is both exclusive (no other person has the personality to file except
those in the enumeration) and successive (the order of preference must be followed) :
1. Victim or offended party unless the victim is incapacitated by reasons other than minority. If
she is of legal age, she alone can bring the action.
2. By either of the parents if the victim is a minor who refuses to file, or is incapacitated as when
she is demented or insane
3. By either of the Grandparents
4. By the legal or the court appointed guardian
5. By the state as parens patriae when the victim dies or becomes incapacitated before she can
file the complaint and has no known parent, grandparents or guardian
II. Defenses in Acts of Lasciviousness and Abduction and seduction
A. Pardon by the Offended Party
1. The pardon must be express

2. If the offended party is of legal age and is not otherwise incapacitated, she alone can extend
a valid pardon
3. If a minor but of sufficient discretion, the victim can extend a valid pardon if she has no
parent, otherwise the pardon must be concurred by the parent, grandparent or guardian
B. A valid Marriage between the Offended and the Offender i.e contracted in good faith

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
1. extinguishes the criminal liability ( case will be dismissed) or remits the penalty ( accused will
not suffer the penalty anymore).
2. This benefits the co-principals (by indespensable cooperation and inducement but not co-
principals by direct participation), accomplices and accessories
ART. 345. CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS GUILTY

OF CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
I. They include:
A. Indemnification of the offended party. Moral damages is recoverable in acts of lasciviousness by

the victim as well by the parents
B. Acknowledgement of the offspring, unless the law should prevent him from so doing
C. To support the offspring
1. In the following there can be no acknowledgement :

(a). in cases of adultery and concubinage
(b). where the offended party is married, provided that paternity is not that of the husband
(c). when paternity can not be determined. Note that DNA testing is accepted to determine
paternity
2. Where there are several accused and paternity can not be determined, all must give support.
TITLE TWELVE
CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS
Art. 347. Simulation of Births, Substitution and

Abandonment of a Legitimate Child
I. Acts Punished:
1. Simulation of Birth:
2. Substitution of one child for another
3. Concealing or abandoning a legitimate child to cause the lose of civil status
II. Principles
A. In simulation and substitution, the child need not be legitimate.

B. The purpose of the acts punished must be to cause the loss of the civil status of the child or to
obtain the civil status of another.
C. Simulation of birth, the act of making it appear that a woman gave birth to a child, must be in the
record of birth/birth certificate. A birth certificate is obtained indicating that the woman gave birth to
a child when in truth she did not.
1. If the simulation is in any other document, the crime is falsification
2. If the woman feigns or pretends to be pregnant and then makes it appear she gave birth to a
baby when in truth the baby is that of another, such pretense is not punished. But when she
causes the birth to be recorded, said act constitute the crime of simulation of birth.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
3. Where the woman pretends to be pregnant and to give birth in order to demand support from
the alleged father, the crime is estafa.
D. The abandonment is not to kill but to cause it to lose its civil status. It consists of the practice of
leaving an infant at the door of a religious or charitable institution, hospitals, or a foster home or the
DSWD. The child be legitimate else it is a crime against security i.e. abandonment by persons having
charge of the education or rearing of the child as in the baby left at the airport.
E. Substitution has for its principal element the putting of a child in place of another born of a different
mother. This results to a change of status because a child is introduced into a family although said
child is a stranger thereto. The child acquires a name, situation and rights to which it is not lawfully
entitled.
Example: (i). Placing a different baby in the crib of another
Art. 348. Usurpation of Civil Status.
I. Concept: the crime committed by any person who shall usurp the civil status of another. It is the act
of pretending to be another person so as to enjoy the latter‘s rights, filiations, paternity or conjugal
rights, including his profession or public status. It involves the idea of impersonating another.
A. The penalty is higher if the purpose is to defraud the offended party or his heirs such as
pretending to be the lost son or nephew of a rich man
B. Example: (i) ―The Prince and the Pauper‖ (ii) ―The Man in the Iron Mask‖. (iii). Pretending to be
the Cesar Oracion in order to be addressed as ―Dean‖
II. Other Related Crimes involving usurpation/impersonation
A. May be Using Fictitious Name as when the accused used another name to avoid being arrested
for traffic violations.
B. Estafa as by pretending to be the creditor or collector
C. Falsification as by pretending to be the payee in a check
D. Perjury
ILLEGAL MARRIAGES
I. Kinds of Illegal Marriages ( i.e. those not recognized or prohibited by law)
A. Bigamous Marriages (Art. 349)

B. Those contracted contrary to the Marriage Law (Art. 350)
C. Premature Marriages (Art. 351)
II. Bigamy: the crime committed by a married person who contracts a second or subsequent marriage
before the first has been legally dissolved or before the absent spouse had been declared
presumptively dead.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
The first marriage must be valid, or at least voidable, and still subsisting and the second marriage
would have been valid were it not for the existence of the first marriage.
Facts: H was prosecuted for bigamy for contracting a second marriage without the first having
been judicially declared null and void. The second wife brought action for declaration of nullity
of the second marriage. Then the charge for bigamy was brought. ( jarillov s. PP, 601 SCRA
236).The moment a person contracts a second marriage without the previous one having been
judicially declared null and void, the crime of bigamy is already consummated because the first
marriage is deemed valid and subsisting still and if the second marriage is declared null and
void, this is no defense to bigamy.
B. If the first marriage is completely void, there is no bigamy. If the second marriage is void, there is
no bigamy either. But this may give rise to either adultery or concubinage.
Example: H married first wife. Then he marries second wife. The first wife died whereupon H married
third wife. H is guilty of bigamy for the second marriage. But he is not guilty of bigamy for the third
marriage because the second marriage is void.
C. Bigamy may be committed by reckless imprudence as: (i). by failure to ascertain the whereabouts
of the first wife (ii) one who obtains a divorced abroad and thinking it is valid here, remarries.
D. The prescriptive period of 15 years commences after discovery of the second marriage as the
principle of constructive notice does not apply to records in the Civil Registry.
E. In case the second marriage is based on the absence of the first spouse, there must first be a
judicial declaration of presumptive death so that the accused can claim good faith and avoid
prosecution for bigamy.
F. Venue. In the courts of the city, province or province where the second marriage was celebrated
III. Marriage Contrary to the Marriage law
1. Those where the essential requirements have not been complied with such as the requirements
of age, marriage license, consent and authority of the solemnizing officer.
2. These refer to the void, voidable, and annullable marriages
IV. Premature Marriages.
1. Marriage contracted by a woman:

(a) Who marries within 301 days from the date of death of the husband or after the annulment
or dissolution of her marriage or
(b) if being pregnant at the time of his death or at time of the annulment or dissolution, shall
marry before having delivered
2. The purpose of the prohibition is to prevent doubtful paternity in the event she gives birth during
the second marriage. Thus there is no liability in the following instances:

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
a). If she already gave birth prior to the second marriage

b). There is proof she was not pregnant by the first husband as when the first husband is sterile,
or infertile or was unable to have physical access to the wife
c). The second husband is sterile
d). The woman is sterile or infertile
V. Performance of Illegal Marriage.
1. This is the crime committed by the solemnizing officer.
TITLE THIRTEEN
CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
Introduction:
1. A person‘s name, honor and reputation, is as sacred to him as his very life. Title 13 seeks to give
protection thereto by defining certain acts injurious to a person‘s name and reputation as crimes and
prescribing penalties therefore.
2. These crimes, which are in the nature of character assassination, are classified according to the
manner of their commission into the following:
a). Libel which is by making use of the mass media and literary forms or literary outlets. This
must include the internet.
b). Oral Defamation which is by the use of oral utterances
c). Slander by Deed which is by performing an act intended to cast dishonor, disrespect or
contempt upon a person .
d). Incriminatory machinations which may either be:

(i) Incriminating an innocent person in the commission of a crime by planting evidence
(ii) Intriguing against honor by resorting to any scheme, plot, design, but not by direct spoken
words, to destroy the reputation of another
3. Elements common to all:
a) That there be a matter, oral written or in whatever form, or of an act, which is defamatory to
another
b).That there is publicity of the defamatory matter
c). That there be malice on the part of the accused
d). That the person defamed is identifiable
4. The foregoing crimes cannot be committed by negligence because all require the element of

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
malice.
5. Title 13, especially the article on libel constitutes another limitation to the freedom of speech and
of the press as these two freedoms can not be allowed to be used to destroy the good name of an
innocent person.
ART. 353. LIBEL

Introduction:
Forms: Libel may be through:

a). The facilities of the mass media i.e print and broadcast media such as articles, news items,
columns, caricatures, editorials in newspapers and magazines; comments, opinions, news aired
over the television or radio stations
b). Modern communication facilities such as through the internet or cellphones, CDs, DVDs
c). Literary outlets such as through letters, books, poems, songs, stage plays, movies, paintings,
drawings, pictures, sculpture and the like
Elements
A. First Element: There must be a defamatory imputation
1. This means that the matter claimed to be libelous must impute a crime, vice, defect, or any act,
or omission, condition, status or circumstance, tending to cause the dishonor, discredit or contempt
to a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.
The purpose is to lower the esteem or honor, or respect, in which a person is regarded, such as :
a). The victim is humiliated or publicly embarrassed
b). The victim is vilified, hated, becomes the subject of gossip, nasty stories, suspected of
wrongdoings, is avoided
c). The victim losses face, becomes a laughing stock, is the object of ridicule
2. Rules to determine whether the language is defamatory or not:
a). What should be considered is what the matter conveyed to a fair and reasonable man and
not the intention of the author or the accused.
b). Statements should not be interpreted by taking the words one by one out of context; they
must be taken in their entirety.
c). Words are to be given the ordinary meaning as are commonly understood and accepted in
daily life. The technical meanings do not apply. This is especially true to idiomatic sayings. Thus
―Babae ng Bayan ― does not mean a heroine. ―Hayok sa Laman‖ does not mean a meat eater.
―Adu client nya nga pagbigasan‖
3. How the imputation is made:

a). By the use of direct and express defamatory words, descriptions or accusations. Examples:
(i). He is a thief, swindler, ―babaero‖, ugly, wife beater, a crook (ii) drawing a caricature of a
person depicting him as a crocodile

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
b). By the use of Figures of Speech such as:
(i) Hyperbole - exaggeration according to which a person is depicted as being better or worse,
or larger or smaller than is actually the case. Example: (a). Mr. X is the gambling lord
(b) She is the mother of all cheaters. (c) Praise undeserved is slander in disguise
(ii) Irony or sarcasm or where words are used to convey a meaning contrary to their literal
sense. Examples: (a). ―Maria belongs to the ladies called ―Kalapating mababa ang lipad‖ (b).
Don‘t bother asking him for a treat. He is boxer ( i.e stingy or a miser) (c) He has a face only a
mother can love (d) She is my wife when she is beside me, yours when she is near you. (e).
She is very famous because she is a public sweetheart.
(iii) Metaphor or the use of words or phrases denoting one kind of idea in place of another word
or phrase for the purpose of suggesting a likeness between the two. Examples: (a) He is Satan
personified on earth. (b) She has an angelic face but covered with a skin as thick as the hide
of a carabao
c) Or words or phrases with double meanings such as those which apparently are innocent but
are deliberately chosen because in reality they convey a different and a derogatory meaning.
Example: ―He will make a good husband. He is a mama‘s boy‖.
(i) Where the alleged libelous matter is susceptible of two or more interpretations, one libelous
and the other not libelous, the courts are justified in holding that the real purpose of the writer
was to have the public understand what he wrote in the light of the worst possible meaning
d). Depicting a person as a character in a story, drama, movie

e). Making a likeness of him in drawings, caricatures, pictures, statues, busts, wood curvings
4. What are not defamatory
a). Words commonly used as expletives, denoting anger or disgust rather than as defamation,
such as the expressions ―Putang inaka, tarandado ka‖, ―Ulol‖, ―Punyeta ka‖.
b). Expressions of an opinion made by one who is entitled to state an opinion on a subject in
which he is interested. Examples:
(i) An heir writes that their was unfairness in the distribution of the properties
(ii) A lady complains over the radio that there was discrimination against Cordillera girls women
in the selection of candidates to the Miss Baguio Pageant
(iii). A law student writes in the school news organ that he believes the faculty in the college of
law are generally lazy and are not kept abreast with new jurisprudence
(iv). A teacher declared in an interview that the students of one school are less intelligent than
those in another school
c). Words which are merely insulting are not actionable as libel or slander per se, and mere words
of general abuse however opprobious, ill-natured, or vexatious whether written or spoken, do not
constitute a basis for an action for defamation in the absence of allegation for special damages.
The fact that the language is offensive to the plaintiff does not make it actionable by

