Article 48

ARTICLE 48 – COMPLEX CRIMES

1. When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies (compound crimes)
2. When an offense is a necessary means for committing the other
(complex crime proper)
 There must be at least two crimes
 Complex crime = ONLY one crime
 Complex crimes are more favorable to the accused because instead of being convicted of two separate counts of
the same crime, it is considered as only one

 Compound Crime
- Requisites:
1. that only a single act is performed by the offender
2. that the single act produces (i) 2 or more grave felonies, (ii) one or more grave & one or more less grave
felonies, (iii) 2 or more less grave felonies
 The single act should produce a grave felony or a less grave felony or a combination of both
 Light felonies produced by the same single act should be treated and punished as separate offenses or may be
absorbed by the grave felony

 Supposing, you shot your neighbor then the bullet hit two children ; the result was your neighbor died, two
children slightly injured, the result was 1 grave and 2 light felonies, is the crime complex or separate?
Separate, because the single act should produce a grave or less grave felony only
 Supposing, a single criminal act produced 1 grave felony and 10 light felonies, is the crime complex or
separate? Separate
 Supposing, a single criminal act produced 1 less grave felony and several light felonies , is the crime complex or
separate? Separate
 Supposing, a single criminal act produced a crime punishable by the RPC and a crime punishable by special
law, is the crime complex or separate? Separate, considered as separate violations
 Supposing, Prof. Amurao throws a grenade in class, 5 students died, is the crime complex or separate? Complex
 Supposing, using the same facts above, in addition 3 light felonies were produced, is the crime complex or
separate? Separate
 Supposing, Prof. Amurao switched the machine gun to automatic and shot at the students with one single
act of pressing the trigger, producing several injuries, is the crime complex or separate? Separate, because
the what is considered is the no. of bullets discharged (People v. Desierto)
 Supposing, Prof. Amurao switched the machine gun to not automatic and fired one bullet aimed at someone
but hit 3 others producing serious physical injuries, is the crime complex or separate? Complex
 Supposing, the act of firing a machine gun produces the crimes of attempted murder and physical injuries ,
is the crime complex or separate? Separate, as held by the Court of Appeals
 Supposing, two shots were fired directed against two different persons, is the crime complex or separate?
Separate
 Supposing, in a notorious village, a commander ordered all his soldiers to shoot at the residents , is the
crime complex or separate? Complex, the SC held in People v. Lawas that it was a complex crime because there
was a single offense since there was a single criminal impulse/intent/purpose
 Supposing, a person stole the fighting cocks of his neighbor alternately with three separate, independent
acts, is the crime complex or separate? Complex, as held by the SC in People v. De Leon, the criminal act was
done on the same occasion and the offender was motivated by one criminal impulse
 Supposing, a libelous article was published defaming 5 congressmen specifically identified by their names , is
the crime complex or separate? Separate, because there are as many crimes of libel as there are persons
libeled, provided that the persons are expressly specified; because each of the 5 congressmen may file for libel
 Supposing, using the same facts above except that the congressmen were not identified , is the crime
complex or separate? Complex
 Supposing, in a local publication, news writers wrote that the Herrera doctors are inefficient , is the crime
complex or separate? Complex, because the identification was in general terms, not specifically identified

Complex Crime Proper

- Requisites:
1. that at least two offenses are committed
2. that one or some of the offenses must be necessary to commit the other
3. that both or all the offenses must be punished under the same statute
 Necessary means not equivalent to indispensable means

 Supposing, the accused kidnapped a girl with intent to kill, brought the victim somewhere then killed her , is
the crime complex? NO, the crime is only murder, because the kidnapping was only a means to commit the crime
of murder
 Supposing, law students made a falsified solicitation letter and collected money , is the crime complex? YES,
the falsification of the private document was necessary for the crime of estafa
 Supposing, a public official committed malversation through falsification of public documents , is the crime
complex? YES, because the falsification was necessary to commit malversation
 Supposing, the accused killed his victim in a building, then committed arson to conceal the murder , is the
crime complex? NO
 In the crimes of estafa and falsification, you look at the crime first committed if it was necessary for the
commission of the other; the common element in estafa and falsification is the intent to cause damage

