Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 141

The Fraternal Order of St.

Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)


Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
REVISED PENAL CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES MU
TAU Provides for their penalty:
ACT NO. 3815 MU
One of the weaknesses of bar candidates is the law on
TAU
penalties. They are afraid of computation. But you cannot avoid this because
MU whether you like it or not, the law on penalties is part and parcel of the
TAU Revised Penal Code.
AN ACT REVISING THE PENAL CODE OF THE MU
Question: What are the sources of criminal law?
OTHER PENAL LAWS TAU Answer: There are only two know sources of criminal law:
MU
TAU  Revised Penal Code (Act 3815), as amended; and
(December 8, 1983)  Special Laws – (Anti-graft; Dangerous Drugs Act, etc.)
MU
TAU But actually, if you analyze it, there is only one source, the law itself. Because
MU the Revised Penal Code is the general law; but, definitely common sense
TAU would tell us that not all crimes in the Philippines are found in the Revised
Penal Code. There are crimes that are found in various special laws.
MU
Preliminary Article – This law shall be known as “The TAU Question: Why is it that there is only one source of criminal law, because in
MU the final analysis, there is only one source - the law itself?
Revised Penal Code.” Answer: You back to back in nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege. There is
TAU no crime if there is no law that penalizes an act or omission as a crime.
MU
TAU Question: Is there such thing as a common law crime?
BOOK ONE MU Answer: There is no such thing as common law crime because law is based
TAU on customs and tradition. There is no such thing as crimes by tradition in the
Philippines. Tradition or custom itself does not create a crime, but the law
MU itself must provide and penalize an act as a crime.
TAU
General provisions regarding the date of enforcement and application of the Question: Is the Constitution a source of criminal law?
MU
provision of this code, and regarding the offenses, the persons liable and the Answer: No, because it does not define “crime”, nor provide penalty. You
penalties.
TAU
still have to hear of an information filed in court for the violation of the
MU Constitution. The Constitution is the source of many rights of an accused, but
TAU you cannot find any crime defined and penalized in the Constitution. So,
MU theoretically, the Constitution is not a source of criminal law.
Preliminary Title and application of the provision of this code. TAU
CHARACTERISTICS OF CRIMINAL LAW:
MU 1. General;
Article 1. Time when Act takes effect. — This Code TAU 2. Territorial;
MU 3. Prospective
shall take effect on the first day of January, nineteen
hundred and thirty-two. TAU
Generality:
MU Philippine criminal laws are binding on all persons who live and sojourn in
TAU the Philippine territory – when one commits a crime in the Philippines,
Criminal law is defined simply as that branch or division in the study of law MU whether he is a resident citizen, alien, a transient, or tourist, he is subject to
which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for their punishment. prosecution before Philippine courts. That is what you mean by general
character of criminal law.
TAU
It defines crimes: MU Questions: Are there exceptions? Are there people who are in the Philippines
TAU who commit criminal act, but are immune?
We are familiar with the Criminal Law axiom nullum crimen , nulla poena Answer: By way of exception, yes. There are two:
sine lege, that there is no crime where there is no law punishing an act or
MUT
omission as a crime. It tells us what is punishable and what is not punishable. AU 1. Those who are exempt by virtue of the principle of
MU Public International Law.
TAU
MU These are the:
Treats of their nature:  Heads of State; and
 Diplomatic officials
TAU
Example:
Crimes belong to different classes. In Book II alone, crimes MU
President Bush went to the Philippines on a state visit, and upon landing in
are divided or classified into 13 classifications – from Crimes Against
National Security and the Laws of Nations, to Quasi-offenses, Crimes Against
TAU Manila, the first thing he did was to molest somebody. Can he be accused of
acts of lasciviousness or rape? No. He cannot even be arrested and charged
Honor, etc. And there are many classifications of penalties, like the MU
before our courts because he is a head of state. He is immune.
consummated, attempted, and frustrated, the grave, less grave and the light
felony. These are what you call nature of crimes. We are concerned not only
You also cannot arrest anybody who holds a diplomatic rank, whether he be a
of crimes under the Penal Code, but this includes those acts punishable under
diplomat of any nation, or an ambassador, ministers plenipotentiary, ministers
special laws. So, you must understand the nature of each. Each one has its on
residents, or charge d’ affairs. These are the people who are exempt.
special rules to be followed.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 1 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU There are supposed to be five exceptions to the territorial characteristic of
SCHNECKENBURGER vs. MORAN TAU criminal law. These exceptions are found in Article 2 of the Revised Penal
Code.
63 Phil. 250 MU
TAU Prospectivity:
Held: It is well settled that a consul is not entitled of the privileges and MU
immunities of an ambassador or minister, but is subject to the laws and
regulations of the country of which he is accredited. TAU This means that crimes are punished under the law in force at the time of their
MU commission.
A consul does not represent the political interests. In the absence of a treaty to TAU
So, if the act becomes a crime today because the law itself fixed it such that it
the contrary, a consul is not exempt from criminal prosecution for violations
MU be considered a crime today, you cannot prosecute a person who had done the
of the laws of the country where he resides.
TAU act yesterday. Criminal law looks forward. That is the general rule.
2. Those are exempt by virtue of treaties. MU
TAU Question: May a penal law be given retroactive effect?
When the Philippines enters into a treaty with a foreign country and grants MU Answer: Yes, when a law is more favorable to the accused. An example of
immunity from criminal prosecution of its nationals by agreement – the best such penal statue is if a new law reduces the penalty of your offense.
example of such a treaty was the former US-RP Military Bases Agreement TAU
where for certain crimes committed in the Philippines by American MU Example: You commit a crime punishable by 5 years imprisonment.
Servicemen who were discharging their official duties, they could not be TAU Now, there is a new law reducing the penalty of 5 months.
charged in Philippine Courts. They could be charged by the United States
under their laws. We cannot do anything about that because we agreed to it.
MU
Question: Can the offender claim now, that upon conviction is penalty should
That is a treaty. TAU be 5 months?
MU Answer: Yes, he is covered and he can claim it.
The principle of generality and its exceptions are clearly expressed in the Civil TAU
Code of the Philippines which states: MU
TAU
ARTICLE 14, CIVIL CODE: Penal laws and those of public
security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live and MU
ORDOÑEZ vs. VINARO
sojourn in Philippine territory, subject to the principles of TAU
public international law and to treaty stipulations. MU Facts: Somebody was found guilty of selling marijuana. The law in force at
TAU the time of the offense was the Dangerous Drugs Act (RA 6425), which
Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all penalizes the selling of marijuana with life imprisonment. The convict had
MU
who live and sojourn in Philippine territory; subject to the principles of public been serving sentence since 1986.
international law and to treaty stipulations. TAU
MU In 1995, RA 7659, or the Heinous Crime Law, was passed amending, among
Territoriality: TAU others, RA 6425. This new law provides for a penalty, which depend upon the
number of grams or sticks of marijuana that is sold. Insofar as this particular
MU convict is concerned, the law had the effect of reducing his sentence,
This means that penal laws of the Philippines are enforceable only within its
territory. We cannot enforce them outside of the Philippines if the crime was TAU considering that he sold only two sticks of marijuana.
committed outside. MU
Held: The new law should be given retroactive application because it is
TAU favorable to the convict. The Director of Bureau of Prisons was ordered to
PROBLEM: A and B are Filipino citizens. They took a tour on Japan.
When they were in the tour, A attacked B in Tokyo, inflicting upon B physical MU release the convict from the National Penitentiary.
injuries. When B came back here, the first thing he did was to file a case of TAU
physical injuries against A, in Philippine courts. MU But there are exceptions to the exceptions. Meaning, even if favorable, it will
not be given retroactive effect. You then go back to the general rule.
Question: Can the Philippine courts try the case of physical injuries, because
anyway both parties are residents of the Philippines.
TAU 1. If the new law is expressly made inapplicable to
Answer: No, because even if the crime of physical injuries will be admitted MU pending actions or causes of action.
by A, it did not happen here. It happened in Japan. We cannot enforce our TAU
Revised Penal Code for the crime committed outside of Philippine territory. MUT If the law is silent, it should be given retroactive effect if favorable.
Supposing the law will say that it is not applicable to pending actions.
Question: What is the difference between generality and territoriality? AU
None, even if it is favorable, it will not be given retroactive effect.
Answer: They are almost the same. General characteristics, it is enforceable MU Meaning, the law provides for non-retroactivity. That is why such a
upon everyone who resides or visits or sojourns in the country. Territorial TAU provision must be express.
characteristics is enforceable only for crimes committed in the Philippines.
They may appear to be overlapping, but there is a slight difference. MU

In general characteristics of criminal law, the emphasis is on the offender, the TAU
2. Where the offender is a habitual delinquent under
person who commits the crime, whether he is a reside alien or not, tourist of MU
citizen – the emphasis is the person who commits the crime. Article 65, of the Revised Penal Code.
TAU
But territorial characteristic, the emphasis is upon place only. However, the MU
territorial character of criminal law has known exceptions. Meaning, even if
the crime committed outside Philippine Territory, the offender can still be
charged under Philippine laws and tried by our courts, even of the act was not CONSTRUCTION OF PENAL LAWS
committed here.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 2 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
If there is doubt, the doubt is resolved in favor of the accused. Thus, applying MU including in Davao, but still remains to be seen whether the bill will be finally
the constitutional presumption of innocence. But this rule of construction is TAU enacted into law.
applied only where the law is ambiguous, and there is doubt as to its
MU
interpretation. Where the law is cleat, there is no room for application of this In other words, there have been several attempts to amend or replace the RPC
rule. TAU for the past 75 years. It has passed the test of time, it is a very durable law.
MU
But there is also rule of construction. In the construction or interpretation of TAU
the provisions of the Revised Penal Code, the Spanish text is controlling THEORIES UNDERLYING THE REVISED PENAL
because the Philippine Legislature in its Spanish text approved the Code. This MU
CODE
was the language of the lawmakers in expressing the intent of the law. If there TAU
is a conflict between the English version and the Spanish version of the MU
Every country in the world has its system of penology. Every country has its
Revised Penal Code, the Spanish text shall prevail.
TAU own theory of what is a crime. How did it start? It depends upon the
MU orientation of that country. But it is admitted that in criminal jurisprudence
anywhere in the world, there are two basic schools of thought or theories
PEOPLE vs. MANGULABNAN TAU underlying Criminal Law.
99 Phil. 993 MU
TAU The Classical Theory
Facts: During the robbery in a dwelling house, one of the culprits fired his MU This is the older one. It is called the Traditional Theory because it is the one
gun upward in the ceiling, not knowing that the owner of the house was hiding that is older that the positivist Theory, which is a more modern thought. What
TAU
the ceiling. The owner was hit by the slug that passed though it and was killed we should remember here are the basic principles underlying the Classical
unintentionally. MU Theory. What to Classicists advocate? What do they say about crimes, about
TAU criminals/
Article 294 (1) of the Revised Penal Code provides that the crime is robbery MU
with homicide “when by reason or an occasion of the robbery, the crime of The Classicist’s Theory: Man is a rational being. If he is a rational being, he
homicide shall have been committed”. The Spanish text of the same provision TAU can distinguish right from wrong. If he commits a crime, such as murder, he
reads: “cuando con motivo o occasion del robo resultare homicido”. MU assumes he knows that he is wrong. Since he knew that it was wrong, he must
TAU prepare himself for the consequences of what he did. That is the theory of the
Held: In view of the Spanish text which must prevail, the crime is robbery Classicists and crimes vary. There us a serious one; there is the not-so-serious
with homicide supervened by mere accident.
MU one, and there are slight ones.
TAU
MU There should be a mechanical proportion between the crime and the penalty.
BRIEF HISTORY OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE TAU That is why the penalty in the RPC on sight physical injuries is not the same
penalty as in murder. Otherwise, there must be a disproportion. If you punish
MU murder wit death and punish also physical injuries with death, there is a
The Revised Penal Code originated from the old Spanish Penal Code of 1887
which took effect in July 14,1887. And that was the prevailing law up to the TAU disproportion.
coming of the Americans. The Americans did not touch the Penal Code and MU
the Civil Code. They introduced law especially on criminal procedure, but the TAU The Positivist Theory
substantive law remained the same. The positivist advocate that we cannot simply consider a crime as
MU permanently governed or continuously governed by laws. Meaning, we have
However, sometime in 1914, there was an attempt by the government to TAU to take into consideration the environment, the social conditioning of persons
change the Old Spanish Penal Code. And the government commissioned a MU andArt.
therefore it is wrong toofsimply
2. Application fix a predetermined
its provisions. — Exceptpenalty
as for a crime,
Committee, chaired by Rafael del Pan, to draft a new law. That Committee because there are so many factors to consider. At least, the basic difference
came out with a proposed law to replace the old Penal Code. The proposed
TAU provided
between the twointheories
the treaties
is on theirand laws of preferential
emphasis.
law was called the Proposed Correctional Code of del Pan. However, the draft MU application, the provisions of this Code shall be
was never acted up by the Philippine Legislature. TAU enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago,
Difference:
MU Theincluding its atmosphere,
Classical Theory its interior
gives more emphasis upon thewaters and
ACT committed rather
About ten years later, the government created another Committee which was thatmaritime
the actor. Whereas, thealso
Positivist Theory gives more emphasis on the
given instructions to revise the Old Penal Code. The Committee was chaired zone, but outside of its jurisdiction,
ACTOR rather than the act. There is a focus of attention on the DOER rather
by Anacleto Diaz, with the following members: TAU against
than on whatthose
he did.who:
The focus on Classical Theory is on WHAT HE DID
 Quintin Paredes MU 1. Should
rather commit an offense while on a Philippine ship
than the actor.
 Guillermo Gueverra TAU or airship
 Alex Reyes Question: Uponforge
which or
of these two schools of thought is the RPC based?
 Mariano de Joya MUT 2. Should counterfeit any coin or currency note
Answer: The RPC is almost 80% reproduction of the Penal Code of Soain.
AU of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities
Since the Spanish Penal Code is based on the Classical Theory, necessarily
The committee came out with their draft and the Philippine Legislature passed MU ourissued
RPC isby the on
based Government
the Classical of the Philippine
Theory of Criminal Law.Islands;
There were
it into law on December 8, 1930 and became effective on January 1, 1932. It 3. Should
certain changesbe liable for
introduced actsRPC.
by the connected with theprovisions were
Certain Positivist
came to be known as Act 3815, or the Revised Penal Code. So, the Revised
TAU
inserted. The framers
introduction of the
into RPCislands
these had the of
complete authority to throw
the obligations and away
Penal Code has been effective for 75 years already. It has undergone several MU the Spanish Penal Code. But they were cautious, they were not prepared. They
amendments, but the basic structure of the law is the same. securities mentioned in the presiding number;
came basically with the Spanish Penal Code, revised. So, they still adhered to
TAU the4.structure
While ofbeing publicPenal
the Spanish officers
Code.or employees,
That is why our should
RPC is still the
During the late 1940’s, there was an attempt to redraft the Revised Penal Code commit
Classical an offense in the exercise of their functions; or
Theory.
(RPC). The committee charged came out with the proposed Code of Crimes,
MU
which, however, was not passed by Congress. And in late 1970’s, the UP Law TAU 5. Should commit any of the crimes against national
Center came out with another draft which was also called he Code of Crimes. MU security and the law of nations, defined in Title One of
It was submitted to the Batasang Pambansa but to no avail. Book Two of this Code.

In 1995, the then Congress passed another bill – to be called the code of
Crimes again. Although it is different one from the previous drafts. It was
sponsored by Congressman Sergio Apostol. He conducted public hearings,

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 3 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU 1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine
TAU ship or airship
MU
TAU
MU The term “airship” instead of “airplane” was used because at the time of the
TAU drafting of the RPC, there were no commercial planes yet. The means of
transportation then were the dirigibles, those that look like ballons (the
MU Lindenburg of American accident fame). That is what they mean by the term
TAU ‘airship”.
MU
TAU
A ship or airship, which is of Philippine registry, is
MU
considered as Philippine territory.
TAU
MU PROBLEM: Mr. A, while on board a Philippine vessel anchored at the
TAU Davao Gulf in Sasa, commits a crime against Mr. B on board that vessel.
MU Question: Are the provisions of the RPC applicable?
Answer: Yes, because the crime was committed in Philippine territory. Sasa
TAU is not yet outside of Philippine territory. That is covered by the opening
MU paragraph, because the crime was committed within the Philippine territorial
TAU waters. So, the reason is not based of the opening paragraph of Article 2.
MU Question: What is Paragraph 1?
TAU Answer: That is when the ship is outside the Philippines. What gives
MU jurisdiction to the Philippines is not the fact that crime was committed on
board a Philippine ship under paragraph 1, but because of the fact that it was
TAU
committed in Philippine Territory, because it falls under the exception. This is
MU one of the instances, when RPC may be given extraterritorial effect.
TAU
MU So, paragraph 2 refers to a ship already outside of the Philippine territory. IF
the problem says that the ship is in the middle of Pacific Ocean, does
TAU Philippine law apply? Yes, because the crime was committed on board a
MU Philippine vessel. Even if it is outside of the Philippine Territory, it falls under
The phrase except as provided in treaties or laws of preferential application.
the exception. This is one of the instances when RPC may be given
These are so called Exceptions to the General Characteristics of Criminal TAU
extraterritorial effect.
Law. Meaning, the RPC is binding on all who live and sojourn in the MU
Philippines, except people who are not covered by the RPC due to treaty TAU
stipulations, because laws of preferential application. The same thing with airplanes. The plane is flying in the middle of the
MU atmosphere over the Pacific Ocean, between the United States and the
Question: What does “Philippine Territory” cover? TAU Philippines. If the crime is committed aboard that plane, the crime is triable in
Answer: The first paragraph of the RPC in Article 2 expresses the Territorial MU the Philippines. That is an exception also.
Principle: “Philippine territory” comprises the Philippine Archipelago, its
atmosphere, the space above it, subject to the aviation rights of other
TAU
We have no problem if the crime is committed on board a Philippine ship or
countries. MU airplane, while outside of the Philippines, flying or sailing, as the case may be,
TAU in international waters or airspace. The problem comes in if the crime is
During that time, the concept of outer space is not yet recognized. That is MU committed on board a Philippine ship outside the Philippines where it is
beyond the territory of any country. There is only a certain limit in territorial anchored and it is under the territory of another country.
waters. Only a portion of the sea is considered as Philippine Territory. These
are all parts of public international law. TAU Question: Suppose, a Japanese vessel is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean,
MU and a Japanese crewmember killed another Japanese crewmember. Whose law
TAU shall be applied on the prosecution of crime?
Question: What is the accepted radius? Answer: I do not know, and I do not care. It did not happen in our territory. It
Answer: It used to be three miles, then it became six. Now, it is twelve miles. MUT did not happen in our ship or airship. Presumable, it is the Japanese law, but I
It also covers the Economic Zone, such as the Spratlys. That is not part of its AU do not know the Japanese law.
economic zone. China, Vietnam, Taiwan are also claiming it. That might MU
become source of war. That is Philippine Territory. But if a Philippine ship was in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and a crime
TAU was committed on board it, no country will assume any interest there.
As a general rule, the RPC and the other Penal Laws can only be enforced MU
within Philippine Territory. They cannot be enforced outside. There are Five Question: Was it committed in the Philippine territory?
exceptions to the territorial character of Criminal Law. TAU Answer: Of course not, the crime took place while the vessel was in the
middle of the Pacific Ocean.
Question: When may the provisions of the RPC be enforced outside
MU
Philippine Territory? What are the exceptions to the territorial nature of te TAU Question: Can the crime be tried in the Philippines?
RPC? In what instances may the provisions of the RPC be given MU Answer: Yes, because of Article 2(1). The crime was committed outside
EXTRATERITORIAL effect? Philippine territory, but on board a Philippine ship.
Answer:
But the problem in paragraph 1 comes in when the crime is committed on
board a Philippine ship while the same is in the territory of another country.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 4 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
For example: While a Philippine ship is anchored in Tokyo Bay, or a PAL MU cannot be charged under Philippine laws because you say you counterfeited
plane is about to land at the Narita Airport in Tokyo, a passenger killed TAU currency, but not in Philippine territory. That will not prosper! You can be
another passenger. arrested as if you committed the crime here. That constitutes economic
MU
sabotage, so we can try the crime in our courts as idthe crime was committed
Questions: Where will the crime be tried? Suppose the Philippine would say, TAU in Philippine territory.
“we should try this here in the Philippines because the crime took place on MU
board of a Philippine ship or airship’. Is that correct? TAU
Answer: Yes, based on Article 2(1). 3. Should be liable for acts connected with the
MU
introduction into these islands of the
But suppose Japan would say, “No, the crime is triable by our courts because TAU
it was committed in Japanese territory. That is also correct. How do you MU obligations and securities mentioned in the
resolve that issue? Both sides have legal issue. presiding number;
TAU
That kind of problem has been in existence for hundreds of years now. That is MU The third exception is related to the second. You may not tne the forger or
why it gave rise to two sets of rules: TAU counterfeiter, but you are the importer into the Philippines of these forged or
1. The English Rule MU counterfeited currencies and securities. So, you are liable for the introduction
2. The French Rule pf the same in the Philippines.
TAU
MU
The English Rule TAU 4. While being public officers or employees, should
This holds the view that a crime is committed on board a foreign vessel while MU commit an offense in the exercise of their
that vessel is in the territory of another country, the crime shall be tried under
the law of the territory where it is committed. TAU functions; or
MU
This applies more particularly to those in the foreign service because the
Except when the crime is minor, something which affects or involves only the TAU
offender here is a public officer who commits a crime in the exercise of his
internal management of the vessels, in which case, it would be tried in the
MU function. For example, officers of the Philippine Embassy and Consulate
country under whose flag the vessel navigates or where it is registered.
TAU malversed government funds of the embassy.
The French Rule MU Question: Does it mean that every crime committed abroad by these officers
It came out an opposite view. The French believe that if a crime is committed TAU can be tried here?
on board a foreign vessel while the same is anchored in another country, the MU Answer: No, only those committed in the exercise of their function. Meaning,
crime should be tried not in that country, but in the home state of the vessel. the acts were related to their jobs – where the element of being public officer
TAU
is an essential ingredient. If you commit an offense which is purely private
Except if it affects the peace, security, and safety of the territory where the MU and it has nothing to do with your being a public officer, it is not covered.
crime was committed, in which case it should be tried here. TAU These crimes here are those under the Title of Crimes Against Public Office –
malversation, bribery or crimes committed under the Anti-Graft Act.
So, the only difference is that the English Rule makes the territorial principle MU
of criminal law as the general rule and the extraterritorial principle as the TAU
exception, whereas the French Rule holds opposite view. It is actually a set of MU
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national
inverse rules because of the fact that what the general rule is there is an
TAU security and the law of nations, defined in Title
exception, which is the general rule in the other. It is actually the dame dog
with the collar at different ends, depending upon who put it. MU One of Book Two of this Code.
TAU
MU Example of a crime against national security: treason, espionage. A Filipino
Question: Which rule is followed in the Philippines? citizen, during the war, commits an act of treason while he is abroad. After the
Answer: According to the old case of US vs. BULL (15 Phil. 14), the TAU war, he goes back to the Philippines. He can be arrested for that crime even if
Supreme Court said that we adhere to the English Rule. MU the crime was not committed here because that is against national security of
the state.
However, based on the public international law, these vessels should be TAU
MERCHANT VESSELS. This is not applicable to warships because warships
are considered extensions of the territory of the mother state wherever it may MU Example of crimes against the laws of nations: piracy, mutiny. A group of
be. TAU pirates committed piracy in Indonesia. That is clearly outside Philippine
MUT territory. But the pirates are apprehended in Philippine waters. They can be
Example: A ship of an enemy is in the Philippine waters, and a crime is charged under Philippine law. They cannot say the act of piracy was
AU
committed. The English Rule cannot be applied. The navy vessel in the committed beyond Philippine territory, that they committed it in Indonesia.
country is not subject of the laws of a foreign sovereign. MU
Piracy is a crime against the laws of nations and the offenders can be
TAU apprehended and tried under the law of the country where they are caught.
MU
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency
note of the Philippine Islands or obligations TAU
and securities issued by the Government of the MU
Philippine Islands; TAU
MU
The second exception applies also to government bonds, treasury warrants,
and sweepstakes tickets.