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
itself ( MVRS Pub. Inc. vs Islamic Da‘wah Council of the Phil. 444 Phil. 20; Binay vs. Sec. of
Justice Sept. 8, 2006)
B. Second Element: Publicity of the Libelous Matter
1. This means the accused caused the libelous material to be known or read or seen or heard by a
third person, other than the person to whom it has been written i.e. the victim. Somebody must have
read, seen or heard the libelous material due to the acts of the accused.
(A). The addressing of defamatory words directly to the person concerned, and to no other
person, does not constitute an actionable libel.
(B). If it was the victim himself and not the accused, who showed, informed or relayed the libelous
material to others, then the accused is not liable.
(C). Circulation or publicity is not necessarily through the newspaper.
(D). Examples:
i). Posting the material in the internet or posting in a bulletin board

ii). Showing the caricature, or naked picture, of the victim to another
i) Announcements in the radio, or paid advertisements such as ―The public is warned not to
purchase the skin lotion products of ABC Corp. to prevent possible cancer‖
iv). Asking someone to write a defamatory letter about the victim
iv). Sending the letter to the victim through a messenger but it is in an unsealed envelope ( the
presumption is that the letter is intended to be read by anyone other than the victim). Thus if the
letter is sent in a sealed envelope, the element of publicity is missing.
2. Effect: Each separate publication of a libelous matter is a separate crime, whether published in
part, or in the same newspaper. Example: (i) There as many crimes of libel as there are various
showing or staging of a libelous drama or stage play in different venues and at various times.
(ii) If the same libelous news is published in two or more newspapers, then there be such number of
separate libels corresponding to the different newspapers which published the material.
C. Third Element: The Person libeled must be identified. (Identity of victim)
1. This means the complainant or plaintiff must prove he is the person subject of the libelous matter,
that it his reputation which was targeted.
2. This element is established by the testimony of witnesses if the complainant was not directly
mentioned by name. They must be the public or third persons who can identify the complainant as
the person subject of the libel. If third persons can not say it is the plaintiff or complainant who is the
subject, then it cannot be said that plaintiff‘s name has been tarnished.
a). Where the publication is ambiguous as to the person to whom it applies, the testimony of
persons who read the publication is admissible for the purpose of showing who is intended to be
designated by the words in said publication
3. How the identification or referral to the plaintiff is made

a). Directly by his name

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
b). By descriptions of his person, his address, nature of his office or work, his actions, or any other
data personally connected or related to the plaintiff; or identification from similar other the
circumstances
c) From the likeness of his face or features to the libelous drawing, caricature, painting or
sculpture
4. The victims maybe natural persons who are alive or juridical persons, or deceased persons as to
their memory.
5. Rule if several persons were defamed or libeled
a). If several persons were libeled in one article, but all are identifiable, then there are as many
charges of liable as there are persons libeled
b). If the article is directed to a class or group of several persons in general terms only without
specifying any particular member, there is no victim identified or identifiable, hence there is no
actionable libel. No person can claim to have been specifically libeled as to give that person the
right to file charges of libel.
Examples:
(i). Some lady students in the 4th year law class section A, are ugly
(ii). Two thirds of the law students are cheaters
(iii). Majority of the policemen are crooks
(iv). Most lawyers are thieves disguised in coat and tie
c). If the defamation is directed against a group or class and the statement is so sweeping or all-
embracing as to apply to every member of that group or class, then any member can file an action
for libel in his own name, not in the name of the group/class. (Note: Philippine laws do not
recognize group libel). Or if the statement is sufficiently specific so that each individual can prove
that the statement specifically point to him then he may bring an action in his own name.
Examples:
(i). All those belonging to 4th year law class section A are sex perverts
(ii) Each and every employee in the accounting office is secretly taking home part of the tuition
fees paid.
(iii) If you are a faculty member of the college of law of U.B. then you have no integrity but you
are a yes-man of the school President
d). But even if directed against a group or class but the statement is directly and personally
addressed to a member or members thereof, then only such member(s) can bring an action.
Example: A radio announcer addresses himself to Mr. X and Mr. Y and says: ― Mr. X, and you
Mr. Y. You Pangalatoks are sex maniacs‖. Only Mr. X and Mr. Y can file an action for libel.
D. Fourth Element: That there be malice on the part of the accused.
1. Malice is the legal term to denote that the accused is motivated by personal ill-will, spite, hatred,
jealousy, anger, and speaks not in response to duty but to do ulterior and unjustifiable harm. The

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
purpose is really to destroy, to injure, to inflict harm.
2. There are two kinds of malice
a). Malice in Law or Presumed Malice.
(i) The plaintiff need not prove the existence of malice. It is for the accused to disprove this
presumption
(ii) This presumption, that accused was actuated with an evil purpose or malice, arises if the article
is defamatory on its face, or due to the grossness of the defamatory imputation even if the facts
are true, but there was no good intention or justifiable motive.
(ii) Examples:
(a). X writes an article about the sexual escapades of a society matron complete with the
details of time, place, and supported by pictures. In such case the law presumes that X was
actuated by malice even if what he wrote is true.
(b). X calls the radio and announces that the family of Juan de la Cruz is a family of thieves
and crooks.
b). Malice in Fact or Malice as a Fact. -. It is the malice which must be proven by the plaintiff. He
must prove the purpose of the accused is to malign or harm or injure his reputation. This arises
either because:
(i) the article is not defamatory on its face or if libelous it is ambiguous
(ii) the accused was able to overcome the presumption of malice.
Prosecution for Libel
A. Remedies of the Victim: (i) the person libeled may file a criminal case or a separate civil case for
damages (ii) but he may opt to recover damages in the same criminal case
B. Jurisdiction and Venue of the criminal action
1. a). Actions based on libel, whether civil or criminal, are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the
Regional Trial Court even if the penalty is within the Jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Courts.
b).The civil case must also be tried in the RTC trying the criminal case (No separate civil action)
c) If the libel imputes any of the private crimes, the Prosecution must be upon a complaint filed
by the offended party
2. Venue: as a general rule the action for libel shall be in the RTC of the province/city where the
article was first printed and published ( Rule of Place of First Print and Publication) but it may
also be filed elsewhere as follows:
a). If a private person: in the RTC of the province/city where he resides ( Place of Residence)
b). If a public official and holding office in Manila: In the RTC of Manila
c) If a public official holding office outside Manila: in the RTC of the province/city where he holds
office