 Supposing, a city treasurer malversed P5million pesos out of taxes then falsified documents to conceal the
malversation, is the crime complex? NO, the crimes are separate
 Supposing, in the crime of rebellion, an NPA commander burned villages and killed the villagers in
furtherance of his acts of rebellion, is the crime complex? NO, because the acts he committed were
absorbed in the crime of rebellion
 Supposing, in the crime of rebellion, the NPA commander killed someone for personal reasons , is the crime
complex? NO, the crimes are separate
 In the crimes of treason or rebellion, when common crimes are committed, (1) in furtherance of or is related to
treason or rebellion, the crimes are absorbed, but (2) for personal reasons or for a private purpose, the crimes
are separate
 There is no complex crime of rebellion with common crimes

 Special Complex Crimes

- Rape with Homicide - Robbery with Serious Physical Injuries
- Robbery with Homicide - Kidnapping with Murder or Homicide
 Express provisions in the Revised Penal Code that cannot be complex
- Article 129: search warrant obtained maliciously
- Article 235: maltreatment of prisoners
- Direct Bribery = cannot be complexed
 Article 48 is intended to favor the culprit or accused
 The penalty for complex crimes is the penalty for the most serious crime , the same to be applied in its
maximum period
 Two felonies in a complex crime punishable by imprisonment and fine = only the imprisonment is imposed

Article 49
 ARTICLE 49 – PENALTY FOR PRINCIPALS OF CRIME COMMITTED WAS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WAS INTENDED
 applicable only to mistake in identity
Steps
1. identify lesser penalty
2. whichever penalty is prescribed by law,
3. the lesser penalty is always applied or imposed
Article 50-57
 ARTICLES 50-57 – DEGREES TO WHICH PENALTIES SHOULD BE LOWERED (reading matter)
Participants’ liability lowered by degrees

consummated frustrated attempted

Principals 0 1 2

Accomplices 1 2 3

Accessories 2 3 4

 Article 50 – Principals in a frustrated felony

 Article 51 – Principals in an attempted felony
 Article 52 – Accomplices in a consummated felony
 Article 53 – Accessories in a consummated felony
 Article 54 – Accomplices in a frustrated felony
 Article 55 – Accessories in a frustrated felony
 Article 56 – Accomplices in an attempted felony
 Article 57 – Accessories in an attempted felony

 Basis for the determination

- under the RPC, penalties can be reduced by degrees
1. stage reached by the crime in its development (consummated, frustrated, attempted)
2. participation of persons liable (principals, accomplices, accessories)
3. privileged mitigating circumstances

 All penalties for each crime in the RPC = generally, shall always be imposed unless the law itself expressly
provides, except Article 60

 Degree – one whole penalty; one entire penalty or one unit of penalties enumerated in the graduated scales
 Period – one of the 3 equal portions (minimum, medium, maximum)

Article 58-60
 ARTICLE 58 – ADDITIONAL PENALTY UPON ACCESSORIES OF ART.19(3)
- Absolute perpetual disqualification if guilty of a grave felony
- Absolute temporary disqualification if guilty of a less grave felony
 Article 19(3) – public officers who help the author of the crime by misusing their office and duties shall suffer
the additional penalties
 ARTICLE 59 – PENALTY FOR IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES
- Arresto mayor, with fine of P200-P500
 Basis for imposition:
- social danger
- degree of criminality
 ARTICLE 60 – EXCEPTIONS TO ARTICLE 50-57
- shall not be applicable to cases in which the law prescribes a penalty for frustrated and attempted stages or to
be imposed on accomplices or accessories
Article 61
 ARTICLE 61 – RULES FOR GRADUATING PENALTIES
 Divisible Penalties – divided into three, so effects of ordinary mitigating circumstances and generic aggravating
circumstances can be applied
 Indivisible Penalties – eg. reclusion perpetua, public censure, fine
 First Rule and Second Rule
 Penalty only consists of a degree
 The penalty next lower by one degree = penalty immediately following the penalty prescribed by the law
- single and indivisible = Reclusion perpetua
- penalty next lower in degree = Reclusion temporal
 Supposing, accused shot the victim qualified by treachery, but the victim survived, thus accused was
convicted of frustrated murder, the penalty for murder is reclusion perpetua, but since it was frustrated, the
penalty next lower in degree applies, which is reclusion temporal