Example: You are responsible for counterfeiting Philippine money abroad.


Every week you fly to the Philippines, and then you are caught. You say you

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 5 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU 3. Committed by either dolo or culpa.
TAU
MU
TAU 1. Act or omission
MU
TAU Question: Define an “act”.
MU
TAU Answer: An act is a physical movement, a physical activity of human body
MU which tends to influence the outside world. Practically, 90% of all felonies are
done through physical act. How do you kill? By shooting or stabbing. These
TAU should involve some movements of muscles. How about oral defamation?
MU There is still the movement of your tongue; the muscles of your throat are
TAU working when you utter defamatory words. So, you cannot kill somebody by
simple sitting on the bench and stare at somebody. It’s impossible even with
MU
dagger looks!
TAU
Title One MU Question: Define “omission”.
FELONIES AND CIRCUMSTANCES TAU Answer: This is the opposite. Omission is defined as inaction; the exact
opposite of action. In omission, it is the other way around .The failure to do a
MU positive duty which the law commands to be done. So, to say that there is no
WHICH AFFECT CRIMINAL LIABILITY TAU crime when there is no movement is wrong. You may be prosecuted not by
MU doing something but by failing to act. But omissions are the minority.
Majority of felonies are done through actions. Among the most famous ones
TAU
us Misprision of Treason under Article 116 of the RPC; if you have to
MU knowledge of any conspiracy, you have to report it.
Chapter One TAU Art. 116. Misprision of treason. — Every person owing
MU allegiance to (the United States) the Government of the
FELONIES Philippine Islands, without being a foreigner, and having
TAU knowledge of any conspiracy against them, conceals or does
MU not disclose and make known the same, as soon as possible
Art. 3. Definitions. — Acts and omissions punishable by TAU to the governor or fiscal of the province, or the mayor or
law are felonies (delitos). MU
fiscal of the city in which he resides, as the case may be,
Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit shall be punished as an accessory to the crime of treason.
TAU
(dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa). MU If you find a person dying in the middle of the forest, then you just left him
TAU there, you are liable under Article 275 for abandonment of persons in
There is deceit when the act is performed with danger. Normally, you are liable for not doing. The Chinese proverb (Too
MU
deliberate intent and there is fault when the wrongful much talk, too many mistakes. Less talk, less mistake. No talk, no mistake) is
TAU
act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of the general rule, but not in felony of omission. You have to do something.
MU
foresight, or lack of skill.
TAU Question: Based on paragraph 1, classify felonies.
MU Answer:
a. Felonies by act;
TAU b. Felonies by omission.
MU
According to this article, felonies are acts and omissions punishable by law.
But that is not the complete definition. That is only one-third of the definition. TAU 2. The act or omission must be punishable by law or
The concept of felony covers the entire Article 3. It is not limited only to the
first paragraph. You have to incorporate the entire Article 3. MU RPC.
TAU
Question: What is the principle here?
Question: How do you rephrase that? MUT Answer: No matter how bad, no matter how condemnable, immoral or
Answer: Felonies are acts and omissions punishable by law which can be
committed not only be means of deceit (dolo) act is committed with deliberate
AU atrocious an act or omission is, if there be no law penalizing it, there is no
crime. The solution is to write to your congressman and ask him to pass law.
intent or by means of fault (culpa) when the wrongful act results from MU
The Latin Maxim is “nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege”. That must be
imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill. TAU first a law penalizing it. You cannot convict a person for a crime which does
MU not exist in the RPC. There is no crime if there is no law making it a crime.
That is the complete definition. Question: How many laws are there which penalize crimes?
TAU
Answer: There are so many. Generally, there is RPC. Illegal possession of
Question: What are the elements of felony? MU firearms is punishable by PD 8066. Smoking or selling marijuana is
TAU punishable my Dangerous Drugs Act; drinking liquor on Election Day is
Answer: MU punishable by Omnibus Election Code. Issuing a bouncing check is penalized
under BP 22, etc.
Elements of Felony: (Atty. Angel’s Note) Question: Are these illegal possessions of firearms, smoking or selling
marijuana, etc., are felonies?
Answer: No, because they are not punishable by RPC. They are
1. Involves an act or omission. punishable under special laws.
2. Punishable by RPC.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 6 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU Example:
A shoots B to death.
So Article 3 says punishable by law, it refers to RPC only. A better way of TAU
expressing it is: “Felonies are acts and omissions punishable by the RPC”. MU
Question: What was the intent of A?
That would be the more accurate way. For example, murder. TAU Answer: His intent was to kill.
Question: Is there difference between crime and a felony?
MU
Question: What was the motive of A in killing B?
Answer: The word “crime” is generic, because it refers to all acts or TAU
Answer: I don’t give a damn. Maybe it is anger, revenge, jealousy, etc.
omissions punishable by any law. Even the RPC uses the word “crime” to MU
refer to felonies of Book Two in Crimes Against National Security. But the TAU
In the realm of criminal law – substantive law – motive is immaterial; it is not
more accurate term for acts or omissions by the RPC are “felonies”. Those
an element of the crime. Hence, it need not be proved for purposes of
punished by special laws are called “crimes” or “offenses”. “Felony” is a MU
conviction. Otherwise, if we were to require motive to be an element of a
technical term. Those punishable by ordinance are called infraction of TAU
crime, many criminals will not be prosecuted. When the commission of a
ordinance. MU crime is proved and the identity of the criminal is established, motive is
If you say murder is a crime that is correct because the term is used in its TAU
immaterial.
generic sense. But when you say murder is a felony, you must be a law MU
Motive is important, not in substantive law, but in procedural law – the law on
student. You are expected to know the meaning of the word felony. On the TAU
Evidence. Motive may constitute circumstantial evidence. Meaning, if you
other hand, if you say that issuing a bouncing check is a felony you do not
MU have no direct evidence that A killed B, I will gather a series of possible
know what you are talking about. It cannot be felony, because it is not found
TAU reasons to show why A is guilty. So motive is important to prove the
in the RPC.
probability that A is the criminal, but it is not important to prove the existence
MU of a crime. But if you have hundred witnesses, it is not necessary to prove
TAU motive because in that case, the reason for committing the crime becomes
3. There is deceit (dolo) or fault (culpa). MU completely immaterial.
TAU
When you say “deceit” it means you were fooled. For example, you run out of
cash, so you issue check which you know will bounce because there is no MU PEOPLE vs. MOSENDE
fund for it. There is deceit there. In estafa, there is also deceit. But there are TAU
228 SCRA 341
felonies where there is no deceit. For example, Give me your money or else MU
I’ll kill you. There is a felony, i.e. a robbery or hold-up, but there is no deceit.
TAU No motive or reason for the killing here dealt with as reveled by the proofs.
There is intimidation and intent to gain but there is no deceit.
MU This is immaterial, where the evidence otherwise persuasively demonstrates
who is the killer and the acts by which he has carried out nefarious intent.
Question: If there are many crimes where there is no deceit, how come the TAU
This is not that what lies in the murky criminal mind is not interest, especially
law says felonies are committed by means of either deceit or fault?
MU to penologist, criminal psychologist, or social scientists. But it is immaterial in
Answer: Because deceit is a wrong translation of the word “dolo”. Deceit is a
reaching a conclusion of guilt and imposing an appropriate penalty on the
form of dolo but not every dolo constitutes deceit. The better translation for TAU
basis of a cold dispassionate appraisal of the bare facts exposed by the
the Spanish word “dolo” is intent. So, there must be intent, instead of deceit. MU
evidence.
“Culpa” means fault – when there is negligence or importance. There is no TAU
intent but is substituted by lack of foresight or lack of skill.
MU In other words, motive would be a subject of penologist, criminal psychiatrists
or social scientists. But for purposes of getting a conviction, it is completely
Based on the third element, there are two types of felonies: TAU
immaterial for as long as there is evidence to prove that the crime was
 Intentional felonies MU committed and it was the accused who committed it.
 Culpable felonies
TAU
MU Question: Can a person be held criminally liable under the RPC even if he
Another classification are (based of the first element of felony):
has no criminal intent?
 Felonies by act TAU Answer: Yes, if it is committed by means of fault or culpa which is
 Felonies by omission MU substituted for intent.
Question: Intent is in the mind. But how do you prove intent? For example:
Culpable felonies are known under Article 365 as QUASI-OFFENSES. There
When you kill somebody, how do you prove that you have the intent to kill? TAU
is no criminal intent but is substituted by fault – imprudence or negligence.
Answer: There is no need to prove it. There is a presumption in law that MU
criminal intent is presumed from the commission of a criminal act. When you TAU
Imprudence means deficiency of action, lack of skill. Negligence refers to
kill somebody, the law presumes intent to kill. When you divest somebody of
deficiency of perception, lack of foresight. Meaning, the failure to foresee
his money in a robbery or theft, the law presumes that there is intent to gain. It MUT
what a reasonable man ought to foresee.
is fair enough, because how can the prosecution prove what is in the mind of AU
person? So, what is in the mind is judged by your actions. MU
Question: Why is there such a presumption? TAU Example:
A motorist drove his car at a speed of 100 kph in the middle of San Pedro St.
Answer: Because of the Classical Theory of criminal law that man is a MU
Suppose he bumps somebody. That is normal – for incidents as that to happen.
rational being, so that when he commits a criminal act, it is presumed that he
But there must be something wrong in his foresight. Why is he driving at a
did it knowingly, and therefore, his criminal intent is presume from his TAU
very fast jeep in a busy street?
commission of a criminal act. Without such presumption, it should be very
difficult for the prosecution to be required to prove criminal intent. But the
MU
TAU Question: What is the test of intelligence?
presumption could be rebutted.
Answer: The test is the failure to foresee what any ordinary person would
MU have ordinarily done.
Question: Distinguish “motive” from “intent”.
Answer: Both are in the mind. Motive is the moving power that impels a
Question: What is the test of imprudence?
person to commit a crime; while intent the purpose to use a particular means
Answer: The failure to do what any ordinary person would have ordinarily
to achieve a particular result. While criminal intent is an element of a felony,
done.
motive is completely immaterial.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 7 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Question: Why does the law penalize people who commit culpable felonies, MU Requisites of Mistake of Fact
when actually there was no criminal intent? TAU a. That the act done would have been lawful had the facts been
Answer: Because he is penalize people for his lack of skill. According to the or turned out as the believe the to be;
MU
Supreme Court, it is very dangerous is a person can get away with a b. That the intention of the accused in performing the act should
criminal act simply because he did not have the intent. Society will be a TAU be lawful;
great risk if people can be careless anytime. MU c. That the mistake must be without fault or carelessness on the
TAU part of the accused.
Another important principle: when the law says there must be criminal
intent or fault, what it means is the act must be committed voluntarily. MU
Every felony must be committed voluntarily. TAU Question:
MU What is the reason why Ah Chong killed the intruder?
Question: What are the elements of voluntariness in an intentional felony? Answer:
TAU
Answer: There must be, on the part of the actor, the following: Ah Chong killed the intruder because he believed that the intruder was inside
a. Freedom MU his room in the dark to kill him and therefore, he had to kill him first
b. Intelligence TAU Question:
c. Intent MU Suppose what he believed turned out to be true; an intruder in the middle of
the night enters his room to kill him, but he kills him first. Is he liable?
TAU Answer:
Question: How about in a culpable felony? MU Of course not! Because of self-defense. Meaning if you believe it to be so
Answer: In a culpable felony, the elements of voluntariness are: TAU true, you are not liable. So, the first element is there.
a. Freedom of Action
b. Intelligence MU Question:
c. Fault or negligence TAU What was the intention of Ah Chong in killing that man?
MU Answer:
Question: What do you mean by voluntary act in felony? The intention was lawful – the act in self-defense, to protect his life and limb.
TAU
Answer: It is an act which is free, intelligent and intentional. When you
remove one of these elements, the act ceases to be voluntary. There might be MU
intelligent and intent, but if there is no freedom, the act ceases to be voluntary. TAU Question:
MU Was he careless? Did he just immediately stab the person when the latter
Example: enterd the room?
Article 12 – one who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force, one TAU Answer:
who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater MU No, in fact Ah Chong asked who he was and even gave him warnings not ot
injury. Under these two circumstances, the offender acts with intelligence and TAU enter the room or else Ah Chong would kill him. Moreover, it was dark, so
intent, but if there is no freedom of action, as he is only forced, threatened or how can he determine the intruder was his roommate or not. In other words,
MU
intimidated to commit the crime. So, he is exempt from criminal liability the element of intent and culpa were all negated.
because the act ceases to be voluntary. There is Latin maxim: actus me TAU
unvito, factus non est meus actus. As it is done against my will, it is not my MU That is the classic example of mistake of fact. And the Latin maxim there is
act. TAU Actus no facit reum nist mens sit rae. The act is not criminal when the mind
is not criminal.
If there is freedom, there is intent but no intelligence – it has same effect. The MU
act ceases to be voluntary. For example: Article 12 – an imbecile or insane TAU Another maxim Ignirantia facti excusat (mistake of fact is an excuse) is not
person; a minor under 9 years of age. MU to be confused with the Ignorantia legis non excusat. While ignorance of the
law excuses no one from compliance therewith, ignorance or mistake of fact
Suppose there is freedom, there is intelligence, but there is no intent. What
TAU relieves the accused from criminal liability.
happens is that person is again free from criminal liability. It is true that MU
criminal intent is presumed, but such presumption is not conclusive, it is TAU
rebuttable. PEOPLE vs. OANIS
MU
76 PHIL 257
US vs. AH CHONG TAU
MU Facts: Chief of Polis Oanis and his co-accused, Corporal Galanta were under
35 PHIL 488 instructions to arrest one Balagtas, a notorious criminal and escaped convict,
TAU and if overpowered to get him dead or alive. Proceeding to the suspected
Facts: MUT house, they went into a room and seeing a man sleeping with his back towards
Ah Chong was a cook in Fort McKinley. He was afraid of bad elements. One AU the door. The victimturned out to be an innocent man, Tecson, and not the
evening before going to bed, he locked himself in his room by placing a chair wanted criminal.
MU
against the door. He called out twice, “Who is there?” but received no answer.
Fearing that the intruder is a robber, he leaped from his bed and called out TAU During the trail, the accused invoke the Ah Chong case.
again “if you will enter my room, I will kill you!” But at that precise moment, MU
he was struck by the cahir that had been placed against the door, and believing Held: Both accused are guilty of murder. The Ah Chong case does not apply
that he was being attacked, he seized a kitchen knife and struck and fatally here. The first requisite of fact is lacking – that the act done would have been
TAU
wounded the intruder turned out to be his roommate. lawful had the facts been as the accused believed them to be. Assuming it was
MU the wanted criminal that they were ordered to apprehend, do they have the
Held: TAU authority under the law to shoot him down? Even if they invoke the mitigating
Ah Chong is not liable for the death of his roommate because of mistake in MU circmstance of fulfillment of duty, it will not be appreciated in their favor
fact. because although they are authorized to use force in order to affect the arrest,
the law says, reasonable force. It was not necessary for them to shoot him
Mistake of Fact – is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the person who down immediately. Even hardened criminals, if they can be caught without
caused injury to another. He is not, however, criminally liable because he did killing them, then there is no need to shoot them to death.
not act with criminal intent.
Question: Was there fault or negligence on their part?

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 8 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Answer: Of course! They did not even bother to discover his identity – MU Question: Is there anything wrong when a person drinks a bottle of beer
whether the guy was the right person. They just started shooting him. So, that TAU during election day?
is the difference between these two cases. Answer: None, it becomes a crime because the law says so. It says one drink
MU
on any other day, but not on Election Day.
While it is true that culpable felony, intent is not necessary, however, the law TAU
still requires voluntariness on the part of the offender in a culpable felony. The MU Question: Why are people prohibited from drinking on election day?
element being still freedom, intelligence and negligence. So, it is not correct TAU Answer: People are prohibited from drinking on election day because this
to say that in reckless imprudence case, the act is not voluntary. may lead to more violence, added to electoral terrorism, on that day. Suppose
MU B drinks on Election Day, but he has no intention of committing acts of
If you are reckless, you ask yourself, were you forced to be reckless? Did TAU violence or terrorism. Meaning, he has no criminal intent to terrorize voters.
somebody compel you to perform a negligent act? If there is none, then there MU This is immaterial. The law says that the above act is violation. The only issue
is freedom. Were you crazy or out of mind when you committed the crime? If is whether or not the law was violated. That is all.
TAU
you were not, then there is still intelligence. In other words, even culpable
felonies, the elements of voluntariness are still there. MU
TAU Art. 4. Criminal liability. — Criminal liability shall be
Question: How does Article 365 define imprudence? MU incurred:
Answer: Article 365 defines reckless imprudence as voluntarily but without
malice in doing or failing to do an act. So, there, you will see that in reckless TAU
1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although
imprudence cases, there is no dolo, but still the act must be voluntary. MU the wrongful act done be different from that which he
TAU intended.
Question: Can a person be held criminally liable under Philippine law even if 2. By any person performing an act which would be an
there is no criminal intent on his part? MU
Answer: Yes: TAU offense against persons or property, were it not for the
1. When the felony is classified as culpable in nature, like reckless MU inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an
imprudence; and
TAU account of the employment of inadequate or
2. If the crime for which he is caused is classified as a crime malum ineffectual means.
prohibitum. MU
TAU
MALA IN SE vs. MALA PROHIBITA MU
TAU
MALA IN SE MALA PROHIBITA Question: Suppose a person commits felony and the wrongful act done is
MU
precisely what he intended. For example, B kills A. B aimed his gun towards
TAU A and shoots him, B’s intent was to kill A, and A die. Does he incur criminal
Crimes so serious in their Violations of mere rules of
effects to society as to convenience designed to MU liability?
TAU Answer: Of course! But this is not mentioned in Article 4 which says “the
call for unanimous secure a more orderly
wrongful act done be different from which he intended. Here, it was really the
condemnation to its regulation of the affairs of MU intention of B to kill A.
members. society.
TAU
MU Question; But why is B liable when it is not covered by Article 4?
Criminal intent is Criminal intent is Answer: Article 4 enumerates only the EXTRAORDINARY manner of
TAU
necessary. immaterial because the committing a crime or incurring criminal liability. The ordinary way is to
only inquiry is: has the law MU commit a felony and the wrongful act done was precisely what you intended.
been violated? TAU But the wrongful act is different from which he intended, that is not normal.
MU That does not happen everyday. That is why it is extraordinary, and that is
what Article 4 covers. One incurs criminal liability even if his intention is
Generally, refers to those Generally, refers to acts or TAU different from what actually happened.
act or omission punished omissions made criminal MU
by the RPC. by special laws. You will notice that based on that definition, the first paragraph of Article 4
TAU applies only to felonies by act. It cannot apply to felonies by omission because
the wrongful act had done be different from that which he intended. So, there
Example of crimes mala in se are murder, homicide, robbery or rape. They MU was really intent. Therefore, it is also limited to intentional felonies. It has no
are not only crimes under our laws, but they go against natural law, the basis TAU application to culpable felonies.
commandments of God. Even without knowing the law, you conscience MUT
would tell you that there is something wrong with these crimes. They are Question: How can a person commit a felony and the wrongful act done is
wrong per se. Even without the RPC, the human conscience will tell us that AU different from that which he intended?
there is something wrong when a person kill, robs or rapes somebody. With or MU Answer: There are three situations contemplated by Article 4 (1):
without the RPC, society could not accept these evils. TAU 1. Error in personae – error in identity
MU 2. Aberration ictus – mistake in blow
However, these are also crimes which are NOT inherently wrong – mala 3. Praeter Intentionem – the result exceeded the intention.
prohibita. They are wrong only because they are prohibited. They are
violations of mere rules of convenience enacted by the state for the proper and TAU Error in Personae
orderly administration of society. Examples of these are illegal possession of MU A wants to kill B so, he decided to ambush B in the dark. One night, A waited
firearms, violations of traffic rules. for B, when he thought he saw B coming, A attacked and killed B. Later on, A
TAU
found out that the person he attacked was not actually B, but X. he killed the
Question: Is there anything inherently immoral when a person brings a gun MU wrong guy. Of course, A will be prosecuted for death of X, and b is very
with him? much alive. This is A’s defense: he should not be liable for the death of X
Answer: One may posses or own a firearm without license because the law because he (A) did not intended to kill X. He just misidentified the victim.
says so. It is wrong because it is prohibited, not because it is immoral.
Question: Is that a valid defense?