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
C. Persons Liable for Libel
1. In case of written libel:

a). The Authors of the written defamatory article, the artists, sculptor, or painter
b). Any person who shall publish, exhibit or cause the publication or exhibition thereof ( i.e.
those persons other than the author, who make known the libelous matter to a third person)
c). the editor or business manager of the print media where the article was published
2. In case of non-written libel

a). the speaker, announcer or utterer of the defamatory statements aired over the broadcast
media; the host of the show where the libelous statement is made
b). the producers and makers of the libelous cinematographic film, stage show, play or drama
3. Other persons under the principle of ―Libel by Republication” i.e. a person is liable, though he
is not the author of has nothing to do with the libelous matter, if he knowingly republishes or circulates
the said libelous matter.
Defenses Allowed in Libel
1. Concept:
A. In general: if the accused proves the absence of any of the elements, then he is not liable. Thus
he may show: the material is not defamatory; there is no publicity; it is impersonal and does not refer
to the plaintiff; or that there is no malice.
B. There are however specific defenses which may refer to any of the elements of libel or are
independent defenses in themselves. These defenses were established by jurisprudence,
particularly by United States Decisions, as our Libel law is based primarily on American concepts.
II. The Doctrine of Privilege Communication
A. This is a defense against the element of malice and it applies to both libel and oral defamation.
This means that even if the material is considered libelous still there is no malice in the eyes of the
law. These consist of two kinds: (a) Absolutely Privilege Communication and the (b) Qualifiedly
Privileged Communication.
B. Absolutely Privileged Communication: this refers to a communication, whether oral or written

which is defamatory and may even be made in bad faith but which cannot give rise to either criminal
or civil liability. This is because there are higher considerations involved which are considered more
paramount than the damage to the reputation of a person.
1. Privilege Speeches in the halls of Congress

2. Communications made by public officers in the performance of their duties, such as the
explanations on a matter made by a public officer to his superior though it contains harsh language
3. Statements made in judicial proceedings if pertinent and relevant to the case involved, such
as the allegations in the pleadings
4. Statements and evidence submitted in a Preliminary Investigation.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
C. Qualifiedly/Conditionally Privileged Communication: this refers to communications in which

the law presumes the absence of malice, thus they are initially not actionable. The burden therefore
is on the plaintiff to prove the existence of actual malice.
D. Two Kinds of Qualifiedly Privileged Communications Under Article 354.
1. Private Communications, made by one to another in the performance of a legal, moral or social
duty, the subject of which is a third person and it contains matters which the third considers as
defamatory to him. The author is not liable provided that: (i). The one making the communication
must have an interest in the subject and (ii) the person to whom the communication was made is
one who can act on the matter.
(a). This communication maybe oral or written, private, public or official document which are sent
for redress of grievances or to request for appropriate action. But it must be private in that it is
intended to be only between the sender and the recipient. Undue publicity removes the privilege.
Hence a so called ―Open Letter‖ is not privileged. Also, accusations made in a public gathering
are not privileged.
(b). The communication must meet these elements:

(i). The person who made the communication had a legal, moral or social duty to make the
communication, or at least, had an interest to protect, which interest may either be his own or
of the one to whom it is made
(ii). The communication is addressed to an officer or a board, or superior, having some interest
or duty in the matter, and who has the power to furnish the protection sought ( or that the
recipient is a proper person who can act on the communication) and
(iii). The statements in the communication are made in good faith and without malice ( Binay
vs. Sec. of Justice, Sept. 08, 2006)
©. Legal duty: presupposes a provision of law imposing upon the accused the duty to
communicate. Such as the complaint by a citizen concerning the misconduct of a public official to
the latter‗s superior even if, upon investigation, the matters are not substantiated. But it may be
shown that the charges were maliciously made without reasonable ground for believing them to
be true.
Also, a report to the police by a citizen about the suspected criminal activities of another person,
even if latter it is proved the suspicions were groundless, is privileged.
(d). Moral or social duty presupposes the existence of a relationship between the sender and the
recipient of the communication, or the confidential and pressing urgency of the communication.
(e). The sender must have an interest in the subject of the communication and the recipient must
be a proper person who can act on the subject to the communication.
Thus a letter-complaint describing an SLU law professor as lazy incompetent, and an absentee,

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
is privileged if sent to the SLU President. It is not privileged if sent to the President of U.B.
If a teacher writes to his fellow teacher that a student of his is becoming irresponsible and possibly
a drug user, the same letter is not privileged. But if sent to the parents of the student for their
information and action, it is conditionally privileged.
(f). In Alcantara vs. Ponce ( Feb. 28, 2007) the court adopted the ruling in the U.S case of Borg
vs. Borg in that a ‖written charge or information filed with the prosecutor or the court is not
libelous although proved or be false and unfounded. Furthermore, the information given to a
prosecutor by a private person for the purpose of initiating a prosecution is protected by the same
cloak of immunity and cannot be used as a basis for an action for defamation. ―
In this Alcantara case, a newsletter submitted by party in a preliminary investigation, which was
defamatory, was considered as a privilege communication.
It was also ruled that under the Test of Relevancy, a matter alleged in the course of the
proceedings need not be in every case material to the issues or be so pertinent to the controversy
that it may become the subject of inquiry in the course of trial, so long as they are relevant.
2.-A: A fair and true report of any official proceeding, or of any statement, report, or speech, made
thereat
(a). The proceeding must not be confidential, such as the hearings before the Senate, as opposed
to the close door executive sessions of the senate . Thus if the report is with respect to a public
record, it refers only to those made accessible to the public which may be revealed for public
interest or protection of the public.
(b) The report must be without any unnecessary comment or libelous remarks ( i.e. no
editorializing)
(c).The report must be accurate and should not intentionally distort the facts. If there is error in
the facts reported, the report is still privilege if made in good faith
(d) Examples: News report of a judicial proceeding, including the filing of a complaint in court; or
what a witness testified; or of a verbal and heated argument between two councilors during the
session of the city council.
(e). This defense apply most often to members of the media who write on said matters or report
them as news
2-B. Fair and True Report of the Official Acts of a Public Official
(a). The public and official acts of a public official, including his policies, are legitimate subjects of
comments and criticisms, though they may be unfair. Public officials are not supposed to be onion-
skinned. ―Public officials, like Ceasar‘s wife, must be beyond reproach and above suspicion‖.
(b). But the communication may be actionable:

(i) If it contains an imputation which is a false allegation of a fact or a comment based on a
false supposition. For example, in Tulfo vs. People (565 SCRA 283, Sept. 16, 2008),
newspaper columnist Tulfo was found guilty of libel for his failure to substantiate or attempt to

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
verify the truth of the allegations he wrote about an official of the Bureau of Customs, or present
proof thereof.
(ii). If the attack, criticism or imputation pertains to his private acts or private life, unless these
reflect on his public character and image as a public official.
(iii) As stated in the U.S. case of New York Times vs. Sullivan, a public official may recover
damages if he proves that : “the statement was made with actual malice, that is, with knowledge
that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not”
B. Matters Considered Privileged By Jurisprudence
1. Fair Comments on Matters of Public Interest
(a) In Borjal vs. Ct. of Appeals, (301 SCRA 1, Jan. 14, 1999) it was held that the enumeration in
Article 354 is not an exclusive list of qualifiedly privileged communications because “fair comments
on matters of public interest are privileged and constitute a valid defense in an action for libel
or slander”
(b). They refer to events, developments, or matters in which the public as a whole has a legitimate
interest.
©. Examples
(i). A news report on the welfare of youth and students in a school allegedly staffed by
incompetents, or a dumping ground of misfit teachers, concerns a matter of public interest.
(ii). An editorial criticizing the owner of a ship which sunk, for his delay in extending financial help
to the family of the victims, is not libelous as the in action is a matter of public interest.
(iii). The arrest and prosecution of law violator is a matter in which the public has a right to know.
Thus there is no liability for reporting that a lady was arrested for selling shabu or that a person
was charged in court or convicted by a court for Estafa. The persons in question cannot file a case
for libel.
(iv). A radio announcer lambasts a family for their adamant refusal to vacate and remove their
structure inside a park.
(v). Criticism on the CEBU Air for refusal to carry organs or of the dancing stewardess
©. But the mere fact that that the subject of the article is a public figure or a matter of public interest
does not automatically exclude the author from liability. Borjal allows that for a discreditable
imputation to a public official be actionable, it must be a false allegation of a fact or a comment
based on a false supposition.
2. Comments and Criticisms on the Actuations of Public Figures
(a) Public figures refer to people who place themselves in the public limelight or attention either: (i)
by nature of their business or activity, or mode of living, or by adopting a mode of profession or
calling which gives the public a legitimate interest in his doings, his affairs and in his character or

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
which affect public interest (these are the celebrities), or (ii). because they participate in public affairs
or regularly and publicly expound their views on public affairs.
Examples of the first: movie stars; national athletes; those representing the Philippines in world
beauty pageants, Manny Pacquiao; hosts of TV shows/programs such as the Tulfo brothers,
musicians, novelists. The spouse of the President is a public figure.
Examples of the second: candidates for an elective position; columnists of national newspapers,
TV/radio commentators, Cardinal Cruz, Jose Maria Sison.
(b). As with public officials, the imputation maybe actionable if it is (i) a false allegation of fact or (ii)
it is based on a false supposition.
3. Justified Libel or the Privilege of a Reply.
This is fighting libel with libel. This refer to communications made in response to a libel in order to
counter and/or remove the libel, provided it is limited to and related to the defamatory imputation and
not unnecessarily libelous.
4. Truth And Good Motives or Justifiable Ends.
A. It is not enough that what was publicized about another is true. The accused must also prove
good motives or intentions and justifiable ends, in order to disprove malice.
B. This defense is available only if: (a) What is imputed to another is a crime regardless if the victim
is a private or public person or (ii) if the victim is a public officer regardless of whether a crime is
imputed, so long as it relates to the discharge of their official duties.
C. Illustrations: one writes about the criminal activities of another in order to show that crime does
not pay, or to set an example of what conduct to avoid.
5. The Principle of Neutral Reportage.
A. This is a defense available to one charged not as the author but as a republisher of a libelous
material
B. The republisher who accurately and disinterestedly reports certain defamatory statements made
against public figures, is shielded from liability, regardless of his subjective awareness of the truth or
falsity of the accusation. ( See Fil Broadcasting Net Work vs. AGO Medical and Educational Center,
448 SCRA 413)
Example: A parent of a student goes on radio to denounce a school teacher as being incompetent,
absentee, bias and prejudiced. A news reporter quoted the accusations in his news article. He is
not liable even if he personally knows the accusations are untrue.
Preference in the Penalty for Libel
Administrative Circular No. 08-2008 entitled Guidelines in the Observance of a Rule of Preference

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
in the Imposition of Penalties in Libel Cases gives courts discretion to impose either imprisonment
and fine or fine alone, as follows:
5. A fine is preferred but subject to the imposition of subsidiary penalty

6. Imprisonment if imposition of fine alone would (a) depreciate the seriousness of the
offense (b) work violence to the social order or (c) be contrary to the imperatives of
justice
356. Libel As A Threat (Blackmailing)
I. Concept: The law punishes a person who demands a compensation or money consideration by:
1. threatening to publish a libel concerning a person or his family and