 Fourth and Fifth Rule

 Penalty prescribed by law is 1, 2, or 3, several periods
- If one period lower, go down one period in the graduated scale
- If two periods lower, go down two periods in the graduated scale
- If three periods lower, go down three periods in the graduated scale
 Example: Prision Mayor
- Supposing the penalty prescribed by law is prision mayor medium period: is in itself a degree; RPC – all divisible
penalties are divided into 3 periods; prision mayor medium can be divided into maximum, medium, minimum
- Prision mayor (6 years and 1 day to 12 years)
12 – 6 = 6 / 3 = 2
2 = common multiple (add 2 to the periods starting from the minimum)
Minimum – 6 years and 1 day to (6+2) 8 years
 Medium – 8 years and 1 day to (8+2) 10 years Prision mayor
Maximum – 10 years and 1 day (10+2) 12 years medium
- Prision mayor medium (8 years and 1 day to 10 years)
10 – 8 = 2 years / 3 = 8 months
8 months = common multiple (add 8 months)
Minimum – 8yrs. & 1 day to 8yrs. & 8 months
Medium – 8yrs. & 8 months to 9yrs. & 4 months
Maximum – 9yrs. & 4 years to 10 years
 With the 3 periods of prision mayor medium now determined, the mitigating and aggravating circumstances
attendant can now be applied

 Third Rule
- when three penalties are imposed in one (eg. Reclusion temporal – Death)
- since Death is not imposed, three periods lowered immediately following
Article 62
 ARTICLE 62 - EFFECTS OF THE ATTENDANCE OF MITIGATING AND AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES AND HABITUAL
DELINQUENCY

 First rule: Aggravating circumstances:

1. should not themselves constitute a crime, eg. by means of fire = arson; by means derailment of a locomotive =
destruction of property
- Is unlawful entry a crime in itself? YES
2. should not be included in defining the crime, eg. by means of poison in the crime of murder
3. The maximum period shall be imposed regardless of mitigating circumstances if the offender is a public officer
who took advantage by public position
4. The maximum period shall be imposed for members of an organized or syndicated crime group
 Organized or Syndicated Crime Group – group of two or more persons collaborating, confederating or mutually
helping one another for purposes of gain in the commission of any crime

 Second rule
- Aggravating circumstances are not applicable if inherent in the crime, eg. evident premeditation in robbery or
theft; advantage taken by public position in malversation; sex in crimes against chastity; breaking wall in malicious
mischief
 Third rule: Aggravating or Mitigating Circumstances arising from:
1. Moral attributes
 Supposing, the victim gave sufficient provocation, which irritated the accused who called his brother for
assistance, then they both killed the victim, can the mitigating circumstance of sufficient provocation be
appreciated for both of them? NO, only to the one who was the target of the provocation (the accused) and not
his brother
2. Private relations
 Supposing, your neighbor slapped your mom, then you asked your friend to accompany you to kill your
neighbor, can the aggravating circumstance of immediate vindication of a relative for a grave offense be
appreciated for the both you? NO, only to you because it was your mom who was offended first and not your
friend
3. Personal cause
 Supposing, you and your friend entered your neighbor’s house, not knowing that your friend is afflicted
with kleptomania, can the mitigating circumstance of illness be appreciated for the both of you? NO, illness can
be appreciated only to your friend

 Fourth rule: Aggravating or mitigating circumstances apply in the:

- material execution of the act and in the means employed to accomplish it; only to those who had knowledge at
the time of the execution
1. Material execution
 Supposing, Prof. Amurao asked his student to simply kill his classmate, but the student applied cruelty
when he killed his classmate, can the aggravating circumstance of cruelty be appreciated with Prof. Amurao?
NO, because he had no knowledge of the material execution used.
 Supposing, using the same facts above, but Prof. Amurao told his student to kill his classmate ‘at all costs’ ,
can the aggravating circumstance of cruelty be appreciated with Prof. Amurao? YES
2. Means employed to accomplish
- Principal by direct participation uses poison to commit murder without the knowledge of the Principal by
inducement
 Habitual Delinquency
 Habitual Delinquent – a person who, within a period of 10 years from the date of release or last conviction of the
crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa, or falsification, found guilty for a 3 rd
time or oftener. A habitual delinquent shall suffer an additional penalty
 Difference between Habitual Delinquent/Recidivist/Reiteracion