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 9 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Answer: Of course not! A is still liable for the death of X because although MU died. Accused said that the death of B was not due to his fault. But the court
there was a mistake identity of the victim, he still had the intention to kill. TAU still held the accused liable for the death of B.
MU
Aberratio Ictus TAU US vs. MARASIGAN
This is not mistake in identity, but a mistake in the blow. For example, A MU 27 Phil 504
wanted to kill B. A drew his gun, pointed to B and fired at him. But the bullet TAU
did not hit B. Instead, the bullet hi X, killing the latter. Prosecuted for the MU Facts: The victim here was stabbed. Because of his refusal to submit to
death of X. A’s defense is that X was not the intended victim. medical treatment, the wound got infected, and the injury became worse.
TAU
Slight physical injuries became serious physical injuries. The accused was
Question: MU charged with serious physical injuries. Accused claimed he should be liable
Is A liable for the death of X, although he (A) did not even intended to kill TAU for slight physical injuries, because the victim’s serious physical injury arose
him? from his refusal to see the doctor.
Answer:
MU
Yes. That defense will not hold any water. A is liable for the felony although TAU Issue: Is the accused liable for serious physical injuries?
it was not the one he intended. MU
TAU Held: Yes, the accused is still liable for the serious physical injuries inflicted
So in error in personae, there is a correct aim but the actual victim turned out upon the victim although it was not intended. The victim was not obliged to
to be a person different from the intended victim. In aberration ictus, on the MU submit to medical treatment to relieve the accused from the natural and
other hand, because of faulty aim, the intended victim is not the person hit. TAU ordinary results of the crime. It was his voluntary act, which disabled the
MU victim, and he must abide by the consequences resulting therefrom.
TAU
Praeter Intentionem
The result exceeded the intention. MU
TAU PEOPLE vs. MARTIN
MU
98 Phil 18
PEOPLE vs. CAGOCO TAU The husband strangled his wife who was then suffering from heart disease.
58 Phil 524 MU While being strangled by the husband, the wife suffered a heart attack, which
eventually caused her death. So, the cause of his wife’s death was not
Facts: The accused had the intention to inflict physical injuries upon the TAU suffocation but heart attack. The court held that the husband is still liable for
person of B. Approaching B, accused hit him with his fist, because of the first MU the death of his wife. (Note: Parricide)
blow, B fell on the floor. B’s head hit the rock. It fractured his skull and thus TAU
caused his death. A had no intention of killing B. His intention was merely to
MU
inflict upon B physical injuries. But B died.
TAU A person, committing a felony, is liable for the direct, logical
Issue: Is A liable for homicide although his intended felony was only physical MU and natural consequences of his criminal act.
injuries? TAU
In other words, the principle which the Supreme Court applied is the so –
Held: A is liable for homicide, although his intention was merely to inflict MU called “doctrine of proximate cause”, and is defined as that cause which in
upon B, physical injuries. It is conceded that under Article 13, he is entitled to TAU the natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening
the mitigating circumstance that the offended did not intend to commit so MU cause, results in a particular felony, without which the felony would not have
grave a wrong as that committed. But that is beside the point. The issue here is resulted.
whether the crime he committed is homicide or only slight physical injuries.
TAU
MU Question: In the case of Cagoco, the victim did not died because of the
TAU punch. The victim died because his head hit the piece of rock. Would you say
MU that the hitting of his head on the rock which caused his death was something
absolutely foreign, something which broke the relation between cause and
effect, between the punching and the death?
TAU Answer: No. That is not efficient intervening cause. The immediate cause of
US vs. VALDEZ MU death was the fractured skull, but the punching was the proximate cause based
41 Phil 497 TAU on the logic that without the punching, there is no falling down. Without the
MUT falling down, there is no head hitting a piece of rock, and if that did not
Facts: The accused chased the victim with a knife causing the victim to panic happen, there will be no death. So, everything is traceable to the original
AU criminal act.
and run. The latter jumped into the sea and eventually was drowned.
MU
Issue: Is the accused liable for the drowning of the victim? TAU So, the principle laid down by the Supreme Court is: “He who is the cause of
the cause is the cause of the evil caused”. The cause of death is actually the
MU cause of the evil caused.
Held: Yes, although the drowning was not intended.
TAU In other words, the effect is death, immediate cause – the fractured skull,
MU proximate case – punching. So, the immediate cause of death was the
PEOPLE vs. QUIAMSON
fractured skull is the proximate cause of death.
62 Phil 162 TAU
MU Illustration:
The accused inflicted wounds upon B. The accused stabbed B, but B was Punch victim head hits rock victim dies
brought to the hospital, so he was saved. In the hospital, there were many (proximate cause) (fractured skull) effect
instruments attached to him. The victim was restless, while in the hospital immediate cause
bed. Then he started removing the bandages on his wounds. Eventually, B
Question: What do you mean by efficient intervening cause?

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 10 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Answer: An efficient intervening cause is something absolutely foreign and MU So, the proximate cause of the victim’s death was not the wounding, but the
totally unexpected which intervened and which break the relation of cause TAU tetanus, because the wounding was but a remote cause. This is one of the few
and effect, between the original felonious act and the result. cases where the accused was not held liable for the resulting infection. The
MU
Supreme Court here did not apply paragraph 1 of Article 4 but applied the
Generally, infections are all considered as a continuation or the natural effects TAU doctrine of remote cause, rather that proximate cause. As a matter of fact, in
of what happened to the victim. They are not efficient intervening cause. MU the Urbano case, the Supreme Court seems to be “dissenting” medical
TAU wounds. That case become more of medical textbook for tetanus, that a
The law says that one is not liable if there are efficient intervening causes. Supreme Court decision in Martin.
Meaning, if there is something which happened in between which is MU
absolutely foreign between the victim’s death and the original act, there is a TAU
break in the relation of cause and effect, then one is liable only up to that MU
PEOPLE vs. PALALON
point. Beyond that, no more.
TAU 49 Phil 177
Take note that the Supreme Court says that one is liable for all the direct, MU
logical and natural consequences of his criminal act. The Supreme Court TAU Facts: The accused slapped a boy. The victim subsequently developed a fever
never said that he is liable for all possible and probable consequences of his MU due to malaria. Then the boy died. Accused was charged with homicide.
act.
TAU Issue: WoN malaria is efficient intervening cause for which the accused
There are some cases where the factor that intervened between the criminal MU should be held liable for the death of the boy.
act and the resulting injury was considered as an efficient intervening cause, TAU
something totally un expected, something absolutely foreign which broke the Held: The slapping or punching could have caused malaria. Malaria
relation of cause and effect between the original act and the resulting injury. MU caused the boy’s death. But malaria is caused by mosquito bites. The
So, when you are liable for a felony, you are liable up to a certain point. TAU intervention of malaria here was an efficient intervening cause, which broke
MU the relation of cause and effect between the slapping and the death. It was
something foreign or remote. It had nothing to do with the original act. It is
TAU not the direct, natural, logical consequences of the act of the accused.
MU
TAU Take note of the premises of paragraph 1 of Article 4. The law is very clear: a
person is committing a felony although the wrongful act done be different
US vs. DE LOS SANTOS MU from that which eh intended. So, this does not apply to felon by omission.
TAU
Facts: The accused here inflicted a wound upon him, which was not really
Like for example, in one case, the mere act of punching is already intended. In
very serious. It was the type that would heal in one week or less. So, the crime MU
the case of Marasigan, the act of wounding the victim is already a felony. In
is slight physical injuries. But the victim said that he wanted to hold the TAU
the case of Martin, where he straggled his wife, that is already a felony,
accused liable for a more serious crime. What the victim did was to MU
although the cause of her death is heart attack. That is started with felony. But
contaminate his wound, deliberately causing it to be infected. The wound
worsened.
TAU if one is not committing a felony, he is NOT liable for the direct, natural, and
logical consequences of is act.
Held: The victim’s act of deliberately aggravating or worsening his wound MU
was considered as an efficient intervening cause. The accused, here should be TAU
Question: A wanted to play a joke with his friend. Since, this is where he
liable only for slight physical injuries not for serious physical injuries, which MU
passed every night, A waited to the friend. When he reached the place, A
is caused by the infection no longer in normal circumstances. It is because of
TAU surprised him. The friend died due to heart attack. Is A liable for the friend’s
the bad faith on the part of the victim himself.
death on the theory of paragraph 1, although the wrongful act done be
MU
different from that which he intended? Was A committing a felony when he
Normally, jurisprudence would say that the infections are efficient intervening TAU
played a joked on his friend?
causes, except in this case of De los Santos, where it was caused deliberately.
MU Answer: No, A is not liable for the death of is friend. If there was a felony,
yes he is liable. But is there a law in the Philippines that prohibits playing a
There is also another unique case decided by the Supreme Court where the TAU
joke on somebody/ None. Since A here was not committing a felony when he
infection was considered an efficient intervening cause. There are some queer MU
played a joke on his friend, then he is not liable for his friend’s death. It could
cases where the Supreme Court went outside the normal pattern. Because is
be something unexpected and tragic. But it is not enough to make a person
we follow the general pattern, when a person injures another and the victim
suffers an infection maybe because of carelessness or poor medical
TAU criminally liable. There is no basis.
attendance, but not intentional, the accused should be held answerable for MU
everything. That is his burden. TAU
MUT
URBANO vs. IAC AU By any person performing an act which would be an offense
157 SCRA 1 MU against persons or property, were it not for the inherent
TAU impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the
Facts: The accused wounded the victim who was a farmer. Despite the MU employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.
wound, the farmer continued working hard in the field. After several days or
weeks, the wound was infected with tetanus. So, the victim dies. This is known as the concept of “Impossible Crime”.
TAU
Issue: WON tetanus can be considered as an efficient intervening cause of the MU Question: Define Impossible Crime.
victim’s death for which the accused could be held liable. TAU Answer: An impossible crime is a crime committed by a person who
MU performs an act, which would be an offense against the persons or property,
Held: There is a like hood that the wound was but the remote cause, and its were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on the
subsequent infection for failure to take necessary precautions with tetanus account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.
may have been the proximate cause of the victim’s death, with which the
accused has nothing to do. Note: There is no such thing as impossible crime by omission.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 11 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Question: Why is it that in paragraph 2, the Penal Code says, “performing an MU I want to steal your fountain pen. That pen is similar to the pen that I lost. I
act”, whereas paragraph 1 says, “committing a felony”. TAU cannot buy another one, I steal yours. Upon looking at the pen, I realize that it
Answer: Precisely because in paragraph 2 there is no known felony. Unlike in is mine, it is the fountain pen that I lost.
MU
paragraph 1 where felony is defined in the RPC, Book II; but, he performed an
act which would have been an offense against persons or property. TAU Question: Did I commit the crime of theft?
MU Answer: No, there is legal impossibility. One of the elements of theft is that
Meaning, the act should have been a crime against person or property but it TAU the personal taken by the offender belongs to another. If it belongs to you, it
did not turn out to be that way because of the inherent impossibility of its cannot be theft. It is impossible for the offender to be at the same time the
accomplishment or on the account of the employment of inadequate or MU victim of his own act. One cannot steal from himself.
ineffectual means. TAU
MU Question: Is there a crime committed?
PEOPLE vs. BALMORES Answer: Yes, an impossible crime.
TAU
86 Phil 493 MU Inadequate Means
Facts: This is about a crime of somebody trying to counterfeit a currency TAU For example, I placed a small quantity of poison in the food of somebody. He
note. He put a chemical on the note so that he could get an impression. The MU took the food but he did not die because of the dosage that I put in the food as
trouble was that it was not done properly. All the markings on the face of the TAU insufficient to kill a person. I am liable for committing an impossible crime.
forged bill were inverted. It looked like a genuine bill with the exception of
MU Question: For instance, the poison that I placed in the food was adequate but I
the inverted letters. He was charged with counterfeiting and forgery.
TAU did not know that the person was especially immune from the chemical that I
Held: No, it was not counterfeiting or forgery. Counterfeiting or forgery MU used. So, he did not die despite the sufficient amount of poison. Did I commit
means an exact reproduction of what the genuine currency looks like. This is TAU an impossible crime?
not an exact reproduction of the original for everything is inverted. Therefore, Answer: No, that would be more of a frustrated murder. The offender
he is not guilty of counterfeiting, but he is guilty of an impossible crime MU performed all the acts of execution, which would produce a felony as a
because of the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on the account TAU consequence, but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. independent of the will of the perpetrator. So, it is frustrated murder under
MU
Article 6, rather than an impossible crime under Article 4 paragraph 2.
But there is something wrong with the decision. Counterfeiting or forgery is
TAU
not a crime against person or property. It is a crime against public interest. MU
The concept of impossible crime is limited only to crimes, which would have TAU Ineffectual Means
been ended as crimes against persons or property. If we stick to the law, the MU For example, I placed something in your office believing that it was poison,
correct ruling would be that he neither committed any crime nor an impossible but actually it was salt or sugar. You could not have been killed because it was
crime. TAU not poison. But because I believed that I could have killed you were it not for
MU the ineffectual means, Iam liable for impossible crime.
Normally, you commit a crime against person. But you can also commit a TAU
crime against property. Examples are the following: robbery, theft, etc.
Agaisnt persons: murder, homicide, physical injuries, etc. MU
The must be criminal intent on the part of the offender.
TAU
Question: Are all impossible attempts to commit a crime punishable? MU In other words, he believed he was committing a crime at that moment.
Meaning, when you committed an act which turned out not to be an offense of
TAU
an inherent impossibility, are you liable? Suppose, I want to kill Dao while he is asleep in is room. I go to Dao’s room
Answer: No, in order to be considered an impossible crime, it would have MU and see him ling in bed. I approach him, and I notice that he is not moving. I
been an offense against persons or property. So, when you perform an act TAU touch him; he is already dead! So, I said: “Shit! Why do you have to die
which would be an offense against chastity, against honor, or against public MU before I kill you?!” So, I just stab his body, knowing anyway he is already
interest, that is not covered by paragraph 2 of Article 4 because of the special dead.
hatred by the RPC for crimes against persons and property. TAU
MU Question: Am I liable for impossible crime?
Answer: No, because there is not intent to kill. It is different when you think
Crimes Against Persons TAU you are killing him when actually he is already dead.
MU
Suppose, you want to kill Lei and you plan to stab him in his room in the A person could be liable for an impossible crime only if the
middle of the night while he is sleeping. So, you go to his room, you see him TAU
act does not fall under any specific provision of the RPC.
lying, then, you start stabbing him to death, but without knowing that he is MUT
already dead because one or two hours earlier he died in sleep. AU
Impossible crime is the last resort.
MU
Question: Are you liable for murder?
Answer: No, murder is impossible because you cannot kill somebody who is TAU A, who knew that B owned and always carried a watch, decided to rob B of
already dead. There is a physical impossibility; you cannot kill a cadaver. So, MU said watch. When A met B for that purpose, B did not have the watch because
you did not commit murder. But had he been alive, it would have been he forget to carry it with him. Thinking that B had watch wit him, A pointed
murder. his gun at him and asked for the watch. Finding that B did not have the watch,
TAU
A allowed to go without further molestation.
Question: What crime did you commit? MU
Answer: You committed an impossible crime because of the physical TAU Question: Is he liable for an impossible crime because it was impossible for
impossibility of killing 2somebody who is dead. That is Article 4, paragraph MU him to take something, which is not there?
2. Answer: No, that is not an impossible crime that is attempted robbery. It
would fit the definition of an attempted robbery better than the definition of an
impossible crime. And the mere act of placing or poking a gun at somebody is
Crimes Against Property by itself already a felony. So, it falls under a specific provision of the RPC,
then, it should not be treated as an impossible crime.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 12 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Question: What is the basis for impossible crime doctrine? Why should a MU
person be held liable when actually he did not commit any crime? TAU
Answer: The principle here is objectively he is not criminal, but subjectively Question: What does the first paragraph of Article 5 mean? Suppose a person
MU
he is a criminal. He thought he was committing a crime. So, he should be is accused in court criminally and it turned out that the act is not a crime.
punished for that. In the positivist thinking, he is socially dangerous person, TAU Meaning, there is no law that penalizes this act. What should the court do?
be is criminally minded. MU Answer: The law says that the court should render the proper decision.
TAU
Question: Why are we talking about the person? Didn’t we say that the RPC Question: What is the proper decision?
is based on the Classical Theory of criminal law, where we are looking at the MU Answer: Acquit. How can you convict a person when there is no existing
effect rather than the person? Is this not a violation of the classical theory of TAU crime? Nullum Crimen, Nulla Peona Sine Lege. But the court should inform
criminal law? MU the executive branch that it should recommend passage of the law.
Answer: No, Article 4 (2) of the RPC is one of the few principles, which is Sometimes, it happens that you commit an act which appears to be immoral
TAU
positivist-oriented. Our RPC is mainly based on the Classical Theory, but and illegal, but there is no governing law. So, you now recommend that a new
there are few positivist-oriented provisions and one of them is the impossible MU law be passed. This is to cover the loophole in the law.
crime concept, under Article 4 (2) of the RPC. TAU
MU But the second paragraph states the opposite situation. If a person is found
Question: What is the penalty to be imposed on impossible crime? Can we guilty of a crime – there is no question about it; there is no question that he is
penalize the offender for murder, homicide, robbery, etc – the crime that he TAU liable – and this is the proper penalty. This must still be imposed on the
would have committed? MU convict even though it is excessive. Why excessive? It is excessive because of
Answer: Of course not! He cannot be penalized for the crime, which he TAU some special circumstances. Normally, it is not excessive but because of some
would have committed precisely because he did not commit the crime. circumstances, it becomes one. But there is nothing that the judge can do. He
MU still must impose it but he must recommend executive clemency. That is for
Question: What crime did he commit? TAU the President to grant. The judge has no power to pardon. The judge has no
Answer: He committed an impossible crime. MU power to commute or to grant conditional pardon. The executive branch must
take over but as a judge, he has no other choice but to apply the law.
TAU
Question: What then is the penalty for impossible crime?
Answer: Article 59 of the RPC. Penalty to be imposed in case of failure to MU
commit the crime because the means employed or the aims sought are TAU PEOPLE vs. OREFON
impossible. – When the person intending to commit an offense has already MU
performed the acts for the execution of the same but nevertheless the crime Facts: A girl was accused of parricide for killing her own father. The
was not produced by reason of the fact that the act intended was by its nature TAU prescribed penalty for parricide is reclusion perpetua to death. That is a
one of impossible accomplishment or because the means employed by such MU heinous crime. But during the trial, based on the evidence, it came out that the
person are essentially inadequate to produce the result desired by him, the TAU accused killed her own father because she could no longer withstand what her
court, having in mind the social danger and the degree of criminality shown father was doing to her. She was raped from time to time (incestuous rape).
MU
by the offender, shall impose upon him the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine So, she killed her own father. Well, for killing the father se still committed
from 200 to 500 pesos. TAU parricide. There is no exception there and the penalty is reclusion perpetua to
MU death. That cannot be lowered by any mitigating circumstances. So, the judge
TAU has no choice but to sentence her to perpetua. But based on the circumstances
MU of the case, there is something exceptional which makes the penalty excessive.
In other words, the court also considers the feeling of the girl.
Art. 5. Duty of the court in connection with acts which TAU
should be repressed but which are not covered by the MU Held: The trial court is ordered to sentence her to perpetual, but in the
law, and in cases of excessive penalties. — Whenever a TAU decision, recommended executive clemency. The executive branch will take
that into consideration.
court has knowledge of any act which it may deem MU
proper to repress and which is not punishable by law, it TAU This happened very recently. In the case handed by Judge Ocampo, in
shall render the proper decision, and shall report to the MU beautiful Cebu. He convicted the killers of the Chiong sisters, finding them
Chief Executive, through the Department of Justice, guilty beyond reasonable doubt, but he imposed the penalty or reclusion
perpetua, when there is no question that the applicable penalty is death. The
the reasons which induce the court to believe that said TAU judge has applied his own norm of morality, or his own concept of death
act should be made the subject of legislation. MU penalty. The law is the law for all its seeming harshness. We, as court of
In the same way, the court shall submit to the Chief TAU judges, have to apple the law regardless of personal beliefs and compassion.
Executive, through the Department of Justice, such Dura lex sed lex.
MUT
statement as may be deemed proper, without AU
suspending the execution of the sentence, when a strict MU
enforcement of the provisions of this Code would result TAU PEOPLE vs. VILLORENTE
in the imposition of a clearly excessive penalty, taking MU
into consideration the degree of malice and the injury Facts: The case is one for forcible abduction with rape filed against Villorente
caused by the offense. TAU and his mother. Why was the mother included as co-accused? This Villorente
MU was in love with a certain girl but he doesn’t know how to court a girl. The
mother pitied her son and decided to abduct the girl and have her son raped
TAU her. The mother, in fact, cooperated with her son and both of them were
MU sentenced to reclusion perpetua. The case reached the Supreme Court.