2. offering to prevent the publication of a libel
II. Principles:
A. This a form of blackmailing because there is an extortion for money under threat of so called
―exposing‖ a person. This is often called demand for ―Hush Money‖
B. If both modes were committed by a single person, there is only one offense. If committed by
two different persons there be two separate offenses, unless both are in conspiracy.
C. The crime is consumated once the threats or offers were made.
III. Examples:
A. The accused threatened to publish in a weekly periodical certain letters written by a married
woman unless she paid a certain sum of money.
B. The producer of a TV Program demanded money from a politician otherwise he would expose
the sexcapades of the politician.
Art. 358. Slander (Oral Defamation)
I. Concept: It is understood as the speaking of base and defamatory words which tend to prejudice
another in his reputation, office, trade, business or means of livelihood
II. Oral or verbal Defamation is of two kinds: (1) Grave when it is of a serious and insulting kind or (2)
Simple
A. Factors to consider:
1. The expression used including their sense, grammatical significance and accepted ordinary
meaning
2. The personal relations of the accused and the offended party, as when both are bitter
enemies
3. The special circumstances of the case and its antecedents, such as the time, place and
occasion of the utterances, persons present
4. The social standing and position of the offended party
B. Words uttered in the heat of anger or in a quarrel, with some provocation on the part of the

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
victim, is simple slander.
Example: The refusal of the Mayor, without valid justification to approve the monetization of accrued
leaves of the accused led the latter to utter scathing words against the Mayor, which utterances were
considered slight as the said refusal was deemed sufficient provocation (Villanueva vs. People, April
10, 2006)
III. The victim may not have heard the words, it is enough that a third person heard them.
IV. Words uttered in one occasion and place and directed at several persons not mentioned
individually constitute only one offense.
V. Words used as expletives ( i.e.to express anger, displeasure, are not defamatory)
1. Example: the words ―Puta, Putang Ina Mo‖ are common enough expressions in the dialect that are
often employed, not really to slander but rather to express anger or displeasure. It is seldom, if ever,
taken in its literal sense by the hearer, that is, as a reflection on the virtues of the mother
―(PP. vs. Reyes quoted in Villanueva vs. PP)
Art. 359. Slander By Deed.
I. The performance of any act which shall cast dishonor, discredit or contempt upon another person.
Depending upon the seriousness of the act, the time, place, occasion, the character of the victim, it is
either Grave or Light.
II. If it is not proven that the purpose of the act is to humiliate or embarrass the act may either be
maltreatment or unjust vexation.
III. Poking a dirty finger ordinarily connotes the phrase ―Fuck you‖ which is similar to the expression
―Puta‖ or ―Putang Ina Mo‖ and, when there is provocation from the victim, is simple slander by deed (
Viilanueva vs. Pp)
INCRIMINATORY MACHINATIONS
I. Incriminating An Innocent Person Under Art. 363.
A. This refers to acts not constituting perjury but directly tending to cause the false prosecution of
another and is limited to ―planting evidence‖
B. The evidence should not however consist of drug or drug paraphernalia else the act is specifically
known as Planting Evidence punished by the Dangerous Drugs Law, or explosives.
II. Intriguing Against Honor Under Art. 364.
A. This refers to any scheme or plot designed to blemish the reputation of a person by means of
which consists of some trickery. The accused does not avail directly of spoken or written words,
pictures or caricatures, but of some ingenious, crafty or secret plot.
Example: circulating gossips, stories or rumors highly offensive to a lady, that she is ―a saint by day
but not at night‖.

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
(ACTION FOR) MALICIOUS PROSECUTION
I. Concept: It is not a crime but a civil case for damages brought after the dismissal of a criminal
prosecution, civil suit, or other proceeding for having been filed maliciously and without probable cause.
II. Such a complaint states a cause of action if it alleges:

1). That the defendant was himself the prosecutor or at least instigated the prosecution
2). That the prosecution finally terminated in the acquittal of the plaintiff
3). That in bringing the action the defendant acted without probable cause and
4). That the defendant was actuated by malice i.e. sinister or improper motives
TITLE FOURTEEN. QUASI OFENSES

Criminal Negligence
I. Introduction: Negligence may either be criminal or not. Non criminal negligence may either be
contractual or quasi-delictual. Criminal Negligence is the third among the three classes of crimes, the
two others being intentional or malicious crimes and the other being crimes mala prohibita.
II. Negligence is deficiency of perception or lack of foresight: the failure to foresee impending injury,
thoughtlessness, failure to use ordinary care. Whereas, imprudence is deficiency of action in avoiding
an injury due to lack of skill. Both result to a culpable felony.
III. Reckless: If the danger to another is visible and consciously appreciated by the accused. It is simple
if the injury is not immediate or openly visible.
IV. Principles:
A. The degree of diligence required by law varies with the nature of the situation in which a person
is placed.
B. Negligence maybe presumed if at the time the accident occurred, the accused was violating a
regulation the purpose of which was to prevent the accident.
C. There is no conspiracy in culpable felonies.
D. As to the penalties:
1. The penalty as provided under article 356 depends on whether the negligence/imprudence is
reckless or simple and it generally applies to all situations of culpable felonies, unless there is a
specific penalty provided in certain crimes. Example: culpable malversation, evasion through
negligence.
2. The principle of complex crimes does not apply
V-. Defenses Allowed:
A. If both the victim and the accused were negligent, the accused may be held liable under the
Doctrine of Last Clear Chance i.e it was he who had the sufficient opportunity to avoid the accident
after noticing the danger
B. Emergency Rule: due to the negligence of another, the accused was placed in an emergency
and compelled to act immediately to avoid an impending danger, and in so doing he injured

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
another, even if his choice of action was not the wisest under circumstances. This is similar to the
exempting circumstance of accident.
C. The defense of contributory negligent does not apply in criminal cases committed through
reckless imprudence, since one cannot allege the negligence of another to evade the effects of his
own negligence ( Manzanares s. PP, 504 SCRA 354)
D. Contributory negligence on the part of the victim merely mitigates the civil liability of the accused.
VI. If, in a vehicular accident, the accused abandons the victims, this act will result to the imposition of
a penalty one degree higher. Except in the following instances:
a). if he leaves because he is in imminent danger of being harmed
b). he leaves to report to the police
c). or to summon a physician, nurse or doctor.
-o0o-
GOOD LUCK
Prepared by:
ELMER MANUEL SAGSAGO