Habitual Delinquent Recidivism Reiteracion

Crimes - specified crimes
Period - within 10 years
No. of
Crimes - 3rd time or oftener
- 2 crimes embraced in - 2 crimes not
the same title of the RPC embraced in the same
title of the RPC
- time bet. 2 offenses - has served sentence
is immaterial for the 1st offense
- 2nd time is sufficient - 2nd time is sufficient

Effects - additional penalty - a generic aggravating - not always an

is imposed circumstance; can be aggravating
offset by an ordinary circumstance
mitigating circumstance
 Difference bet. Habitual Delinquency & Subsidiary Imprisonment
Habitual Delinquent Subsidiary Imprisonment
- needs to be alleged in the - does not need to be alleged
information
- should be alleged in the - comes only after the sentence of
beginning conviction
- imposes an additional penalty - imposed only when unable to pay fine
- cannot be considered with a - general allegation will suffice
general allegation, must be
specifically alleged

 Requisites for a Habitual Delinquent:

1. offender has been convicted of serious or less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa, or falsification
2. after conviction or after serving sentence again committed within 10 years from his release or date of first
conviction, he was convicted of any of said crimes for the 2 nd time
3. after conviction or after serving sentence for the 2nd offense again commits and within 10 years of conviction or
release for the 2nd offense, commits a 3rd time or oftener
 Additional Penalties
1. For the 3rd time = the penalty for the last crime + Prision correctional medium to maximum
2. For the 4th time = the penalty for the last crime + Prision mayor minimum to medium
3. For the 5th time or more = the penalty for the last crime + Prision mayor maximum to Reclusion temporal
minimum
 Total of last penalty and additional penalty = should not exceed 30 yrs.
 If the court overlooked the imposition of an additional penalty for habitual delinquency = the offender cannot
be compelled to suffer the additional penalty
 In the commission of several crimes occurring on or about the same date shall be considered only as one for
purposes of habitual delinquency
 In the conviction for those crimes occurring on or about the same date shall also be considered as one
Article 63
 ARTICLE 63 – RULES ON INDIVISIBLE PENALTIES
1. For single indivisible penalties (reclusion perpetua) – shall be applied regardless of mitigating or aggravating
circumstances, eg. the crime of rape with homicide, with the mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender,
voluntary confession of guilt, and illness, the penalty shall still be reclusion perpetua because circumstances are
disregarded
2. For two indivisible penalties (sub-paragraphs 1-4 are inapplicable, because there is no death penalty, therefore
there’s only one indivisible penalty)
 Exception to disregarding circumstances: if it is a privileged mitigating circumstance (Articles 68 & 69), or if
the accused is a minor who acted with discernment = can be entitled to a penalty next lower in degree

Article 64
 ARTICLE 64 – RULES FOR PENALTIES WITH 3 PERIODS
- In accordance w/ Articles 76-77 whether there are attending circumstances
 First rule
- if neither a mitigating or aggravating circumstance is present = medium period is imposed
 Second rule
- if there is a mitigating circumstance = minimum period is imposed
 Third rule
- if there is an aggravating circumstance = maximum period is imposed
 Fourth rule
- if there is both a mitigating and aggravating circumstance = courts shall offset the circumstances according to
relative weight
 Fifth rule
- if there are 2 or more mitigating circumstances and absolutely no aggravating circumstances = the penalty next
lower in degree is imposed
 Sixth rule
- whatever the number or nature of aggravating circumstances = courts cannot impose a greater penalty than
prescribed by law in maximum
 Seventh rule
- Courts can determine extent of penalty within the limits of each period
 Mitigating circumstance must be ordinary = not privileged
 Aggravating circumstance must be generic = not qualified or inherent

Article 65-67
 ARTICLE 65 – RULES FOR PENALTIES NOT IN THREE PERIODS
(reading matter)
 ARTICLE 66 – IMPOSITION OF FINES
(reading matter)
- ¼ of the maximum fine is either added (for aggravating circumstances) or deducted (for mitigating
circumstances) from the maximum fine
- courts must consider:
1. mitigating or aggravating circumstances
2. wealth or means of the culprit
 ARTICLE 67 – PENALTY FOR INCOMPLETE EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE OF ACCIDENT
- Arresto mayor maximum to prision correccional minimum (grave felonies)
- Arresto mayor minimum to Arresto mayor medium (for less grave felonies)