Held: The penalty is excessive for Teresita Villorente. Unschooled like her
son, she appears to have acquiesced with Charlie on account of her maternal
concern. She must have agonized with Charlie who did not know how to court
the girl of his dreams. Not knowing how to court Jonah. Charlie looks her

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 13 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
from a distance until he could no longer old his desire and with the complicit MU After the preparatory acts comes the ACTS OF EXECUTION. Where a
of his mother, abducted and raped her. It is , therefore, necessary that under TAU person now proceeds to implement his plan. He now executes the commission
the provision of Article 5 of the Revised Penal Code, the attention of the of the act and there are three possibilities, which RPC calls as the attempted,
MU
President should be called to the mother. frustrated and consummated or mere frustrated or attempted is already
TAU punishable. So, we are concern here because these are all punishable already.
Meaning, sometimes, a mother will go out of her way just to help her child. Of MU
course, you cannot condone that. She still committed a crime because she TAU
wanted her son to be happy. Art. 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted
MU felonies. — Consummated felonies as well as those
How a felony develops TAU which are frustrated and attempted, are punishable.
MENTAL PROCESS/INTERNAL Not Punishable MU A felony is consummated when all the elements
ACTS TAU necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
EXTERNAL/PHYSICAL ACTS MU present; and it is frustrated when the offender
a. Preparatory Acts Gen. Rule: Not Punishable
Exception: If the RPC penalize it. TAU performs all the acts of execution which would
Example: Art. 304 (Possession of MU produce the felony as a consequence but which,
Picklocks and false keys) TAU nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
MU independent of the will of the perpetrator.
b. Acts of Execution TAU There is an attempt when the offender commences the
Attempted Punishable MU commission of a felony directly or over acts, and does
Frustrated
Consummated
TAU not perform all the acts of execution which should
MU produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident
TAU other than this own spontaneous desistance.
Normally, as outlined in some books, a crime usually starts with a person MU
arriving at the decision to commit a crime and then he plans it out. We call
that the mental process or some authors call them internal acts. Although the TAU
word internal acts does not seem to be accurate in criminal law, when we say MU
“act” as defined in Article 3, it is physical action, a moving of the muscle. If it TAU
is a mental process , it cannot be an act but we will just use the word act
MU
loosely.
TAU
At this stage, this is still beyond the scope of criminal law. No one can charge MU
you for thinking of committing a crime. That is a problem, which should be TAU
solved by the person with his spiritual director. But it is not the concern of the Attempted Stage:
law. So if you want to murder your enemies, you just imagine. If you want to MU
rape beautiful girls, you just imagine. That is beyond the scope of criminal TAU There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of felony
law. MU directly by overt act. Since the law says by overt acts, the conclusion is: In
felony by omission, there is no attempted stage. So, there is no such thing as
However, usually after the decision and the planning, that is followed by
TAU attempted stage in a felony by omission because attempted stage applies only
external acts, the physical activity. So, the mental process will now be MU to felony “by act”.
followed by external or physical acts. But external acts should be divided into TAU
two. First, are the Preparatory Acts. The Supreme Court laid down the rule in order to convict a person for an
MU attempted felony; the overt act must have a direct relation to the felony for
Like for example, you want to poison your enemy, you will buy poison. If you TAU which he is charged. There must be a direct relation between the overt act and
want to stab him, you buy knife ad sharpen it. If you want to shoot him, you MU the elements of the felony for which he is charged.
get a gun and practice shooting. Those are preparations.
TAU
Question: Are they punishable? PEOPLE vs. LAMAHANG
Answer: The general rule is No. The act of buying poison is not the act of MU 61 Phil 707
poisoning the victim. The act of sharpening a knife is not the act of stabbing. TAU
Except when the law penalizes such preparatory acts. MUT Facts: One night, a group of policemen, while patrolling on neighborhood,
AU saw a figure in the dark side inside the house. They stopped and observed
Preparatory external acts of preparation for the commission MU what the guy was doing. The guy did not know that the group of policemen
of a felony are not punishable, except when the law TAU patrolling watched him. While the guy was doing, he tried to remove a portion
of the wall. He was trying to create an opening to enter the house. When he
specifically provides penalty for such preparatory acts. MU was able to create an opening, and the accused was already in the act of
entering the house in the middle of the night, that was the time when the
The best example is Article 304 of the RPC, which penalizes the crime known policemen caught him. And for that he was charged for the crime of attempted
as possession of picklocks and similar tools. Picklocks and similar tools are TAU robbery. Meaning, he commenced the commission of robbery by overt acts by
usually objects of gadgets, which are owned by robbers. They use it to open MU trying to enter the house in the middle of the night. Although he did not
doors, windows, etc. TAU succeed because he was caught.
MU
But actually, the possession of a false key or a picklock is not the actual act of Held: There was no attempted robbery. There is no connection between what
robbery. It is only in preparation of robbery. Normally, it should not be he was doing and the elements of robbery. Why? How do you commit
punishable but the trouble is Article 304 says mere possession of these robbery? Robbery is committed by taking personal property belonging to
objects, which are preparatory to the crime of robbery with force uon things, somebody. But here, he has not yet commenced the act of taking something.
is also possible. They caught him in the act of entering, but robbery is not committed by
entering but by taking. So there is no connection between the act and the

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 14 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
crime for which he is charged. For they know, once he is already inside the MU within his means to desist. If he desists, he is not liable. But if he did not
house, his intention might to rape or kill somebody. So, it was premature to TAU proceed not because of his desistance but because of cause or accident other
charge hi with attempted robbery. than is desistance, he is liable for an attempted felony. But if reaches the
MU
subjective stage where he can no longer desist, then, he has reached either the
However, one thing is clear. He was in the act of entering a house in the TAU frustrated stage or consummated stage, depending on whether the crime is
middle of the night, while all the occupants were all asleep. And when one MU accomplished or not. He has gone beyong the stage of attempted felony.
enters a house against the will of the occupants, he commits the crime of TAU
trespass to dwelling. So, the crime he has committed is attempted trespass to
dwelling, not attempted robbery. MU
Frustrated Stage
TAU Question: How does the law define a frustrated felony?
In attempted felony, the offender here had started to commit felony. But the MU Answer: In a frustrated felony, the offender has performed all the acts of
trouble is, he did not finish. He was halfway though or less than halfway execution which would produce a felony as a consequence but which,
TAU
through, but he did not continue because he failed to perform all the acts of nevertheless, do not produce it by reason or causes independent of the will of
execution which would produce the felony. Why? Because of a cause or MU the perpetrator.
because of an accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. TAU
MU Question: Distinguish attempted stage from frustrated stage.
TAU Answer: In attempted stage, the offender has not performed all the acts of
execution, which would produce the felony as a consequence; whereas, in
MU frustrated stage, the offender has performed all the acts of execution, which
Cause TAU would produce the felony as a consequence.
Theft, pick pocket. He was trying to pick pocket of the victim. He was trying MU
to lift the wallet inside the pocket or the bag. The owner of the wallet detected Sometimes, these two stages are difficult to distinguish. Even the Supreme
it, and held the hands of the thief. So, he failed to take the wallet. There was TAU Court in some old decisions admitted its difficulty. The line that divides the
the act of taking but he failed to complete the possession of the wallet. The MU two stages seems to be very thin. The best illustration of determining the stage
reason here why he failed to perform all the acts of execution was because the TAU of a crime is in crime against person which involve an attempt to kill –
owner prevented him. That is a cause other than is own spontaneous attempted or frustrated murder or homicide. But there are some crimes, which
MU
desistance. So, attempted theft. show very unclear differences, like rape, arson, etc.
TAU
MU
Accident TAU PEOPLE vs. BORINAGA
I want to kill A. I aim the gun. I fired, but the gun jammed. It did not explode. MU 55 Phil 433
So, with that I failed to kill the victim. Well, when I pointed my gun to the
victim, I have already commenced the act of trying to kill. But the trouble is it TAU
Facts: The accused, with intent to kill, approached the victim from
did not explode. The jamming of the gun was not consummated, not because MU
behind. The victim was sitting on the chair. The accused had a very long
the offender stopped from proceeding, but because of something else. TAU dagger. There was treachery here. He plunged the dagger towards the back of
MU the victim but the dagger hit the wooden frame of the chair. He dagger was
Other than your own spontaneous desistance imbedded; the victim was thrown forward because it was a very powerful
If a person commences the commission of a felony, but did not complete it TAU blow. There was no injury to the victim because the dagger hit the wood.
because of his own spontaneous desistance, according to Viada, there is no MU
criminal liability. He is not even guilty of attempted felony on the theory that TAU Issue: Whether the felony was an attempted murder or frustrated murder.
a person who is already on the verge of committing a crime but desists or
MU
decides not to pursue because his conscience bothers him should not be Held: The crime was frustrated murder because the offender has
penalized. In fact, he should be rewarded for hearkening to his conscience. TAU performed all the acts of execution which would have produce the murder or
MU death of the victim as a consequence but which, nevertheless, did not produce
Question: Suppose, A would like to kill Z. As a matter of fact, he already TAU the death of the victim because of a cause independent of the will of the
commenced the commission of the felony but he realized that there were offender, and this cause is the dagger hitting the wooden frame rather than the
many eyewitnesses. So, he desisted. Can he be liable? MU
back of the victim.
Answer: Viada says, never mind what is the motive for not continuing. What
is important is that he did not continue with the crime; he desisted voluntarily. TAU Note: It is attempted murder. It cannot be frustrated because the offender has
Viada does not care whether his desistance was based on a noble reason, MU not performed all the acts of execution. How can you kill a person unless you
remorse, or out of fear of being caught. What is important is his desistance. hit him? The victim was not even hit. (Dissenting Opinion)
When he tries again that is another story. But for the moment, since he TAU
desisted, he would not be liable. MUT So, unless you hit the victim, you have not performed all the acts of execution,
AU which would produce the death of the victim as a consequence. The death of
But take note that the desistance must come before the consummation of the the victim cannot be produced unless you hit him first and he sustains wound
MU
crime. You cannot desist when all the acts of execution are already that is sufficient to kill, one that is fatal.
accomplished. TAU
MU However, according to the majority, the wooden frame, which hit by the
Question: Is there an attempted theft? Or is there no theft at all because of my dagger, prevented the victim’s death; it saved him from being hit. You cannot
desistance? talk of death unless the victim is first hit. In other words, the minority is of the
TAU
Answer: The crime of theft is consummated. The moment I take your wallet opinion that the offender did not perform all the acts of execution because of a
and then leave, the crime is accomplished or has already been fully MU cause or an accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.
consummated. So, when I return it to you. I cannot say that I desist. TAU
MU Question: Which of the two contending discussions is correct?
Note: You cannot desist when the crime is already consummated. However, Answer: In subsequent cases, after Borinaga, it appeared that majority ruling
under Article 13, I will be entitled to a mitigating circumstance that is was wrong and the minority view was the correct one. Borinaga should have
analogous to voluntary surrender. been convicted only of attempted murder and not frustrated because later
decisions rectify whatever error came out in the case of Borinaga.
Some authors all that the OBJECTIVE STAGE and the SUBJECTIVE
STAGE. In the objective stage, the actor is still in control of his act. It is still

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 15 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Later decisions came out with a view that in crimes against persons which MU INTOD vs. COURT OF APPEALS
involve intent to kill, before a person could be convicted of frustrated murder, TAU
212 SCRA 52
the prosecution must establish that the victim sustained an injury which could
MU
normally kill. Therefore, if the wound is not mortal, then, the crime is only
TAU Facts: Intod and his companions, with intent to kill, fired at the bedroom
attempted homicide or murder.
where they thought the victim was sleeping. It turned out, however, that the
MU victim was in another city and no one was in the room when the accused fired
TAU the shots. No one was hit by the gunfire.
Question: Suppose, I shot K but the gun jammed. Is that attempted or
frustrated? MU
The accused contends that the crime is an impossible crime under Article 4(2).
Answer: Attempted. How can K die when I did not even hit him. The TAU
They performed an act, which would be an offense against persons – murder,
jamming of the gun is an accident other than my own spontaneous desistance. MU
were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment. How can they
TAU accomplish when the victim was not there, when he turned out in other places.
Question: Suppose, I shot K, but because of my poor aim, he was not hit.
What is that? MU
On the other hand, the prosecution believes that it was attempted murder.
Answer: That is still attempted. How can he die unless I hit him. So, my poor TAU
They failed to kill him because they failed to perform all the acts of execution,
aim is the cause other than my own spontaneous desistance. MU because of a cause other than his own spontaneous desistance. And that cause
is the fact that the victim turned ot no to be there.
Question: Suppose, I hit him but the wound is not really fatal. So, he did not TAU
die. Is it attempted or frustrated? MU
Issue: What was the crime committed?
Answer: It is still attempted because I have not performed all the acts of TAU
execution. How can K die without a fatal wound? So, until the offender
inflicts a fatal wound which could normally kill, it can be rightfully claimed MU
Held: The factual situation of the case at bar presents a physical impossibility
which render the intended crime impossible of accomplishment, and under
that the offender has not performed all the acts of execution which would TAU
Article 4(2), such is sufficient to make the act an impossible crime. To uphold
produce felony as a consequence. MU the contention of the prosecution that the offense was attempted murder
TAU because the absence of the victim was the supervening cause independent of
But, supposed, the offender, with the use of .45 caliber pistol, shot the victim
the actor’s will render useless the provision of the RPC. In that case, all
in the head blowing off his brain, hit him in his chest blasting his heart and MU
circumstances, which prevented the consummation of the offense, will be
still another shot blasting his liver. Then, the victim was rushed to a hospital. TAU
treated as an accident independent of the actor’s will.
Because of modern apparatus, he was able to survive. This modern science is MU
the cause independent of the will of the perpetrator. I did everything to kill
So, the Supreme Court agreed with the accused. It is a case of impossible
him. Definitely, I’ve performed all the acts of execution. He is supposed to be TAU
MU crime because every time a crime is not committed, because of a cause or
dead by now. That is frustrated.
accident other than the desistance of the accused, or causes independent of his
TAU will, it would be attempted or frustrated. There is no more application of
Question: A doctor wanted to poison his wife. So, he placed poison in his
MU Article 4(2), if we follow the logic of the prosecution.
food. His wife ate the food with poison. When the wife had already swallowed
the food, the doctor was bothered by his conscience. He was remorseful; so he TAU
administered first aid and forced her to vomit. The wife survived. Was the MU
1994 Bar Question:
crime attempted or frustrated parricide? TAU Jippy, Arias and Randal planned to kill Elsa, a resident of Brgy. Ula, Laurel,
MU Batangas. They asked the assistance of Ella who is familiar with the place. On
Answer: (Analysis)
April 3, 1992 at about 10:00pm, Jippy, Arias and Randal, all armed with
 In attempted parricide, the offender has not performed all the acts TAU
automatic weapons went to Brgy. Ula. Ella being the guide directed her
of execution. In other words, it would be attempted if the wife, MU
companions to the room of Elsa. Whereupon, Jippy, Arias and Randal fired
who has already taken the poison, vomited by herself. When she
spit out the poison that constitutes an accident other than the
TAU their guns toward the room. Fortunately, Elsa was not around as she attended
a prayer meting that evening in another barangay.
husbands desistance. But if the husband had his conscience MU
stricken before the wife had swallowed the poison, then, there is TAU
Jippy, Arias and Randal were charged and convicted of attempted murder by
not even attempted parricide because of his own spontaneous MU
the RTC. On appeal to the CA, all the accused ascribed to the trial its error in
desistance.
finding them guilty of attempted murder. If you are the ponente, how would
 But if the wife has already swallowed the poison, and it was
you decide the appeal?
already in her stomach, desistance is immaterial. You cannot order TAU
the poison to go out the body. He has in fact passed the frustrated MU
Answer: I will reverse the trail’s court decision and convict them of
stage because he has already performed all the acts of execution. TAU
impossible crime under the doctrine enunciated by the Supreme Court in the
But to convict a person of frustrated parricide, the law requires that
case of Intod vs Court of Appeals.
the felony did not materialize because of causes independent of the MUT
will of the will of the perpetrator. Like you shot somebody but AU
because of timely intervention by a doctor, he survived. But, here, MU
the offender himself saved the wife. In other words, it would not
also fit the definition of a frustrated felony. TAU Consummated
MU Question: What is a consummated felony?
Question: So, what was the crime committed? Answer: A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its
Answer: The crime of administering injurious beverage under Article 364. It TAU execution and accomplishment are present.
is a form of serious physical injuries.
MU The definition of a crime in Book II contains the elements, which you can
Question: How do we distinguish the attempted or frustrated stage of a felony TAU detect by splitting the definition into parts. And to convict a person of a
from an impossible crime? MU particular crime, you have to prove all the elements to establish the crime. If
Answer: In an impossible crime, the crime to be committed was inherently all the elements of a crime are present, then the felony is consummated. That’s
impossible of commission; whereas in attempted or frustrated felony, the the simplest test.
crime is possible of accomplishment, but it was not produced because of a
cause or an accident other than the offender’s desistance, or because of causes For example, with intent to kill. A shot B and B died. That is consummated
independent of the will of the perpetrator. homicide or murder.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 16 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Question: But supposed some elements are present and some elements are MU
absent. Suppose a crime is composed of several elements, then the prosecution TAU
has established only some of the elements but the others are not, what will
MU
happen?
Answer There are Three Possibilities: TAU
1. There is no distinction between the attempted felony
MU
and consummated felony.
TAU
1. The accused can be found guilty only of frustrated MU
You have to take note also that in some special crime the attempted stage and
or attempted felony. TAU the consummated stage are identical. Meaning, when you do it, consummated.
When you attempt to do it, it is also consummated. So, there is no distinction
MU
Example: A, with intent to kill, shoots B. But B did not die because the between the attempted and the consummated because they carry the same
doctor saved his life. TAU penalty.
MU
Question: Is the crime a consummated homicide? TAU Art. 121. Flight to enemy’s country. — The penalty of arresto
Answer: Of course not! It is frustrated homicide. mayor shall be inflicted upon any person who, owing
MU allegiance to the Government, attempts to flee or go to an
TAU enemy country when prohibited by competent authority.
MU
2. The accused cannot be convicted of the felony TAU
charged in its consummated stage but he can be MU PROBLEM: Philippines is at war with another country. So, all citizens of the
found guilty of another felony in its consummated TAU Philippines are banned from going to that country. Suppose, in violation of
that, you decide to go to that country. When you come back, the government
stage. MU will file a case against you because you visit a country with which we are at
TAU war and there is prohibition.
Example:
A person is charged with robbery. Robbery is committed when, with intent to MU
You really wanted to go. You are on the act of going; you are about to board a
gain, one takes personal property belonging to another with violence or TAU
plane. You are caught! So, you are no table to go. You attempt to go,
intimidation of persons or force upon things. The offender is proved to have
taken, with intent to gain , property of another but there was no force upon
MU consummated. You go and you are caught, consummated also. The attempted
TAU and consummated stages are identical, that is why a mere attempt is already
things, or violence or intimidation against persons.
considered consummated.
MU
Question: What crime was proven? TAU
Answer: What was proven was the crime of simple theft. 2. Consummated or Nothing
MU
Example: TAU There are some crimes where there is no attempted or frustrated. It’s either
A is accused of murder because according to the prosecution, with intent to MU consummated or nothing.
kill. A shot B and killed him by means of treachery. During the trail, the
prosecution proved that the accused shot the victim. He shot A with intent to TAU Examples:
kill. The victim died but there was no treachery. So, the charge is MU 1. Felony by omission – You failed to do an act which the law
consummated murder, the crime proven was consummated homicide. commands you t do as a duty. So, if you don’t commit any
TAU
crime. But if you do not do it, there is a crime. Either you o
nd MU or you do not do.
That is the 2 possibility. When the prosecution proves less than the elements
of the crime charged, the accused can be convicted of another crime also in its TAU 2. False Testimony in Court
consummated stage. In the law on criminal procedure, that means the accused MU 3. Slander – When you orally defame somebody in public
of a crime is convicted of a crime necessarily included in the crime charged. TAU presence; “kawatan ka, rapist pa gyud!”. What did you
commit? You have orally defamed the person to put him
MU dishonor. Suppose, you said; “kaw…”, you did not finish. Is
3. When a person is charged with a crime consists of that attempted slander? No! Either you say the whole thing or
two or more elements, some elements are proven you don’t
TAU
but the others are not, the accused should be
MU
acquitted because no crime was established.
TAU Some authors call that Formal Crimes where there is only one
Example: MUT stage as distinguished from crimes composed of stages, which are
A accused B of estafa under the Penal code. Generally, the elements of estafa AU called Material Crimes, like homicide. But even in material
are: crimes, it is also hard to distinguish one from another.
MU
a. Misappropriation;
b. Deceit or abuse of confidence; and TAU
c. Pecuniary damage suffered by the plaintiff. MU For instance, Arson:
You burn a building. Out of 30 rooms, only two are totally burned. The fire
During the trial, the prosecutor proved that the accused as able to get money TAU was extinguished. So, 2/30.
fom the victim and he did not return the money. So there was pecuniary
damage. But there was no deceit, no abuse of confidence. MU Question: What is that – attempted, frustrated, or consummated? How much
TAU portion of the building must be burned before it becomes consummated,
Question: So, what has been proved? frustrated, or attempted?
MU Answer: According to the Supreme Court, counting the number of rooms or
Answer: It is a simple loan. Therefore, there is no estafa. It is purely a civil
obligation. In te absence of abuse of confidence or deceit, the cause of action percentage of the building, which was burned, is not the way to determine the
is purely civil. No crime is proven but there is civil liability. stage of execution of arson. No matter how small is the portion burned, that is
already consummated arson.
However, there are certain crimes where you will have a hard time
determining the stage of execution.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 17 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Question: If that is so, how can you commit frustrated or attempted arson? Is MU or to the public order is negligible. If it is negligible, what possible damage to
there such a thing as attempted or consummated arson? TAU society is there if the light felony is only attempted or frustrated? It is so
Answer: Yes, that is answered by jurisprudence. microscopic in size that the law would rather not punish it anymore.
MU
The same thing with rape. According to the Supreme Court, there is no such TAU However, Art. 7 has also an exception: xxx with the exception of those
thing as half measure or quarter measure in a rape. Mere penetration of the MU committed against person or property. If the light felony is classified as an
labia no matter how slight or momentary, even if there is no emission, TAU offense against persons or property, it will be punishable even if it is only
consummates rape. attempted or frustrated. Meaning, those who commit crimes against persons
MU are more perverse than those who violate the other Titles of the Book.
If there is sexual intercourse between the rapist and the victim, even how TAU
fleeting it is, or how shallow the penetration, that is already consummated. If MU
it is in the act of entering but it is discontinued, that is attempted.
TAU
Question: Where is frustrated here? MU
Answer: In one case, the Supreme Court said that there is no frustrated stage TAU
in rape. These can only be learned if you know jurisprudence. MU
Note: Case of People vs Orita TAU
Supreme Court held that it was a consummated rape not just only MU
frustrated rape. TAU
MU
 Citing People vs Enrile, no frustrated stage anymore and Enrile TAU
ruling was a stray decision.
 It is well settled that slight penetration consummates rape and MU
perfect penetration is not essential. TAU
 Mere touching of the lips of vagina, without laceration of vagina or MU
emission, already consummates rape.
TAU
Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. —
Question:So, based on Article 6, what are the classifications of felonies MU
according to stages of execution? TAU Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are
Answer: They are the following: MU punishable only in the cases in which the law specially
1. Attempted
TAU provides a penalty therefor.
2. Frustrated A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to
3. Consummated MU
an agreement concerning the commission of a felony
TAU
Stages of Execution: (From the memory aid of Atty. Angel) and decide to commit it.
MU
1. Consummated – all elements necessary for EXECUTION There is proposal when the person who has decided to
and ACCOMPLSIHMENT are present. TAU
commit a felony proposes its execution to some other
2. Frustrated – all the acts of EXECUTION performed but not MU
produce a felony as a consequence by reason of Causes TAU person or persons.
Independent of the will of perpetrator. (Recall: CaIn)
3. Attempted – commences the commission of the felony MU
directly by overt acts, but not perform all the acts of TAU
EXECUTION by reason of some Cause or Accident other MU
than is own spontaneous desistance. (Recall: CoRa)
TAU
MU
Article 8 gives us the concept of proposal to commit a felony and conspiracy.
Of course, article 8 presupposes that there are at least two persons involved.
Art. 7. When light felonies are punishable. — Light TAU You cannot give a proposal to yourself and agree with yourself. So, minimum
MU of two. The person proposing the felony, and the person to whom the proposal
felonies are punishable only when they have been is made.
consummated, with the exception of those committed TAU
against persons or property. MUT Note: There is proposal when the person who has decided to commit a felony
AU presupposes its execution to some other person or persons.
MU
In other words, a person who has decided to commit felony proposes its
GENERAL RULE: Light Felonies under Art. 9 are only punishable if they TAU execution to some other person or persons. He is not joking. He has decided.
are consummated. MU
Example:
EXCEPTIONS: I approach A and say, “I will pay you P 1,000, you assassinate X”. From that
1. Light felonies are committed against persons TAU
time, there is already a crime of proposal to commit homicide ir murder,
2. Light felonies are committed against properties MU because I decided to commit a crime and proposed it to somebody.
TAU
In other words, light felonies must be consummated to be punishable. So, if Question: Suppose, the gunman did not agree to the proposal and said; “No, I
the felon is light and it is only attempted or frustrated, there is no liability. It is
MU
do not accept.” Is there still a proposal?
not possible. In effect, there is no crime and you are not liable. Answer: Of course, because proposal is unilateral. Once a proposal is made, it
is there whether the person to whim the proposal is made accepts it or not. As
The reason for the rule is that a light felony is merely an infraction of the law. a matter of fact, the person should not accept because once he does so, there is
As a matter of fact, even if the light felony is consummated, the penalty is now an agreement and the proposal becomes a conspiracy.
only arresto menor or a fine not exceeding P200. Damage or injury to society