CITY PROSECUTOR II
PROFESSOR: COLLEGES OF LAW
SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY OF BAGUIO
X ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
B.P. 880: AN ACT ENSURING THE FREE EXERCISE BY THE PEOPLE OF THEIR RIGHT
PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE AND PETITION THE GOVERNMENT AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
1. This is known as ―The Public Assembly Act of l985‖
I. Declares the policy of the state to ―the ensure the free exercise of the right of the people to
peaceably assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances, without prejudice to the
rights of others to life, liberty and equal protection of the law‖.
I. Defines public assembly to mean: ‖any rally, demonstration, march, parade, procession or any
other form of mass or concerted action held in a public place for the purpose of presenting a lawful
cause; or expressing an opinion to the general public on any particular issue; or protesting or influencing
any state of affairs whether political, economic or social; or petitioning the government for redress of
grievances‖
A. Public place includes any highway, boulevard, avenue, road, street, bridge or other thoroughfare,
park, plaza square, an/or any open space of public ownership where the people are allowed access
B. It does not cover assemblies for religious purposes which shall be governed by local ordinances
and those by workers and laborers resulting from labor disputes to be governed by the Labor Code
and BP. 227
IV. Establishes the policy of Maximum Tolerance to be observed in dealing with public assemblies or
in the dispersal thereof. It means the highest degree of restraint from the military, police: and other
peace keeping authorities.
V. As to the requirement of a permit:
A. A written permit shall be required for any person/persons to organize and hold a public assembly
in a public place during any election campaign period
B. No permit shall be required:

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
i) if the public assembly shall be done or made in a freedom park duly established by law or
ordinance
ii) If done or made in private property in which case only the consent of the owner or the one
entitled to its legal possession is required
iii). If done or made in the campus of a government owned and operated educational
institution which shall be subject to the rules and regulations of said educational institution
iv). Political meetings or rallies held during any election campaign period
C. Procedure for issuance of a permit

i). A Written applications shall be filed with the office of the mayor at least five (5) working
days before the scheduled public assembly
ii). The Mayor‘s Office shall acknowledge in writing the receipt of the application and Posting
of the application by the Mayor‘s office in a conspicuous place of the city/municipal building
a). If the application is acceptance the application shall post it on the premises of the
mayor and shall be deemed to have been filed
iii) Action by the Mayor within 2 working days from date of application . If they fail to act within
two days, the permit shall be deemed granted
a) He may grant
b). He may deny or modify but only on the ground that there is imminent and grave danger
of a substantive evil
(i) The applicant must be informed in writing within 24 hours who may be heard or may
contest it in a court of law
VI. Dispersal
1. No public assembly with a permit shall be dispersed unless it becomes violent ( or when it
becomes seditious, or if held in a private property against the will of the owner who requests for its
dispersal because there is now a trespass to property)
2. When the public assembly is held without a permit where a permit is required it may be peacefully
dispersed
Note: It is provided that ―tear gas ,smoke grenades, water cannons, or any similar anti-riot device
shall not be used unless the public assembly is attended by actual violence or serious threats of
violence, or deliberate destruction of property
VII. Acts Punished include the following:
1. Holding of any public assembly without having first secured the written permit , or use of such
permit for such purposes in any place other than those set out in the permit. However, the persons
liable are the leader or organizer, but not the participants
2. Arbitrary and unjustified denial or modification of a permit by the Mayor or official acting in his
behalf

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
3. Unjustified and arbitrary refusal to accept or acknowledge receipt of the application for a permit
4. Obstructing, impeding, disrupting or otherwise denying the exercise of the right to peaceful
assembly
5. The unnecessary firing of firearms to disperse the public assembly
6. Law enforcers who (i) refuse to provide assistance when requested by leaders or organizers of
public assemblies (ii) do not wear proper and complete uniforms (iii) do not observe maximum
tolerance (iv) carry firearms and (v) who use anti riot devises to disperse a peaceful public assembly
7. The following acts are prohibited, if committed within100 meters from the area of activity of the
public assembly or on the occasion thereof:
a).carrying or a deadly or offensive weapon or devise
b) carrying of bladed weapon and the like
c). malicious burning of any object in the streets or thoroughfares
d). carrying of fire arms by members of a law enforcement unit
e). interfering with or intentionally disturbing the holding of a public assembly by the use of a
motor vehicle, its horns and loud sound systems
VII. As interpreted in BAYAN vs. EDUARDO ERMITA ( April 25, 2006)
A. BP. 880 is constitutional. It is not an absolute ban of public assemblies but simply a regulation of
the time, place and manner of the holding of public assemblies.
1. It is a ―content neutral‖ not ―content-based‖ regulation.
Note: ―Content-neutral regulations‖ are those imposed without reference to the contents of the
speech. They are tests demanding standards and need only a substantial government interest to
support them. ―Content-based regulations‖ are those imposed because of the contents of the
speech. They are censorial and bear a heavy presumption of constitutional invalidity. They are
subject to the test of over breadth and vagueness.
2. It is not over broad as it regulates the exercise to peaceful assembly and petition only to the
extent needed to avoid a clear and present danger of the substantive evils Congress ahs the right
to prevent
3. There is no prior restraint, since the content of the speech is not relevant to the regulation
4. The delegation of powers to the Mayor provides a precise and sufficient standard- the clear
and present danger test
B. Rallyists who can show the police an application duly filed on a given date can, after two days
from said date, rally in accordance with their application without the need to show a permit, the grant
of the permit being then presumed under the law, and it will be the burden of the authorities to show
that there has been a denial of the application

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
C. The so called calibrated preemptive response policy is null and void
D. Until a freedom park shall have been established, all public parks and plazas of the
municipality/city concerned shall in effect be deemed freedom parks; no prior permit of whatever
kind shall be required to hold an assembly therein. The only requirement will be written notices to
the police and the mayor‘s office to allow proper coordination and orderly activities.
-o0o-
Elmer Manuel Sagsago