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 18 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
As defined in the RPC, a conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to MU 3. Conspiracy to commit coup d’etat (Art.136,
an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. TAU as amended by RA 6968)
I propose, you agree. We decide to commit felony. There is now conspiracy.
MU
Question: Is there a proposal to commit sedition?
Once the proposal is accepted, it now reaches the stage of conspiracy, and the TAU Answer: The RPC is silent. The RPC mentions conspiracy to commit sedition
parties are now covered y the definition of conspiracy. Suppose, at that MU but there is no mention of proposal to commit sedition. Conclusion: proposal
moment, they are caught and arrested. TAU to commit sedition is not punishable. There is conspiracy to commit sedition
but there is no mention of proposal to commit a crime is not punishable,
Question: Is there an attempted murder? MU unless the law provides penalty therefore.
Answer: No, not yet because in murder, the offender must have commenced TAU
the commission of the act. So, the fiscal will charge them with the crime of MU In general, mere proposal is not punishable. But in crimes of treason,
conspiracy to commit murder. rebellion, coup d’etat, the State itself is the victim. If you succeed in your
TAU treason or rebellion, the State is the victim. Since the crime is directed against
Question: If you are the lawyer of the accused, what will you do? MU the State, the State had the absolute power to prosecute you even if you are
Answer: I will move to quash the information because according to Article 8 TAU only preparing to commit a crime. You do not have to wait for the
mere proposal to commit a felony, mere conspiracy to commit a felony is not MU commencement.
punishable. There is no commencement yet; the act is only preparatory. The
conspiracy or proposal is only a preparatory act to the crime. TAU
MU Art. 9. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and light felonies.
Question: So, is there such a crime of conspiracy to commit murder? TAU
Answer: No, because preparatory act is not punishable.
— Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the
MU capital punishment or penalties which in any of their
Question: So, what is the legal principle involved in proposals or conspiracies TAU periods are afflictive, in accordance with Art. 25 of this
to commit felony? MU Code.
Answer: The rule is they are not punishable.
TAU Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with
Question: If we agree to rob a bank and before we have started the robbery MU penalties which in their maximum period are correctional,
we are caught. You cannot say there is robbery because we have not even TAU in accordance with the above-mentioned Art..
commenced the overt act of robber. It is just an agreement. Are we guilty of MU Light felonies are those infractions of law for the
conspiracy to commit robbery?
Answer: No. There is no article in the RPC which penalizes the crime of TAU
commission of which a penalty of arrest menor or a fine
conspiracy to commit robbery. So, in reality, according to article 8, mere MU not exceeding 200 pesos or both; is provided.
conspiracy to commit felony is not punishable. They are only preparatory acts. TAU
When I propose the commission of a crime, we agree, we are not yet in the
MU
fact of executing the crime. We are still preparing for it and we have learned Question: What are the classifications of felonies according to their gravity?
that preparatory external acts as a rule are not punishable, except when the law TAU Answer: According to their gravity, felonies are either:
provides a penalty for mere preparatory. So, we have to apply the exception MU 1. Grave
here. TAU 2. Less Grave
3. Light
Article 8 says, “Unless the law specially provides a penalty therefore.” MU
Meaning, conspiracy or proposal is not punishable unless the law makes TAU Summary of Classifications of Felonies under the RPC:
conspiracy or proposal punishable for certain offenses. MU 1. Article 3
TAU a. Felonies by act
Question: Are there instances when mere conspiracy or mere proposal
MU b. Felonies by omission
becomes a felony? 2. Article 3
Answer: Yes. That is when the law provides penalty therefore. And there are TAU a. Intentional felonies
many crimes in the RPC which can be consummated by mere proposal or MU b. Culpable Felonies
mere conspiracy, such as the following: 3. Article 6
TAU a. Attempted
1. Machinations in public auctions. b. Frustrated
2. Monopoly or combination in restraint of trade. MU c. Consummated
3. Abuses against chastity (as when a public officer or a prison TAU 4. Article 9
warden makes unchaste proposal to a woman prisoner who is
MUT a. Grave
under his custody, there is already a crime.) b. Less Grave
AU c. Light
But the most famous conspiracies that constitute crimes are those, which are MU
directed against the internal or external security of the State, such as the
following: TAU
MU Grave Felonies:
1. Conspiracy to commit treason (Art. 115) Question: How do you determine whether a felony is grave, less grave or
2. Conspiracy to commit rebellion or insurrection (Art 136) TAU light?
3. Conspiracy to commit coup d’etat (Art.136, as amended by RA Answer: It depends in the penalty attached by law to the crime committed.
6968)
MU This is a manifestation of the classical theory of criminal law. There must be a
4. Conspiracy to commit sedition. TAU proportion between the seriousness of the crime and the penalty.
MU
Question: How about proposals? Enumerate some important crimes in RPC, Question: How do I know that a felony is grave?
which are punishable even if they have only reached the proposal stage. Answer: According to Article 9, if it is punishable by death or any penalty
Answer: More or less the same. They are the following: which the Code classifies as afflictive, it must a grave felony.
1. Conspiracy to commit treason (Art. 115)
2. Conspiracy to commit rebellion or Question: What are the afflictive penalties?
insurrection (Art 136) Answer: Under Article 25, you have the following:

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 19 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
1. Reclusion perpetua MU Congress can pass a law anytime amending the RPC. It is
2. Reclusion temporal TAU incorporated in the RPC. Congress may also pass a law adding
3. Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualifications another crime in the RPC.
MU
4. Perpetual or temporary special disqualifications That is not a special law because a special law is intended to stand
5. Prision mayor TAU separately from the RPC; it is no intended to form part of the RPC.
MU
So, any crime in the RPC which carries any one of those penalties is TAU Example:
automatically a grave felony. Law on coup d’etat.
MU
TAU Article 10 is a statement of whether the RPC should or should not apply to
MU crimes punished by special laws. Crimes in the jurisdiction may be penalized
Less Grave Felonies by the RPC or special laws – mala in se or mala prohibita.
TAU
Question: What is a less grave felony?
Answer: It is one, which, in its maximum period is punishable by a penalty
MU
classified as correctional in nature. If the penalty is correctional, it is less TAU
grave. MU Question: Does the RPC apply to crimes punishable be special laws?
TAU Answer: The rule is NO. It does not. The provision of the RPC does not apply
to special laws because the provisions of the RPC, as a rule, apply only to
MU
felonies. However, if the special law is deficient, the provisions of RPC can
TAU apply suppletorily of crimes punished by special laws. And in case of conflict
Question: What are the correction penalties? MU between RPC and the special law, the latter shall prevail.
Answer: Article 25 of the RPC gives the answer: So, the RPC can still apply to crimes punishable by special laws in a
1. Prision correctional TAU
supplementary capacity to provide what is lacking in the special law. But if
2. Arresto mayor MU the special law is complete or sufficient, RPC does not apply.
3. Suspension TAU
4. Destierro Illustration: A special law is passed penalizing a certain crime.
MU
Somebody attempts to commit the crime but does not succeed.
Light Felonies TAU
Question: What are light felonies? MU Question: Should the offender be liable for attempted violation?
Answer: They are infractions or violations of the RPC where the prescribed TAU Answer: No. If the special law does not penalize the attempted or frustrated
penalty is imprisonment of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding P200 or MU stage of the crime, then, the conclusion is that it is not punishable the
both. provisions of Article 6 of the RPC do not apply to special laws.
TAU
MU A case has been decided by the Supreme Court, where the accused was
Art. 10. Offenses not subject to the provisions of this prosecuted for an attempted violation of the Anti-Graft Act. There are many
TAU
  Code. — Offenses which are or in the future may be crimes punishable by the Anti-Graft Act, one that is when you cause injury to
MU the government. There was an attempt to case injury to the government – the
punishable under special laws are not subject to the TAU cheating of taxes. Bu they were merely attempts because it was discovered by
provisions of this Code. This Code shall be MU the Bureau of Customs. They were charged with “Attempted Violation of the
supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should Anti-Graft Act”.
TAU
specially provide the contrary. MU Question: Is there such a crime?
TAU Answer: The Supreme Court Ruled that there is none because there is nothing
MU in the Anti-Graft Act which penalizes a mere attempt and Article 6 of the RPC
would not apply.
TAU
Question: What are the sources of criminal law? MU Question: Why is it that the attempted and frustrated felonies do not apply to
Answer: There are two: crimes penalized by special laws?
1. The Revised Penal Code TAU Answer: The reason is because of the penalties. Under the RPC, penalties
2. Special penal laws have their own specific nomenclatures, like death, reclusion perpetua, prision
MU mayor, etc. and there is a scale of penalties. The general rule is that the
Question: What is a special penal law insofar as the study of criminal law is TAU penalty for the attempted or the frustrated stage is one or two degrees lower
concerned? MUT than the penalty prescribed for the consummated felony.
Answer: It has two definitions.
AU
But in special laws, penalties are not denominated as prision mayor, etc if
1. A special penal law is a law, which punishes acts or MU found guilty, you are sentenced to imprisonment for say, 1 to 5 years or 9
omission not defined and penalized by the RPC. TAU years. That’s the penalty. There is no more one or two degrees lower or higher
MU because there will be no basis for the penalty. If the special law says that the
act of doing that is a crime, then, th e attempt or frustration to commit it
Example: cannot be a crime.
Violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act – like pushing – that is not found in TAU
the RPC but in another law, that is, RA 6425, as amended. Another is illegal MU In other words, you cannot apply by analogy the attempted or frustrated stage.
possession of firearms is penalized by PD 1866. In the first place, you have no basis for the penalty. The basis for attempted or
TAU
frustrated is the penalty for the consummated crime – prision correctional,
MU reclusion temporal, etc. – one or two degrees lower, as the case maybe.

2. It is a statute enacted by the legislative branch, The same principle will control with respect to the liability of the accomplices
penal in character, which is not an amendment to and accessories under Articles 17 to 20. If the special law does not penalize
the accomplice or the accessory, then, only the principal is held liable
the RPC.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 20 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
because, again, there is no basis for fixing the penalty for these people, in the MU
absence of rules on graduation of penalties. TAU 2. Exempting Circumstances
MU - Those grounds for exception from punishment because
Moreover, the Supreme Court said as a general rule the provisions of there is wanting in the agent of the crime any of the
mitigating and aggravating circumstances do not apply to special laws because TAU conditions which make the act voluntary, or negligent,
they only apply to penalties prescribed by the RPC. Penalties under special MU such as intelligence, freedom of action, intent or
laws do not have minimum, medium or maximum period. TAU negligence.
Exception - Examples are: imbecility and minority
The exception is if the special law is insufficient and here is no conflict MU
anyway, then, the provisions of the RPC may be applied in supplementary TAU
3. Mitigating Circumstances
manner. MU - Those, which, if present in the commission of a crime,
TAU do not entirely, free the actor from criminal liability,
Question: A special law borrows the penalties under the RPC, can there be a
MU but serve only to reduce the penalty.
penalty for the attempted or frustrated crime?
- Examples are: incomplete self-defense, the offender
Answer: Yes, because there are now attempt to barrow the principles in the TAU
had no intention to commit a wrong as that committed.
RPC, you can now apply the RPC in a suppletory manner. MU
The perfect example would be RA 7659, the Heinous Crime Law, which TAU 4. Aggravating Circumstances
amended the Dangerous Drugs Act, adopting the penalties of the RPC. The MU - Those, which, if attendant in the commission of a
penalties in the RPC are now adopted in RA 7959. With that, the intention is TAU crime, serve to increase the penalty without, however,
to make the RPC supplementary. exceeding the maximum penalty provided by law for
MU the offense.
Question: Suppose a person is convicted of possession of illegal drugs. After TAU - Examples are: treachery and recidivism.
he is convicted , what will happen to the exhibits? Will it be returned to him? MU
Answer: Of course not. It should be forfeited be the State.
TAU 5. Alternative Circumstances
- Those, which must be taken into consideration as
Question: If the law is silent, what will the court do? MU aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and
Answer: Apply the RPC. TAU effects of the crime and the other conditions attending
MU to the commission.
Art. 45. Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds or - Examples are: relationship and intoxication.
instruments of the crime. — Every penalty imposed for the TAU
commission of a felony shall carry with it the forfeiture of the MU
proceeds of the crime and the instruments or tools with TAU
which it was committed.
MU
Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated Synopsis:
and forfeited in favor of the Government, unless they be TAU Number Circumstance Article
property of a third person not liable for the offense, but those MU 6 Justifying Article 11
articles which are not subject of lawful commerce shall be TAU 7 Exempting Article 12
destroyed.
MU 10 Mitigating Article 13
You can apply it suppletorily because such is not there. There is no conflict TAU 21 Aggravating Article 14
between them. MU 3 Alternative Article 15
TAU
MU
Chapter Two
TAU
MU
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
TAU
AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH EXEMPT FROM
MU
CRIMINAL LIABILITY
TAU
Question: What are the five circumstances affecting criminal liability of a MUT
person under the RPC? Describe each and cite two examples: AU
Answer: The following are the circumstances affecting criminal liability: MU
RECALL: JEMAA (Memory aid; from the notes of Atty. Angel)
TAU
MU
1. Justifying Circumstances
- Those where the act of person is said to be in TAU
accordance with law, so that such person is deemed not MU
to have transgressed the law and is free from criminal
and civil liability, except in paragraph 4 (state of
TAU
necessity/ emergency rule) where the civil liability is MU
borne by the person benefited be the act.
- Examples are: self-defense, fulfillment of duty or
lawful exercise of a right or office.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 21 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU Answer: Well, the word justifying is a hint. Justifying circumstances are
TAU those, which, if attempting the commission of an act, make the act lawful. The
act is lawful; it is justified. It is in accordance with law. Therefore, the act is
MU
not a crime.
TAU
MU
TAU Memory Aid (from the notes of Atty. Teodoro V. Angel)
MU
TAU Justifying Circumstances
D 1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or Rights, provided
MU that the following circumstances concur;  
TAU First. Unlawful aggression.
MU Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
Art. 11. Justifying circumstances. — The following do not prevent or repel it.
TAU Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the
incur any criminal liability:
MU person defending himself.
R 2. Any one who acts in defense of the person or rights of his
1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, TAU
Relatives such as spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legitimate,
provided that the following circumstances concur; MU
natural or adopted brothers or sisters, or his relatives by affinity in
First. Unlawful aggression. TAU the same degrees and those consanguinity within the fourth civil
Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed MU degree, provided that the first and second requisites prescribed in
to prevent or repel it. TAU the next preceding circumstance are present, and the further
Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of requisite, in case the revocation was given by the person attacked,
MU that the one making defense had no part therein.
the person defending himself.
TAU
2. Any one who acts in defense of the person or rights of his MU S 3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a
spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural or TAU Stranger, provided that the first and second requisites mentioned in
adopted brothers or sisters, or his relatives by affinity in the MU the first circumstance of this Art. are present and that the person
same degrees and those consanguinity within the fourth civil defending be not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil
TAU motive.
degree, provided that the first and second requisites MU
prescribed in the next preceding circumstance are present,
TAU A 4. Any person who, in order to Avoid an evil or injury, does not act
and the further requisite, in case the revocation was given by
the person attacked, that the one making defense had no part MU which causes damage to another, provided that the following
TAU requisites are present; xxx
therein.
MU
3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a TAU R 5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful
stranger, provided that the first and second requisites exercise of a Right or office.
MU
mentioned in the first circumstance of this Art. are present TAU
and that the person defending be not induced by revenge, A 6. Any person who Acts in obedience to an order issued by a
resentment, or other evil motive. MU superior for some lawful purpose.
TAU
4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does not MU (Recall DR SARA)
act which causes damage to another, provided that the TAU
following requisites are present;  MU
First. That the evil sought to be avoided actually
exists; TAU Elements of Self Defense:
Second. That the injury feared be greater than that MU
done to avoid it; 1. Unlawful aggression.
Third. That there be no other practical and less TAU
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it.
harmful means of preventing it. MUT 3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending
AU himself.
5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the MU (Recall URL)
lawful exercise of a right or office. TAU
MU
6. Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a
superior for some lawful purpose.
TAU
MU Elements of defense of relative
1. Unlawful aggression.
TAU 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it.
MU 3. In case of Provocation was given by person attacked, one
defending had no part therein.
(Recall URP)

Question: What is the definition of that?

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 22 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Elements of defense of stranger: MU
TAU Question: Why?
Answer: Because when you invoke self-defense, you automatically admit that
1. Unlawful aggression. MU
you killed the other, that you are the author of his death (in case of homicide
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it. TAU
or murder). So, you better justify the death of the victim. Give a good
3. Person defending is Not induced by revenge, resentment or other
MU explanation as to why you should not go to jail for killing a human being. That
evil motive.
TAU is why the Supreme Court said that defense of self-defense should be proved
(Recall URN)
by clear and convincing evidence which is approximately proof beyond
MU reasonable doubt.
TAU
Avoidance of Greater Evil or Injury MU Question: Why does the law allow self-defense?
Answer: There are two reasons:
TAU
E 1) Evil sought to be avoided actually exists.
MU a. It is the duty of the State to defend its citizens.
TAU
G 2) Injury feared Greater than to avoid it. MU That is why the State has a law enforcement agency, the PNP
TAU – to protect the citizens from the assault of others. But this
agency has gained a negative image. People believe that the
O 3) No Other practical and less harmful means preventing it. MU policemen, who are supposed to secure, protect and defend us
TAU from criminals, are the very same people involved in crime
(Recall EGO) nowadays. Theoretically, it is the job of State to protect us.
MU
That’s why we pay our taxes for peace and order.
TAU
Fulfillment of Duty or Lawful Exercise of Right or Office MU But the State recognizes the fact that it could not protect
TAU everybody 24 hours a day. That is impossible. That is
tantamount to asking the State to assign one policeman for
MU
Per 1) Accused acted in Performance of duty or lawful exercise of every citizen. We have to be realistic. The State cannot afford
TAU it. It does not have the manpower to defend everybody 24
right or office.
MU hours a day.

Due 2) Injury caused as necessary consequence of Due performance of TAU Therefore, of somebody attacks you, and there is no
duty or office. MU policeman to defend you, you defend yourself. If in the
TAU process, it becomes inevitable for you to disable or kill the
(Recall PerDue) MU attacker, you are not liable because you are only doing what
the State should be doing for you. So, the State cannot take
TAU that against you. You only have assumed the obligations of
MU the State.
TAU
Obedience to Superior Order
MU
TAU
b. It is recognition of the natural law of self-
preservation.
O 1) Ordered issued by superior. MU
TAU Every living being, whether animal or plant, has the instinct
P 2) Lawful Purpose (or at least patently lawful) MU for self-preservation. So, the concept of self-defense only
TAU acknowledges the natural instincts of man. It is absorb to
M 3) Means to carry out order also lawful. expect a person not to defend himself when he is under attack
MU because there is a natural instinct for self-preservation.
(Recall OPM)
TAU Note: To prove self-defense; it requires the concurrence of these three
MU elements.
TAU
Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided that the Unlawful Aggression
following circumstances concur; MUT Without which, there could be no self-defense. It is indispensable in the sense
First. Unlawful aggression. AU that there could be unlawful aggression even without the second and third
Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or elements. But the second and third elements cannot exist without the first.
MU
repel it. That is really indispensable. The existence of the second and third presume
Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person TAU the existence of the first is out, all there are out. And if either of the second or
defending himself. MU third elements is lacking, as long as there is unlawful aggression, it constitutes
an incomplete self-defense, which is a mitigating circumstance.
Self-defense only applies to crimes against persons, as when you are accused TAU
of homicide, murder, or physical injuries. Meaning, it applies to crimes Question: Define aggression.
against persons when you are accused of the death of or injuring somebody, MU Answer: Aggression, as contemplated by the law, means a physical attack. An
and you claim that you had to do it because you had no choice. I had to act in TAU aggression, which can cause you injury or even death, like somebody stabs
defense of my person. MU you or beats you with a club. So, if there is no physical aggression to speak of.

Question: Who bears the burden of proof? Example: A started to insult B, uttering derogatory remarks against B. B hit
Answer: Generally, it is the prosecution’s job to prove the guilt of the accused back and injured A. For the injury sustained by A, B pleads self-defense.
who is presumed innocent. However, as these are manners of defense, the
burden is shifted to the accused. It is for him to prove these circumstances; it Question: Can B invoke self-defense?
is not for the prosecution to prove them.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 23 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Answer: No, B cannot claim that he acted in self-defense because B was the MU Suppose, here is a thief running with his stolen items. The police are after
aggressor. There can be no self-defense here because the aggression is verbal. TAU him. The thief hits back at the policeman. Now, suppose sues him for direct
What the law contemplates is physical attack. Insulting words, no matter how assault. The thief invokes self-defense. His defense is that the policeman is an
MU
slanderous, cannot cause death or physical injuries. It is directed against your aggressor. If the policeman did not try to arrest him, he would not hurt the
name or honor, but not your body. So, that does not constitute aggression TAU policeman. The latter should have left the policeman alone. That cannot be!
within the meaning of Article 11(1). MU There is aggression, but it is LAWFUL aggression. That is the duty of the
TAU policeman, so his aggression is lawful in nature.
Note: Remember also the certain important doctrines in self-defense.
MU
TAU Unlawful Aggression
Example: If you are walking on the street peacefully and here comes
MU somebody with a knife. He tries to stab you with it. That is unlawful
TAU aggression. Unless he can point to a law which authorizes him to approach
anybody and stab you.
i. When one claims self-defense, the law assumes that MU
there is no mutual agreement between both parties TAU By “unlawful aggression”, it means that there is danger to your life and limb.
to fight, when there is mutual agreement to fight, MU Aggression can either be an actual or threatened aggression. Aggression need
not be actual; it could also be a threatened.
no one can claim self-defense and each one is TAU
susceptible for each one’s injury. MU
TAU Note: There is no problem if the aggression is actual. If it is actual, it is on
going.
Example: The people agree to fight and in the course of the fist fight; A MU
inflicted injury on B. B inflicted injury on A. Each one of them files a case TAU
Question: But does the law expect the aggression to commence before you
against the other for the injuries. They ended up suing each other for physical
MU can act in self-defense?
injuries. And ob course, the defense of both is self-defense.
Answer: No, the law does not really require a person to wait before defending
TAU
himself because it might be too late. The law would be demanding too much if
Question: Who is entitled of self-defense? MU it requires that the person defending must first wait for the aggressor to pull
Answer: No one is entitled. When both of them became an aggressor against TAU out his gun from his waist before the former can defend himself. When the
the other, no one can claim self-defense. In fact, each of them is liable for the MU law says “unlawful aggression”, it contemplates of actual aggression or
other’s injury. threatened, imminent aggression. A threatened aggression amounts to actual
TAU aggression.
“By agreement”, means that there is no need of a written contract. A verbal MU
agreement is sufficient. TAU Question: When does a threatened aggression amount to actual aggression?
What is the TEST given by the Supreme Court?
MU
ii. A person does not have to be cornered against the Answer: The criterion reached by the Supreme Court is a threatened
TAU aggression amounts to actual aggression, if the threatened harm is imminent or
wall before he can lawfully defend himself from an
MU on the point of happening. Meaning, maybe in less than one second, you are
unlawful aggression. dead. Your enemy beat you first. So, that is the criterion – imminent or at the
TAU
point of happening. Therefore, if it does not meet that standard, it is not
The old concept if self-defense is “retreat to the wall”. One can only act in MU unlawful aggression.
self-defense if he is concerned. Meaning, if somebody is going to kill you, try TAU
to avoid him. But if you are already concerned, you have no more means of
MU
escaping that is the only time you can defend yourself. But that concept has People vs Cabungcal
already been DISCARDED. TAU
MU 51 Phil 803
The rule now is maintaining your ground when in the right. Meaning, if TAU
you are walking peacefully and here comes somebody who wants to stab you, Facts: The accused is a boatman. His occupation is to transport people
there is no obligation to run. There is no rule, which requires you to run away, MU across a channel. Just like the means of transportation when you go to Samal
and then when you are already concerned, that is the only time you can act. Island. Once, after the fiesta in the island, some passengers went on board
TAU including a drunken man. In the middle of the sea, this drunk passenger
If somebody is going to kill you with a knife, if you are brave, do not run MU started to rock the banca. The accused warned im. Don’t do that, we might
away. Wait for him and then defend yourself. If you kill him, you still invoke capsize. But the drunken passenger continued to rock the banca.
self-defense. It cannot be taken against you. The rule is stand ground when TAU
you are right. You have the right to act where you are because you are not the MUT So, the accused hit this drunken man and the latter fell. But he surfaced and
aggressor. threatened that he would capsize the banca. In so saying, he again started to
AU
rock it, to the point that the women and children passengers panicked. So, the
MU accused hit his back with the paddle. This made the drunk to drown and died.
There are two types of aggression:
1. Lawful Aggression
TAU
MU Issue: Was there unlawful aggression?
2. Unlawful Aggression
Held: Yes, the accused does not have to wait to find out if the drink
Lawful Aggression TAU passenger was serious or joking. If he was able to turn it around, they will all
Example: Aggression by a public officer who is acting in the fulfillment of a MU die. People will start drowning.
duty to effect an arrest. Due to the condition of the river at the point where the deceased started to
TAU
rock the boat, if it had capsize, the passengers would run the risk of losing
Question: How does he arrest the person? MU their lives, the majority of whom were women especially the nursing child.
Answer: According to the Rules of Court, the arresting officer can use such The conduct of the deceased in rocking the boat until the point of it having
force as may be reasonably necessary to affect the arrest. And because he can taken in water and his insistence on this action despite of the accused warning,
force in the process of effecting the arrest, the policeman may become an gave rise to the belief on the part of the accused that it would capsize if he did
aggressor. not separate the deceased from the boat in such a manner as to give him no
time to accomplish the purpose. It was necessary to disable him momentarily.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 24 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU In other words, there seems to be two stages of fight: the first stage where
If you will say that the accused will have to wait to see if the drunk will be TAU victim was the unlawful aggressor, and the second stage where Alconga
able to capsize the banca, you are running the risk of all possibilities that the became the unlawful aggressor because after the first stage was over, b reason
MU
banca will sink in the middle of the sea. To tarry for a while might be too late. of the running away of the unlawful aggressor, there was no more room for
That is already an actual aggression. There will be more dead if the accused TAU self-defense because the danger to Alconga’s life and limb has ceased. That is
waited. So, the alleged offender there did not act in defense of his person, but MU already retaliation. That is not the concept of self-defense.
also of strangers. TAU
MU Another point that you will notice in the law of self-defense is that the law
Example: Suppose, you are inside your house in the second floor, then, TAU says that self-defense applies to anyone whoa acts in defense of his person or
somebody from below shouts at you challenging you to fight, wait there and I MU rights. There is no question about “person”. When somebody is trying to hurt
will kill you! He’s going to kill you to beat him to it. You killed him first. You or kill me, I can act in defense of my person. But the problem is the “rights”.
TAU
are now prosecuted for his death. You claim self-defense, because there was a
threat. MU Question: What are the rights, which can be defended under Article 11(1)?
TAU Answer: The right to chastity of a woman. For example, a guy is about to
Question: Is the threatened harm imminent? (Take note that he is still has to MU rape a woman and the woman killed the would-be rapist. She is accused of
go up) homicide. She can claim that she acted in self-defense. Although rape is not
Answer: No, the threatened harm is not at the point of realization. A TAU considered as a crime against person, but against chastity, a woman’s right to
threatening attitude assaults amounts to actual aggression. That is not self- MU defend her honor from sexual attack is considered as a right similar to
defense. The most you can invoke there is the mitigating circumstance of TAU defending one’s person under Article 11(1).
sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party immediately
preceding the act, under Article 13(4). MU Note: Rape now is a crime against person.
TAU
So, it is a question of evidence. Is there harm now or on the point of MU What is controversial here is whether the right to protect one’s property can
happening? Is there death now or on the point of happening? If the answer is give rise to self-defense under Article 11(1). If, for example, a thief or robber
TAU
no, then the threatened harm does not amount to unlawful aggression. It is a tries to run with your wallet or jewelry, and in order to stop him from running
future aggression. You have no right to act now simply because there is a MU away, you shoot him to death. Can you now claim self-defense? There was
threat. TAU unlawful aggression on your property right because there was an aggression
Another important principle in unlawful aggression is the rule lay down by the MU on my property right? Is that a valid defense?
Supreme Court that you can only act in self-defense when the aggression is
ongoing or about to begin. But once the aggression has ended and because you TAU Answer: No, defense of property can give rise to self-defense under Article
wanted to get even, you hit back, that is no longer self-defense. That is MU 11(1) only if the attack on one’s property is coupled with an attack on his
retaliation, getting even. The rule to remember is when the aggression has TAU person.
ceased; there is no more room for aggression because the danger to life
MU
and limb has ended. Like for example, a robber tried to get your money and when you tried to
Example: Suppose A attacked B, and B landed on the ground, sustaining TAU resist, he drew out his knife. So, you have to give him your money. Suppose a
many blows. Then A left. When A left, B stood up, chased A and attacked MU robber entered your house and in getting your property, he tried to kill you
him. B killed A. B claimed that the killing of a is self-defense because it was TAU killed him firs.
A who attacked him first.
MU Question: Are you entitled to self-defense?
Question: Is B entitled of self-defense? TAU Answer: Yes, because the attack or aggression on your property was coupled
Answer: No, because of the rule that you could only act in self-defense while MU with an attack against your person.
the aggression is still on or going to start.
TAU Question: But suppose, when that same robber saw you, he started to run
MU away, but when he was about to jump the window, you shot him. Are you
People vs Alconga TAU acting in self-defense?
Answer: No, because there is no assault on your person. What justified killing
79 PHIL 366 MU
is not the assault on the property right, but the assault or attack on one’s
person. So, it must be coupled with an attack on one’s person. The reason is
Facts: The victim here was playing cars – blackjack. He was the dealer TAU
simple: the value of property can never be equated to human life, which is
until he noticed that he was losing. He suspected Alconga as the one giving
supposed to be priceless.
the signal to the winning party. So, he started to attack Alconga by hitting him MU
with a cane. Alconga had to run to the bench but the dealer continued hitting TAU
him. MUT People vs Narvaez
AU
121 SCRA 389
This made Alconga think that the victim was serious. He had to draw his gun,
fired at the dealer and inflicting a wound. When the dealer realized that this MU Facts: There was a land conflict between a big corporation and some
time he was wounded, he ran away. Alconga started to chase him, overtook TAU persons, one of whom was Narveaez. He had a house and a rice mill, which
and fired the second shot, killing the victim. Alconga was accused of MU the corporation wants to get from him.
homicide, and his defense was self-defense.
One day, after sleeping inside the house, he woke up and saw men hammering
Held: There was no self-defense. When the dealer started to hit Alconga, TAU away. They were putting up a fence around the property. So, Narvaez got his
that constitutes unlawful aggression. So, that when Alconga shot the victim, MU riffle and fired at them, hitting one of the victims. The others started to run
he was justified in doing so as he was only acting in self-defense. But from the TAU towards the jeep to get their arms. Narvaez also shot and killed all of them.
moment the victim ran away, the danger to Alconga’s life and limb ceased.
The unlawful aggression has ended and therefore, there was no more reason MU He was charged with homicide and his defense is that there was unlawful
for Alconga to fire the second shot. But when Alconga gave chase and aggression against his property. But there was no danger to his life. The
overtook the victim, he was no longer acting in self-defense. As a matter of aggression against is property was not coupled with an attack against his
fact, at that stage of the fight, Alconga became the unlawful aggressor. person.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 25 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Held: Strangely, he was acquitted. This was self-defense. The act of the MU
victims in ordering the fencing of the home and rice mill of Narvaez TAU Power
constitutes unlawful aggression against his property. The law says the means is reasonable if a gun is used to defend yourself from
MU
somebody who attacks you with a knife. You say that is reasonable because a
Note: This is a stray decision. It cannot be reconciled with the general rule. TAU gun is more powerful against a knife. Not all things are being equal. A knife
This should not be considered as the controlling rule because it is in fact an MU can also kill especially if the assailant succeeds.
aberration. TAU
MU Character of the parties and their relative standing;
Maybe it is unreasonable to use a knife when somebody attacks you with a
Reasonable Necessity of the Means Employed to Prevent the TAU fist, one-by-one. But when five or ten people attack you with their fists, and
Aggression MU you use a knife against them, that is reasonable.
TAU
Question: What do you prevent? MU Question: When we say reasonable means, are we referring to weapons? Is
Answer: You prevent an actual aggression. You repel a threatened TAU this the only factor?
aggression. But in either way, you must use reasonable means. Answer: No, there are other factors. You, too, will have to consider the
MU number of aggressors.
Question: What do you mean by reasonable means? TAU
Answer: Reasonable means refer to two means: Example: You were attacked by fist blows and you used a knife or club to
MU
1. The course of action taken is reasonable; and defend yourself. IT might be unreasonable because you should also use your
TAU fist, that is true. But all things being equal, suppose the aggressor who attacks
2. The weapon used to defend is also reasonable.
MU with a fist is Manny Pacquiao, you are not required to use fist. It is reasonable
Course of action taken by the offender means his conduct and response to the TAU for you to use a club because considering the relative strength, you might have
occasion whether your reaction is reasonable or not. the chance with a club. Or you are attacked by seven men. There are seven
MU who maul you, and you are alone. Here, you may use a club.
Question: How do you determine the reasonableness of one’s reaction to the TAU
aggression? MU Question: What is that called?
Answer: It depends on the factors. It depends on the circumstances of the TAU Answer: The Number of Aggressor Rule. So, that is the balance. Reasonable
person, time and place. equality, not perfect equality.
MU
Question: If somebody is walking in a very dark street which is a very TAU
dangerous area, and all of the sudden somebody in the dark held him tightly at MU Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person
the back, and he responded by hitting his attacker, could you say that the TAU defending himself.
reaction of the person is reasonable? If you are a victim of unlawful aggression, even if you defend yourself
Answer: Yes, based on the circumstances of time and place. MU
reasonably, still you cannot claim self-defense if you were the cause of the
TAU aggression, because you gave sufficient provocation. You are also at fault.
But, for example, you are inside the classroom, and then you feel somebody MU You are partly to blame for the other party’s reaction. So, I provoked you and
behind you. He touched you, then you turned around and threw a punch on his because of that provocation you attack me and I have to defend myself with
face because he might attack you. That is a different story. That is not TAU reasonable means, I cannot claim self-defense because I am also at fault.
reasonable. MU
TAU Question: What are the principles to be remembered under the 3rd element?
Reasonableness of the weapon used: MU Answer:
The law does not require perfect equality of weapons. What the law requires is
reasonable equality. This does not mean to say that you should not use gun
TAU First, there was no provocation at all on the part of the person defending
because the aggressor is attacking you only with bolo or knife. A gun is more MU himself. Without doing anything, somebody attacks you. There was total
powerful than a bolo or knife, but you are now placed in danger because of the TAU absence of any provocation.
aggression. It is not perfect equality but reasonable, considering the fact that MU
when a person is under attack, instinctively he will the first available means at Second, the person defending himself might have given some provocation
his disposal to defend himself, and when a person is under unlawful but it is not sufficient. In the sense, the law allows him to plead self-defense
aggression, you cannot expect him to think coolly and to choose what kind of TAU because, even if he gave provocation, it is not commensurate with the reaction
weapon to use. MU on the attacker.
TAU
Example: Somebody attacks you with sticks; does it authorize you to use Question: How do you determine the sufficiency or insufficiency of a
your gun? It is unreasonable for a person, while being attacked by somebody MUT provocation?
with a Chaco, to use an M206 submachine gun to defend himself. That is too AU Answer: The guide there is the provocation that you gave is such that is
much! Obviously, there is no proportion between the weapon used by the MU normal and natural for him to react by becoming an unlawful aggressor.
aggressor and the one used by the person defending himself. The weapon used Meaning, if I uttered a remark, which is annoying or irritating, it does not
by the aggressor is not sufficient to kill. Why will you use a weapon that can
TAU justify you start to kill me. I can still plead self-defense because the reaction is
kill? MU not commensurate with the provocation, assuming there is one, is not
sufficient.
However, reasonableness of the weapon is not only measured by – using a TAU Example: Like in one case, a landowner saw somebody trespassing on his
knife as against a fist, using a club as against a Chaco. You also consider the hand. One day, he watched out him to pass by. When the landowner saw the
following:
MU trespasser, he asked why are you passing by my property? Who gave you the
 The size or power of the weapon TAU permission? The guy did not answer, bit instead killed him.
 The character of the parties MU
 Their relative standing. Question: Was there sufficient provocation?
Size Answer: Maybe yes. If the landowner did not comfort the accused, he would
So, if somebody attacks you with a knife, and then you defend yourself also not have been killed. Does this mean that the landowner has no right to ask a
with a knife, you cannot say that the means is reasonable because his knife is trespasser? The landowner could have giver the provocation, but that is not
larger, and yours is shorter. sufficient for a trespasser to kill the owner. The accused was only asked. And
the landowner has the right to ask him.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 26 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
TAU That is called the justifying circumstance on DEFENSE OF RELATIVES. If
Third, the person defending himself might have given sufficient you act for the defense of yourself, there is no reason why you cannot act for
MU
provocation, but his provocation was not immediate to the act of the defense of your relatives. That is based on two reasons: humanitarian
aggression, he can still invoke self-defense. TAU and blood ties.
MU
Example: I provoked Mr. A today, but he did not react. Ten, after six months, TAU Question: Who are considered your relatives?
when we met at San Pedro St., he started to attack me. So, I have to defend Answer: They are:
myself. MU  Spouse
TAU  Ascendants
Question: Can I claim self-defense? MU  Descendants
Answer: Yes, because the provocation was not proximate or immediate to the  Brothers and sisters, whether legitimate, illegitimate, natural or
TAU
act of aggression. IT is different is I provoke you now, you react immediately. adopted
MU  Relatives by affinity, within same degrees, like:
Meaning, I gave a provocation now, sufficient provocation. You attack me TAU o Parents-in-law
and I kill you, there is no self-defense because of the absence of the 3 rd MU o Son-in-law
element. But id I gave a provocation now, and then you attack me one year o Daughter-in-law
from now, and I kill you, I can claim self-defense. You cannot invoke the TAU o Brother-in-law
provocation I gave last year to defeat my claim for self-defense. MU  Relatives of consanguinity within fourth civil degree
TAU
Note: Three is a close co-relation between the first and the third elements – Question: What are the elements?
unlawful aggression and lack of sufficient provocation. MU
Answer:
TAU 1. Your relative must be a victim of unlawful aggression If your
An aggression may also be a provocation. When I attack you that could be a MU relative is the aggressor, and you came to aid to finish off his
provocation on m part for you to be also aggressor against me. Mt aggression, opponent, you cannot claim defense of relatives.
TAU
which should work against me, could be a provocation on my part in order for 2. You have also to use reasonable means – reasonable necessity of
you to also become an aggressor. It is convertible. MU
the means employed to prevent or repel the aggression.
TAU 3. The one making the defense had no part therein.
That is very illustrated in the case of Alconga. The deceased attacked Alconga MU In case your father or brother gave the provocation to attack, you
with a clb. So, the deceased is the unlawful aggressor. Then, when Alconga can still defend him if you are not part of the provocation. The law
fought back and the deceased realized that he was wounded, the deceased run TAU dies not say that your relative must be the provocator.
away. So, there is no more aggression but Alconga pursed him and killed him. MU
Alconga was accused for the death of the victim. TAU If your brother has not provoked anybody and is attacked, all the
MU more that you can legally defend him: it’s better that your brother
Question: Can the victim, who is now accused, claim self-defense? has not provoked anybody and is attacked, you can defend him.
Answer: TAU
But if your brother or your father provoked somebody, and your
 Was there unlawful aggression by Alconga? MU brother or father attacked, he cannot invoke complete self-defense
 Yes, he went after the man to kill him. TAU because his provocation will prejudice him.
 Did he use reasonable means to kill Alconga?
 We will assume that. MU
However, even if it prejudices him, it will not prejudice you. While
 Was there lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person TAU he may not act in lawful self-defense, you may still act in lawful
defending himself? MU defense of relative because what is important is that you have no
 No. Why did Alconga want to kill him? It was because part in the provocation.
he wanted to kill Alconga at the first stage of the fight.
TAU
So, his aggression earlier became a provocation on his MU
3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a
part in the second stage of the fight. TAU
So, if that was what happened that Alconga was the deceased and the MU stranger, provided that the first and second requisites
deceased was the accused and latter invokes self-defense, still he cannot claim mentioned in the first circumstance of this Art. are present
self-defense because this time, there is the absence of the 3 rd element. That is and that the person defending be not induced by revenge,
how you correlate those two elements. Either way, Alconga could claim self- TAU
defense.
resentment, or other evil motive.
MU
TAU
MUT Briefly: Defense of Strangers
AU
MU Question: Define a stranger.
Answer: A stranger is a person who is not among the relatives in paragraph 2.
TAU So, if you defend a relative in the 5 th civil degree that is already a stranger.
2. Any one who acts in defense of the person or rights of his MU The word “stranger” is not literal as somebody who is unknown to you. If you
spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural or have a best friend, you see him being attacked and you came to help him that
constitutes defense of stranger. So, stranger is practically the human race.
adopted brothers or sisters, or his relatives by affinity in the TAU
same degrees and those consanguinity within the fourth civil MU Question: Why? What is the principle behind defense of stranger?
TAU Answer: Humanitarian reasons. What you can do for yourself, the law allows
degree, provided that the first and second requisites you to do it for others. My fellowmen, my keeper. That’s a noble principle.
MU
prescribed in the next preceding circumstance are present,
and the further requisite, in case the revocation was given by The elements are the same with the two first elements of self-
the person attacked, that the one making defense had no defense.
1. Unlawful aggression
part therein.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 27 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel MU
the aggression TAU
3. That the person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment 5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the
MU
or other evil motive.
TAU lawful exercise of a right or office.
So, what differs this is third element. It means that you were motivated by MU
This provision is short, but actually, it talks of three separate and distinct
humanitarian sentiment. You really did it to defend the stranger. You were not TAU
justifying circumstances:
induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motives.
MU  One who acts in the fulfillment of duty
 One who acts in the exercise of a right
Example: I am looking for my enemy because I want to kill him and then TAU
 One who acts in the exercise of an office
when I saw him, he was attacking somebody, so I entered the scene and killed MU
him. Let us assume these things are established because these are matters of
TAU Question: What are the requisites?
evidence.
MU Answer:
1. That the accused acted in the performance of a duty or in lawful
Question: Am I entitled to complete defense of stranger? TAU exercise of a right or office.
Answer: No, actually it was just coincidence that my enemy was attacking a MU
2. That the injury caused or the offense committed be necessary
stranger and since the aggressor was my long time enemy, it was apparent that
TAU consequences of the due performance of a duty or the lawful
I was induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive.
exercise of such right or office.
MU
TAU In the fulfillment of duty
4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does MU The best example for this is applicable to law enforcement officers because in
not act which causes damage to another, provided that the TAU the performance of their duty, they can hurt people. Arresting officers, who
following requisites are present; authorized to employ reasonable force sometimes, injure and then the person
MU arrested sues the policeman for physical injury or even homicide.
Briefly, this is justifying circumstance of State of Necessity or the TAU
Emergency Rule. You are confronted with a situation where you are left MU Question: What would be the defense of the policeman?
with no choice because either way you do it; you also cause him harm, injury, TAU Answer: He acted in fulfillment of his duty.
or damage to the property of another. In order to avoid evil or injury to
yourself, you commit acts which would also injure others, provided that the
MU But take note that in order to avail of this justifying circumstance, it must be
three requisites are present. TAU established that is a proper fulfillment of duty. A policeman cannot simply
MU commit homicide when there is no need for him to kill person to be arrested.
Examples: In that case, the fulfillment of duty would be improper.
TAU
1. If the injury is greater than that done – injury feared in death. MU The use of force may be improper if the person to be arrested is peacefully
TAU surrendering. So, for example, if the guy is surrendering, there is no need to
You are driving your car in the highway, observing traffic rules and MU use force. Moreover, if the person who surrendered sues you for using force
regulations. That all of a sudden in front of you is an over speeding 6x6 truck against him, then you cannot claim that it is a fulfillment of a duty because
straight to your direction. What will you do? If I will drive on you will be TAU your act is improper. The Rules of Court requires that the use of force must be
squashed to death. If you stopped, you will be killed. You only recourse is to MU reasonable.
turn left or right to avoid collusion. But if you turn left, you will fall into a TAU
cliff and surely you will die. The only alternative is to turn right, but by
MU People vs Delima
turning right, there are people who will surely be ran over. Since you have no
choice, you have to adopt the only remaining alternative through which you TAU
can save your own life and for the death or injury to those people that you MU Facts: Policeman Delima is tasked to arrest a dangerous escapee-convict.
would run over, you could invoke the emergency rule or state of necessity. TAU When he tried to apprehend the convict, the latter fought back with a
sharpened bamboo pole. But the policeman was able to evade the attack and
But suppose, I am also over speeding and even if I apply brakes, I will still MU the convict turned around and ran away. So, Delima had to shoot him. He was
collide with the truck. Then I cannot avail of this rule in case I injure or kill accused of homicide.
somebody because the emergency rule cannot invoke by the person who TAU
caused the state of emergency. MU Issue: WoN Delima is liable for homicide.