Professor: Criminal Law Review
SLU-UB
DIVERSION UNDER R.A. 9344

THE JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE ACT OF 2006
1. CONCEPT: Refers To an alternative, child-appropriate process of determining the responsibility

and treatment of a child with the law on the basis of his social, cultural, economic, psychological or
educational background without resorting to formal court proceedings.
A. The CICL is placed under diversion programs which may consist of any of the following:
1. Restitution, reparation or indemnification
R.A.7610: Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse,

Exploitation and Discrimination Act.
1. Isidro Olivarez vs. Court of Appeals ( July 29,2005)
A. The Elements of Sexual Abuse Under Section 5, Article III

1. The accused commits the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct
2. The said act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other
sexual abuse
3. The child, whether male or female, is below 18 years of age
B. Meaning of Lascivious Conduct per section 32 Article XIII of the Implementing Rules and
Regulations:
―The intentional touching, either directly or through clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast
inner thigh, or buttocks, or the introduction of any object into the genitalia, anus, or mouth, or
any person, whether of the same or opposite sex, with intent to abuse, humiliate, harass,
degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person, bestiality, masturbation,

2017 CRIMINAL LAW
lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of a person‖
C. Is failure to allege the age of victim fatal and violative of the right of accused to be informed?
―…while it is necessary to allege the essential elements of the crime in the information, the
failure not do so is not an irremediable vice. When the complaint or resolution by the pubic
prosecutor which contains the missing averments is attached to the information and form part of
the records, the defect in the latter is effectively cured, and the accused cannot successfully
invoke the defense that his right to be informed is violated‖
D. In addition to moral damages, a fine is awarded for each count of lascivious conduct
E. Distinction between Acts of Lasciviousness under the RPC from that under Section 5, Art. III of
R.A 7610 per the dissenting opinion of Justice Carpio
Section 5 of RA 7610 deals with a situation where the acts of lasciviousness are committed on
a child either exploited in prostitution or subjected to OTHER SEXUAL ABUSE. The acts of
lasciviousness committed on the child are separate and distinct from the other circumstance-
that the child is either exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse.
The phrase ―other sexual abuse‖ refers to any sexual abuse other than the acts of
lasciviousness complained of and other than exploitation in prostitution. Such ―other sexual
abuse‖ could fall under acts encompassing obscene publication and indecent shows
mentioned in section 3(d) (3) of RA 7610.
Thus a child performing in indecent shows in a cabaret is a child subjected to ―other sexual
abuse‖. A customer in such cabaret who commits acts of lasciviousness on the child is liable for
violation of Section 5…
… the element of profit or coercion refers to the practice of prostitution, not to the sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct committed by the accused.
The information must allege that the child is exploited in prostitution or other sexual abuse
CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS

1. Meaning of the phrase‖ committed in relation to office‖
A). Montilla vs. Hilario (90 Phil. 49): the relationship between the crime and the office must be
direct and not accidental, such that the offense cannot exist without the office
B). PP vs. Montejo ( 108 Phil. 613): although public office is not an element of the offense
charged, as long as the offense charged is intimately connected with the office of the offender
and perpetrated while he was in the performance, though improper or irregular, of his official
functions, the accused is held indicted for an offense committed in relation to his office

Pros Sagssago Notes in Criminal Law 2017 Edition

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

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

Pros Sagssago Notes in Criminal Law 2017 Edition

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

2017 CRIMINAL LAW

ELMER MANUEL SAGSAGO

The Principle of Legality.

VI. Rule in the Philippines:

A. The Philippines adhere to the Principle of Legality.

Principle of Publicity: Ignorance of the law.

CRIMINAL LAW IN GENERAL

The components or functions of a penal law therefore are:

II. Sources of Penal Laws in the Philippines

A. The Revised Penal Code ( Act N0. 3815).

1. Those of national application.

i) Acts- those passed during the American Military Regime

2. Those which are of local application i.e. city/municipal penal ordinances.

III. Power to enact penal laws.

B. Limitations to the power.

IV. Interpretation of Penal Laws

B. Application of the Principle of Prospective Interpretation in that the law is to be interpreted as

V. Repeal of Penal Laws. Classification:

A. As to the manner of repeal:

2. Implied. (Repeal by Incompatibility).There is no provision in the new law making reference to an

VI. Theories Underlying Criminology

A. The Juristic or Classical Theory. Its characteristics are as follows:

B. The Positivist or Humanist Theory. Its characteristics are:

VII. Theory to which the Philippines adhere.

The Philippines does not adhere to one theory exclusively.

VII. Characteristics of Penal Laws.

The immunity includes acts not related to their functions.

If at all there is consular immunity, two requirements must be met:

diplomatic and consular representatives stationed in said country (Principle of Reciprocity).

2. Philippine territory includes:

7. Extraterritorial Application of Philippine Penal laws

1. Pursuant to Principles of Public International law

2. Pursuant to Article 2 of the RPC

ARTICLE 2. EXTRA TERRRITORIALITY

A. Over offenses committed on board a Philippine Ship or Airship

1. This is based on the Affects Doctrine

C. Over Crimes committed by public officers in relation to their office.

1. Crimes against the law of nations include:

(b). Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court:

The act or an element must have begun in the Philippines to be covered.

CRIMES AND FELONIES

II. CLASSIFICATION OF CRIMES/FELONIES

A. According to their inherent nature

The principles involve the following:

The principles involve the following:

prohibited. The act is not a casual or accidental performance.

c). Modifying circumstances, the degree of accomplishment/execution and degree of

b). Its elements are freedom, intelligence and lack of skill/foresight

c). QUESTION: Is negligence a mode of committing a crime or is it the crime itself?

d). Nomenclature of crimes through negligence if several injuries result.

The following cannot be committed by negligence:

(i). Murder and rape

h). There can be no conspiracy through negligence

3. Requirement of Voluntariness: whether the felony is intentional or culpable, it must be

a). Kinds of Impossibility: Legal and Physical Impossibility.

to medical attention, the accused is liable for frustrated murder.

c). Principles involved:

D. According to whether they have Stages of Commission (Article 6).

E. According to their Stage of Execution (article 6)

F. According to their Gravity (Article 9).

G. According to the Number of Violations Constituting the Crime

d). Continuous/Continued Crimes ( delito continuado): an instantaneous but single offense

I. According to the Time Frame of Commission