2. To save more properties from fire, a property will be sacrificed – TAU Held: He is not liable because he acted in the fulfillment of duty to arrest
destroy three or more houses to save fifty houses. MUT the convict. There was no other way of apprehending the victim and the latter
AU showed that he was resisting the arrest. As a matter of fact, he attacked
3. To save a vessel and people’s lives, the cargoes will be jettisoned. Delima earlier and he was running away, he was taking with im the bamboo
MU
pole. That showed his determination no to surrender. There is no other way of
Note: No one can invoke emergency rule if he brought out the emergency TAU catching him alive and the only way is to kill him.
himself. One who causes the emergency rule has right to invoke the MU
emergency rule. This Delima case is often confused with the Alconga case. In the case of
TAU Alconga, the victim was already running away, he was chased and killed by
Like a person who is over speeding and saves his life by killing somebody. He Alconga. The court ruled there that Alconga was liable. How come here in
wanted to avoid collision. He is not entitled to the rule because he is the one MU this case the rulling is different when the facts are identical because here the
who brought out emergency himself. TAU victim was also running away, and so, there is no more unlawful aggression?
MU
As we shall see later, and even as expressed in Article 101 of the RPC, this is
the only justifying circumstance where there is no criminal liability, but there Question: Is there a conflict between Delima and Alconga ruling?
is civil liability. Normally, the person who successfully invokes and proves Answer: There is no conflict because Alconga case was decided under
any of the justifying circumstances under Article 11 does not incur any paragraph 1 on self-defense, the Delima case is decided under paragraph 5, on
criminal liability. This paragraph is where there is no criminal liability to be fulfillment of duty. The ruling in Alconga was based on the fact that in self-
borne by the persons benefited by the act. defense, there is no need for unlawful aggression. There can be no self-

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 28 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
defense without unlawful aggression. That’s why since there was no more MU
unlawful aggression, Alconga cannot invoke self-defense. But in the TAU Question: Is it reasonable for the owner of the watch to immobilize the thief
fulfillment of a duty, paragraph 5 does not require that the person fulfilling his by shooting him in the leg so that he cannot run?
MU
duty must be the victim of an unlawful aggression. Answer: Yes.
TAU
As a matter of fact, the law recognizes that in the fulfillment of duty, the law MU Let us change the story. Your watch was taken from your wrist; the thief was
enforcement officer himself maybe the aggressor, but for as long as the TAU able to run away. Since you cannot overtake him and in order to prevent the
exercise of his duty is proper, he cannot be held liable for any injury sustained thief from running away with your watch, you shoot him in the body and
by, or death of the person arrested. That is why there is really no conflict MU killed him.
between the two rulings because the philosophy behind self-defense is not the TAU
same as the philosophy behind the fulfillment of a duty. MU Question: Can he invoke paragraph 5 that he acted “in the exercise of his
right”?
TAU
For example, the policeman is going to arrest you and then you tried to kill Answer: No, because while under paragraph 5, in relation to Article 429 of
him, instead of surrendering. So, the policeman killed you. What is the MU the Civil Code, the owner or possessor of a property has the right to exclude
difference? As a matter of choice, I can invoke self-defense, but he could also TAU any person from enjoyment or disposal of his property, the law requires that in
claim fulfillment of duty. But when you turn your back and run away, you MU doing so, he may use such reasonable force to prevent or repel an actual or
don’t give up to the policeman has no choice, so he killed you. Self-defense is threatened unlawful physical invasion or usurpation of his property. It was not
not anymore there. But he can still rely on paragraph 5 – fulfillment of duty. TAU reasonable for the owner of the watch to kill the thief to recover the watch.
MU That is based on the principle that no one is justified to take life simply
TAU because of property.
In the exercise of a right MU
Question: Is there such a thing a self-defense of property?
Answer: Under paragraph 1, there is none, because in order to invoke self- TAU In the exercise of office
defense of property, under self-defense, there must be an attack on your MU Question: What is the example?
person and if there is none, there is no such thing as defense of property. That TAU Answer: Executioner of the National Bilibid Prison.
is not one of the rights contemplated under paragraph 1.
MU
Question: Suppose you are the official executioner. You are the one assigned
But there is such an animal as defense of property under paragraph 5, when TAU to condemn the convict to death by electrocution or lethal injection. The
the accused can prove, due exercise of a right. Now this paragraph 5 is the real MU convict died. So, now you are sued. What is you defense?
law on self-defense of property. TAU Answer: That you acted in the lawful exercise of an office. You are an
executioner. That is your job.
MU
Question: What law gives the right to an owner or possessor of a property to
TAU But, take note paragraph 5 says “in lawful exercise xxx office”. So, the
defend his property when he is unjustly attacked?
exercise of an office must be proper. For example, the execution is at 3:00 pm.
Answer: Article 429 of the Civil Code, which is called as the Doctrine of MU
Do not execute him at any other time, say 12:00 noon. That is improper
Self-Help. TAU because the President might grant him pardon or commutation of the sentence.
MU But if you execute him on time, and you are charged with homicide, you can
Art. 429. The owner or lawful possessor of a thing has the
TAU invoke paragraph 5 as a defense.
right to exclude any person from the enjoyment and disposal
thereof. For this purpose, he may use such force as may be MU
Another example: As a surgeon, you have to amputate the leg of a patient
reasonably necessary to repel or prevent an actual or TAU because of gangrene. You have to save his life by amputating his leg and after
threatened unlawful physical invasion or usurpation of his
MU that the patient sued for the crime with Mutilation of second type, which is
property. (n)
TAU punishable by the RPC.
MU Question: What is the surgeon’s defense?
A lawful owner of a property has the right to defend is possession of the TAU Answer: That he was in the lawful exercise of his office.
property and for this purpose he may use such force as may be reasonably MU
necessary in order to prevent or repel an actual or threatened invasion of his 6. Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a
property. TAU superior for some lawful purpose.
Question: If, for example, a group of people is going to forcibly occupy your MU
TAU Requisites:
land, do you have the right to drive them out?
1. That an order has been issued by a superior;
Answer: Of course! MUT 2. That such order must be for some lawful purpose; and
AU 3. That the means used by the subordinate to carry out said order is
Question: If you are sued by these people for driving them out, what is your
MU lawful.
defense?
Answer: The right to defend your property. But to invoke Article 11(1), you TAU
The best examples are people in the military or police. They are normally
invoke paragraph 5 because you are acting in the exercise of a right. MU following orders. The Supreme Court said that the order must be lawful or at
least prima facie lawful, and the means to carry out the order must be lawful.
But take note, under Civil Code, the use of force to defend your possession of
property must be reasonable. For example, a pickpocket grabbed your TAU
If you are a subordinate, you were just ordered by a superior, you followed the
expensive watch. You chased him. In order to prevent him from escaping, you MU
order it turned out to be illegal. Now, you are being sued. Your defense is that
drew your gun and shot him in the leg. As a result of which he could no longer TAU
you are just following the order of a superior officer. That is not a valid
run. You are able to recover your watch. Eh sues you for physical injuries for
MU defense. The condition is that the order must be lawful.
the wound you inflicted in his leg.
Question: So, going back to the whole Article 11, what is the basis for not
Question: What will be your defense?
being criminally liable?
Answer: Do not invoke self-defense, as it is not covered. So, you say that you
Answer: That the act is justified. The act is in accordance with law. If that is
acted in the exercise of a right to prevent or repel the act of the victim in
so, the accused does not incur criminal liability and obviously, it follows that
getting your property.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 29 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
is the act is in accordance with law, he is not also incur any criminal or civil MU
liability, except in paragraph 4 (state of necessity) where there is civil liability. TAU
MU
Exempting Circumstances TAU
MU
Question: What is the essence of an exempting circumstance? TAU
Answer: An exempting circumstance is a circumstance which, if present in MU
the commission of a crime, makes the offender exempt from criminal liability.
He is not criminally liable for the crime committed because when he TAU
committed the felony, he acted without intelligence, or without freedom, or MU
without intent or negligence. And therefore, since there is the absence of any TAU
of these, the felony was not committed with voluntariness.
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
Art. 12. Circumstances which exempt from criminal MU
liability. — the following are exempt from criminal TAU 1. This is known as the exempting
liability: MU circumstance of IMBECILITY or INSANITY.
1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has TAU
acted during a lucid interval. MU Question: What is the basis of paragraph 1?
Answer: Complete absence of intelligence.
When the imbecile or an insane person has committed TAU
an act which the law defines as a felony (delito), the MU
court shall order his confinement in one of the TAU Question: What is imbecility?
Answer: It is a condition of the mind where the offender might be advance in
hospitals or asylums established for persons thus MU
age but the mental development is comparable to that of a child between two
afflicted, which he shall not be permitted to leave TAU and seven years of age.
without first obtaining the permission of the same MU
court. TAU Insanity lays down a condition: unless the insane person has acted during a
lucid interval. This qualification applies only to insane people, not imbecile.
2. A person under fifteen years of age. MU When you are an imbecile, there is no such thing as lucid interval. You are an
3. A person over fifteen years of age and under TAU imbecile all your life, through and through. You cannot be a retarded person
eighteen, unless he has acted with discernment, in MU now, then tomorrow you are normal. Whereas, there are types of insanity
which case, such minor shall be proceeded against in where there is some period of time when he is normal ad if the insane person
TAU
commits a crime at the time he is normal he is liable.
accordance with the provisions of Art. 80 of this Code. MU
When such minor is adjudged to be criminally TAU Question: What is the presumption?
irresponsible, the court, in conformably with the MU Answer: The presumption is he is insane. But it can be rebutted by evidence
provisions of this and the preceding paragraph, shall that he acted during a lucid interval.
TAU
commit him to the care and custody of his family who MU Question: What is the definition of insanity?
shall be charged with his surveillance and education Answer: It has a medical definition, but the legal concept of insanity is the
otherwise, he shall be committed to the care of some TAU inability to distinguish what is right from what is wrong.
institution or person mentioned in said Art. 80. MU
4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with People vs Dungo
TAU
due care, causes an injury by mere accident without 199 SCRA 660
MUT
fault or intention of causing it. AU Under foreign jurisdictions, there are three major criteria in determining the
5. Any person who act under the compulsion of MU existence of insanity:
irresistible force. TAU
6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an 1. Delusion Test – insane delusion is manifested by a false belief
MU for which there is a number of reasonable basis and which would
uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury.
be incredible under the given circumstances to the same person if
7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by TAU he is of compos mentis. An insane person believes in a state of
law, when prevented by some lawful insuperable cause. MU things, the existence of which no rational person would believe.
TAU
2. Irresistible Impulse Test – A person acts under an
MU irresistible impulse when by reason of duress or mental disease, he
has lost the power to choose between right and wrong, to avoid the
act in question, his free agency being at the time destroyed. In
other words, he can distinguish between right and wrong, but he
has lost the power to choose. He cannot resist the urge to commit a

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 30 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
crime because he has no power to choose, although he recognizes MU
the different between right and wrong. TAU
2. A person under fifteen years of age.
MU
3. Right and Wrong Test – A person is insane when he
TAU
suffers from such perverted condition of the mental and moral
faculties as to render him incapable of distinguishing between right MU Republic of the Philippines
and wrong. TAU Congress of the Philippines
MU Metro Manila
In the Philippines, there is no definite criterion for insanity. But the
Supreme Court adopted a definition from the Revised TAU
Administrative Code, Section 1039, which state that insanity is a MU Thirteenth Congress
manifestation in language or conduct, of disease or defect of the TAU Second Regular Session
brain or a more or less permanently diseased or dishonored
condition of the mentality, functional or organic, and characterized
MU
Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the twenty-fifth day of July,
by perversion, inhibition, or dishonored function of the sensory or TAU two thousand and five.
of the intellective faculties, or by impaired or dishonored violation. MU Republic Act No. 9344
Insanity, as defined above, is evidenced by a deranged and TAU
perverted condition of the mental faculties, which is manifested in
language or conduct. An insane person has no full and clear MU AN ACT ESTABLISHING A COMPREHENSIVE JUVENILE
understanding of the nature and consequences of his act. TAU JUSTICE AND WELFARE SYSTEM, CREATING THE JUVENILE
MU JUSTICE AND WELFARE COUNCIL UNDER THE DEPARTMENT
TAU OF JUSTICE, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR AND FOR
People vs Mancao MU
OTHER PURPOSES
49 PHIL 887 TAU
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in
Facts: This is a case involving an epileptic. During the influence of an MU Congress assembled:
epileptic fit, he attacked the victim. He committed a crime. He pleaded TAU
insanity as a defense. MU
TITLE I
Issue: WON he is liable or not. TAU
GOVERNING PRINCIPLES
MU
Held: Epilepsy is not insanity from medical point of view. But from the point TAU
of view of the law, that is precisely the concept of insanity. He cannot CHAPTER 1
MU
distinguish what is rig from wrong, because the condition of the mind is not TITLE, POLICY AND DEFINITION OF TERMS
the same. TAU
MU
It is important to note, however, that the epileptic, to be exempt form liability, TAU Section 1. Short Title and Scope. - This Act shall be known as the "Juvenile
must have committed the crime at the very moment that he was under the Justice and Welfare Act of 2006." It shall cover the different stages
influence of an epileptic fit. Otherwise, even is he is an epileptic; he is not MU involving children at risk and children in conflict with the law from
exempt from liability if he did not commit the crime during an epileptic TAU prevention to rehabilitation and reintegration.
attack. MU
TAU SEC. 2. Declaration of State Policy. - The following State policies shall be
MU observed at all times:
People vs Tanco
TAU
58 PHIL 255
MU (a) The State recognizes the vital role of children and youth in
Facts: A somnambulist or sleepwalker, while sleeping, got up. Got a bolo nation building and shall promote and protect their physical, moral,
and upon meeting is wife tried to stop him, wounded her and also attack other TAU spiritual, intellectual and social well-being. It shall inculcate in the
persons. MU youth patriotism and nationalism, and encourage their involvement
TAU in public and civic affairs.
Held: He is not criminally liable, it appearing that the act was committed
while in a dream. He is covered by the term “insanity” because at the time he MUT
committed the crime, he lack intelligence. AU (b) The State shall protect the best interests of the child through
MU measures that will ensure the observance of international standards
Under the law, even if you are medically insane, if you commit a crime during of child protection, especially those to which the Philippines is a
lucid interval, you are liable. There are types of insanity where the doctor will
TAU
party. Proceedings before any authority shall be conducted in the
say that he is insane for a certain time and for another time, he is normal. The MU
best interest of the child and in a manner which allows the child to
lucid interval is the period of sanity. There are also types of insanity where
there are no lucid interval. If they are in their lucid interval, they are liable TAU participate and to express himself/herself freely. The participation
because during that period they are sane and therefore they can distinguish of children in the program and policy formulation and
MU implementation related to juvenile justice and welfare shall be
what is right from what is wrong.
TAU ensured by the concerned government agency.
There are persons who are not normal during full moon – lunatics. At the last MU
quarter, they become normal. The mind is affected by the movements of the
moon, like the waves, high tide if full moon. There must be scientific (c) The State likewise recognizes the right of children to
explanation in that. How come some persons during those periods manifest assistance, including proper care and nutrition, and special
some kind of lunacy? protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty and
exploitation, and other conditions prejudicial to their development.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 31 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
(d) Pursuant to Article 40 of the United Nations Convention on the MU (2) being exploited including sexually or economically;
Rights of the Child, the State recognizes the right of every child TAU
alleged as, accused of, adjudged, or recognized as having infringed MU (3) being abandoned or neglected, and after diligent
the penal law to be treated in a manner consistent with the TAU search and inquiry, the parent or guardian cannot be
promotion of the child's sense of dignity and worth, taking into
MU found;
account the child's age and desirability of promoting his/her
TAU
reintegration. Whenever appropriate and desirable, the State shall
adopt measures for dealing with such children without resorting to MU (4) coming from a dysfunctional or broken family or
judicial proceedings, providing that human rights and legal TAU without a parent or guardian;
safeguards are fully respected. It shall ensure that children are dealt MU
with in a manner appropriate to their well-being by providing for, TAU (5) being out of school;
among others, a variety of disposition measures such as care, MU
guidance and supervision orders, counseling, probation, foster TAU (6) being a streetchild;
care, education and vocational training programs and other
MU
alternatives to institutional care.
TAU (7) being a member of a gang;
MU
(e) The administration of the juvenile justice and welfare system
TAU (8) living in a community with a high level of
shall take into consideration the cultural and religious perspectives
of the Filipino people, particularly the indigenous peoples and the
MU criminality or drug abuse; and
Muslims, consistent with the protection of the rights of children TAU
belonging to these communities. MU (9) living in situations of armed conflict.
TAU
(f) The State shall apply the principles of restorative justice in all MU (e) "Child in Conflict with the Law" refers to a child who is
its laws, policies and programs applicable to children in conflict TAU alleged as, accused of, or adjudged as, having committed an
with the law. MU offense under Philippine laws.
TAU
SEC. 3. Liberal Construction of this Act. - In case of doubt, the interpretation MU (f) "Community-based Programs" refers to the programs provided
of any of the provisions of this Act, including its implementing rules and TAU in a community setting developed for purposes of intervention and
regulations (IRRs), shall be construed liberally in favor of the child in conflict MU diversion, as well as rehabilitation of the child in conflict with the
with the law. law, for reintegration into his/her family and/or community.
TAU
MU
SEC. 4. Definition of Terms. - The following terms as used in this Act shall TAU (g) "Court" refers to a family court or, in places where there are no
be defined as follows: family courts, any regional trial court.
MU
TAU
(a) "Bail" refers to the security given for the release of the person MU (h) "Deprivation of Liberty" refers to any form of detention or
in custody of the law, furnished by him/her or a bondsman, to imprisonment, or to the placement of a child in conflict with the
TAU
guarantee his/her appearance before any court. Bail may be given law in a public or private custodial setting, from which the child in
in the form of corporate security, property bond, cash deposit, or
MU conflict with the law is not permitted to leave at will by order of
recognizance. TAU any judicial or administrative authority.
MU
(b) "Best Interest of the Child" refers to the totality of the (i) "Diversion" refers to an alternative, child-appropriate process of
circumstances and conditions which are most congenial to the
TAU determining the responsibility and treatment of a child in conflict
survival, protection and feelings of security of the child and most MU with the law on the basis of his/her social, cultural, economic,
encouraging to the child's physical, psychological and emotional TAU psychological or educational background without resorting to
development. It also means the least detrimental available MUT formal court proceedings.
alternative for safeguarding the growth and development of the AU
child. MU (j) "Diversion Program" refers to the program that the child in
TAU conflict with the law is required to undergo after he/she is found
(e) "Child" refers to a person under the age of eighteen (18) years. MU responsible for an offense without resorting to formal court
proceedings.
(d) "Child at Risk" refers to a child who is vulnerable to and at the TAU
risk of committing criminal offenses because of personal, family MU (k) "Initial Contact With-the Child" refers to the apprehension or
and social circumstances, such as, but not limited to, the following: TAU taking into custody of a child in conflict with the law by law
MU enforcement officers or private citizens. It includes the time when
(1) being abused by any person through sexual, the child alleged to be in conflict with the law receives a subpoena
physical, psychological, mental, economic or any other under Section 3(b) of Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal
means and the parents or guardian refuse, are unwilling, Procedure or summons under Section 6(a) or Section 9(b) of the
or unable to provide protection for the child; same Rule in cases that do not require preliminary investigation or

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 32 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
where there is no necessity to place the child alleged to be in MU individuals. Physical mobility of residents of said centers may be
conflict with the law under immediate custody. TAU restricted pending court disposition of the charges against them.
MU
(I) "Intervention" refers to a series of activities which are designed TAU (u) "Victimless Crimes" refers to offenses where there is no private
to address issues that caused the child to commit an offense. It may MU offended party.
take the form of an individualized treatment program which may TAU
include counseling, skills training, education, and other activities MU CHAPTER 2
that will enhance his/her psychological, emotional and psycho- PRINCIPLES IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUVENILE JUSTICE
TAU
social well-being. AND WELFARE
MU
TAU
(m) "Juvenile Justice and Welfare System" refers to a system SEC. 5. Rights of the Child in Conflict with the Law. - Every child in
MU
dealing with children at risk and children in conflict with the law, conflict with the law shall have the following rights, including but not limited
which provides child-appropriate proceedings, including programs TAU to:
and services for prevention, diversion, rehabilitation, re-integration MU
and aftercare to ensure their normal growth and development. TAU
MU (a) the right not to be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman
or degrading treatment or punishment;
(n) "Law Enforcement Officer" refers to the person in authority or TAU
his/her agent as defined in Article 152 of the Revised Penal Code, MU
(b) the right not to be imposed a sentence of capital punishment or
including a barangay tanod. TAU
life imprisonment, without the possibility of release;
MU
(0) "Offense" refers to any act or omission whether punishable TAU
under special laws or the Revised Penal Code, as amended. (c) the right not to be deprived, unlawfully or arbitrarily, of his/her
MU
liberty; detention or imprisonment being a disposition of last
TAU resort, and which shall be for the shortest appropriate period of
(p) "Recognizance" refers to an undertaking in lieu of a bond MU time;
assumed by a parent or custodian who shall be responsible for the TAU
appearance in court of the child in conflict with the law, when MU
required. (d) the right to be treated with humanity and respect, for the
TAU inherent dignity of the person, and in a manner which takes into
MU account the needs of a person of his/her age. In particular, a child
(q) "Restorative Justice" refers to a principle which requires a TAU deprived of liberty shall be separated from adult offenders at all
process of resolving conflicts with the maximum involvement of times. No child shall be detained together with adult offenders.
MU
the victim, the offender and the community. It seeks to obtain He/She shall be conveyed separately to or from court. He/She shall
reparation for the victim; reconciliation of the offender, the TAU await hearing of his/her own case in a separate holding area. A
offended and the community; and reassurance to the offender that MU child in conflict with the law shall have the right to maintain
he/she can be reintegrated into society. It also enhances public TAU contact with his/her family through correspondence and visits, save
safety by activating the offender, the victim and the community in MU in exceptional circumstances;
prevention strategies. TAU
MU (e) the right to prompt access to legal and other appropriate
(r) "Status Offenses" refers to offenses which discriminate only TAU assistance, as well as the right to challenge the legality of the
against a child, while an adult does not suffer any penalty for MU deprivation of his/her liberty before a court or other competent,
committing similar acts. These shall include curfew violations; independent and impartial authority, and to a prompt decision on
truancy, parental disobedience and the like. TAU such action;
MU
(s) "Youth Detention Home" refers to a 24-hour child-caring TAU (f) the right to bail and recognizance, in appropriate cases;
institution managed by accredited local government units (LGUs) MUT
and licensed and/or accredited nongovernment organizations
AU (g) the right to testify as a witness in hid/her own behalf under the
(NGOs) providing short-term residential care for children in
conflict with the law who are awaiting court disposition of their
MU rule on examination of a child witness;
cases or transfer to other agencies or jurisdiction. TAU
MU (h) the right to have his/her privacy respected fully at all stages of
(t) "Youth Rehabilitation Center" refers to a 24-hour residential the proceedings;
care facility managed by the Department of Social Welfare and
TAU
Development (DSWD), LGUs, licensed and/or accredited NGOs MU (i) the right to diversion if he/she is qualified and voluntarily avails
monitored by the DSWD, which provides care, treatment and TAU of the same;
rehabilitation services for children in conflict with the law. MU
Rehabilitation services are provided under the guidance of a (j) the right to be imposed a judgment in proportion to the gravity
trained staff where residents are cared for under a structured of the offense where his/her best interest, the rights of the victim
therapeutic environment with the end view of reintegrating them and the needs of society are all taken into consideration by the
into their families and communities as socially functioning court, under the principle of restorative justice;

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 33 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
(k) the right to have restrictions on his/her personal liberty limited MU In all proceedings, law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges and other
to the minimum, and where discretion is given by law to the judge TAU government officials concerned shall exert all efforts at determining the age of
to determine whether to impose fine or imprisonment, the MU the child in conflict with the law.
imposition of fine being preferred as the more appropriate penalty; TAU
MU
(I) in general, the right to automatic suspension of sentence; TAU
TITLE II
MU
STRUCTURES IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUVENILE JUSTICE
(m) the right to probation as an alternative to imprisonment, if TAU
AND WELFARE
qualified under the Probation Law; MU
TAU
SEC. 8. Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council (JJWC). - A Juvenile Justice
(n) the right to be free from liability for perjury, concealment or MU
and Welfare Council (JJWC) is hereby created and attached to the Department
misrepresentation; and TAU of Justice and placed under its administrative supervision. The JJWC shall be
MU chaired by an undersecretary of the Department of Social Welfare and
(o) other rights as provided for under existing laws, rules and TAU Development. It shall ensure the effective implementation of this Act and
regulations. MU coordination among the following agencies:
TAU
The State further adopts the provisions of the United Nations Standard MU (a) Council for the Welfare of Children (CWC);
Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice or "Beijing Rules",
TAU
United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency or the
MU (b) Department of Education (DepEd);
"Riyadh Guidelines", and the United Nations Rules for the Protection of
Juveniles Deprived of Liberty. TAU
MU (c) Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG);
SEC. 6. Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility. - A child fifteen (15)
TAU
years of age or under at the time of the commission of the offense shall be MU (d) Public Attorney's Office (PAO);
exempt from criminal liability. However, the child shall be subjected to an TAU
intervention program pursuant to Section 20 of this Act. MU (e) Bureau of Corrections (BUCOR);
TAU
A child above fifteen (15) years but below eighteen (18) years of age shall MU (f) Parole and Probation Administration (PPA)
likewise be exempt from criminal liability and be subjected to an intervention TAU
program, unless he/she has acted with discernment, in which case, such child MU
(g) National Bureau of Investigation (NBI);
shall be subjected to the appropriate proceedings in accordance with this Act. TAU
MU
(h) Philippine National Police (PNP);.
The exemption from criminal liability herein established does not include TAU
exemption from civil liability, which shall be enforced in accordance with MU
existing laws. (i) Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP);
TAU
MU
SEC. 7. Determination ofAge. - The child in conflict with the law shall enjoy (i) Commission on Human Rights (CHR);
TAU
the presumption of minority. He/She shall enjoy all the rights of a child in
MU
conflict with the law until he/she is proven to be eighteen (18) years old or (k) Technical Education and Skills Development Authority
older. The age of a child may be determined from the child's birth certificate, (TESDA);
baptismal certificate or any other pertinent documents. In the absence of these TAU
documents, age may be based on information from the child himself/herself, MU
(l) National Youth Commission (NYC); and
testimonies of other persons, the physical appearance of the child and other TAU
relevant evidence. In case of doubt as to the age of the child, it shall be MUT
resolved in his/her favor. AU (m) Other institutions focused on juvenile justice and intervention
MU programs.
Any person contesting the age of the child in conflict with the law prior to the TAU
filing of the information in any appropriate court may file a case in a summary MU The JJWC shall be composed of representatives, whose ranks shall not be
proceeding for the determination of age before the Family Court which shall lower than director, to be designated by the concerned heads of the following
decide the case within twenty-four (24) hours from receipt of the appropriate TAU departments or agencies:
pleadings of all interested parties.
MU
TAU (a) Department of Justice (DOJ);
If a case has been fiied against the child in conflict with the law and is MU
pending in the appropriate court, the person shall file a motion to determine (b) Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD);
the age of the child in the same court where the case is pending. Pending
hearing on the said motion, proceedings on the main case shall be suspended.
(c) Council for the Welfare of Children (CWC)

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 34 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
(d) Department of Education (DepEd); MU (2) the periodic trends, problems and causes of juvenile
TAU delinquency and crimes; and
(e) Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) MU
TAU (3) the particular needs of children in conflict with the
(f) Commission on Human Rights (CHR); MU law in custody.
TAU
(g) National Youth Commission (NYC); and MU The data gathered shall be used by the JJWC in the improvement
TAU of the administration of juvenile justice and welfare system.

(h) Two (2) representatives from NGOs, one to be designated by


MU
the Secretary of Justice and the other to be designated by the TAU The JJWC shall set up a mechanism to ensure that children are
Secretary of Social Welfare and Development. MU involved in research and policy development.
TAU
The JJWC shall convene within fifteen (15) days from the effectivity of this MU (h) Through duly designated persons and with the assistance of the
Act. The Secretary of Justice and the Secretary of Social Welfare and TAU agencies provided in the preceding section, to conduct regular
Development shall determine the organizational structure and staffing pattern MU inspections in detention and rehabilitation facilities and to
of the JJWC. undertake spot inspections on their own initiative in order to check
TAU
compliance with the standards provided herein and to make the
MU necessary recommendations to appropriate agencies;
The JJWC shall coordinate with the Office of the Court Administrator and the TAU
Philippine Judicial Academy to ensure the realization of its mandate and the MU
proper discharge of its duties and functions, as herein provided. (i) To initiate and coordinate the conduct of trainings for the
TAU personnel of the agencies involved in the administration of the
MU juvenile justice and welfare system and the juvenile intervention
SEC. 9. Duties and Functions of the JJWC. - The JJWC shall have the TAU program;
following duties and functions:
MU
TAU (j) To submit an annual report to the President on the
(a) To oversee the implementation of this Act; MU implementation of this Act; and
TAU
(b) To advise the President on all matters and policies relating to MU (k) To perform such other functions as may be necessary to
juvenile justice and welfare;
TAU implement the provisions of this Act.
MU
(c) To assist the concerned agencies in the review and redrafting of TAU SEC. 10. Policies and Procedures on Juvenile Justice and Welfare. - All
existing policies/regulations or in the formulation of new ones in government agencies enumerated in Section 8 shall, with the assistance of the
MU
line with the provisions of this Act; JJWC and within one (1) year from the effectivity of this Act, draft policies
TAU
MU and procedures consistent with the standards set in the law. These policies and
(d) To periodically develop a comprehensive 3 to 5-year national procedures shall be modified accordingly in consultation with the JJWC upon
TAU
juvenile intervention program, with the participation of the completion of the national juvenile intervention program as provided
government agencies concerned, NGOs and youth organizations; MU under Section 9 (d).
TAU
MU
(e) To coordinate the implementation of the juvenile intervention SEC. 11. Child Rights Center (CRC). - The existing Child Rights Center of
programs and activities by national government agencies and other the Commission on Human Rights shall ensure that the status, rights and
activities which may have an important bearing on the success of TAU interests of children are upheld in accordance with the Constitution and
the entire national juvenile intervention program. All programs MU international instruments on human rights. The CHR shall strengthen the
relating to juvenile justice and welfare shall be adopted in TAU monitoring of government compliance of all treaty obligations, including the
consultation with the JJWC; MUT timely and regular submission of reports before the treaty bodies, as well as
AU the implementation and dissemination of recommendations and conclusions
(f) To formulate and recommend policies and strategies in MU by government agencies as well as NGOs and civil society.
consultation with children for the prevention of juvenile TAU
delinquency and the administration of justice, as well as for the MU
treatment and rehabilitation of the children in conflict with the law;
TAU TITLE III
(g) To collect relevant information and conduct continuing MU PREVENTION OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY
research and support evaluations and studies on all matters relating TAU
to juvenile justice and welfare, such as but not limited to: CHAPTER 1
MU
THE ROLE OF THE DIFFERENT SECTORS
(1) the performance and results achieved by juvenile
intervention programs and by activities of the local SEC. 12. The Family. - The family shall be responsible for the primary
government units and other government agencies; nurturing and rearing of children which is critical in delinquency prevention.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 35 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
As far as practicable and in accordance with the procedures of this Act, a child MU a 3-year period shall be instituted in LGUs from the barangay to the provincial
in conflict with the law shall be maintained in his/her family. TAU level.
MU
SEC. 13. The Educational System. - Educational institutions shall work TAU The LGUs shall set aside an amount necessary to implement their respective
together with families, community organizations and agencies in the MU juvenile intervention programs in their annual budget.
prevention of juvenile delinquency and in the rehabilitation and reintegration TAU
of child in conflict with the law. Schools shall provide adequate, necessary MU The LGUs, in coordination with the LCPC, shall call on all sectors concerned,
and individualized educational schemes for children manifesting difficult particularly the child-focused institutions, NGOs, people's organizations,
TAU
behavior and children in conflict with the law. In cases where children in educational institutions and government agencies involved in delinquency
conflict with the law are taken into custody or detained in rehabilitation
MU
prevention to participate in the planning process and implementation of
centers, they should be provided the opportunity to continue learning under an TAU juvenile intervention programs. Such programs shall be implemented
alternative learning system with basic literacy program or non- formal MU consistent with the national program formulated and designed by the JJWC.
education accreditation equivalency system. TAU The implementation of the comprehensive juvenile intervention program shall
MU be reviewed and assessed annually by the LGUs in coordination with the
SEC. 14. The Role of the Mass Media. - The mass media shall play an active TAU LCPC. Results of the assessment shall be submitted by the provincial and city
role in the promotion of child rights, and delinquency prevention by relaying MU governments to the JJWC not later than March 30 of every year.
consistent messages through a balanced approach. Media practitioners shall, TAU
therefore, have the duty to maintain the highest critical and professional MU SEC. 19. Community-based Programs on Juvenile Justice and Welfare. -
standards in reporting and covering cases of children in conflict with the law.
TAU Community-based programs on juvenile justice and welfare shall be instituted
In all publicity concerning children, the best interest of the child should be the by the LGUs through the LCPC, school, youth organizations and other
MU
primordial and paramount concern. Any undue, inappropriate and concerned agencies. The LGUs shall provide community-based services
sensationalized publicity of any case involving a child in conflict with the law TAU which respond to the special needs, problems, interests and concerns of
is hereby declared a violation of the child's rights. MU
children and which offer appropriate counseling and guidance to them and
TAU their families. These programs shall consist of three levels:
SEC. 15. Establishment and Strengthening of Local Councils for the MU
Protection of Children. - Local Councils for the Protection of Children TAU (a) Primary intervention includes general measures to promote
(LCPC) shall be established in all levels of local government, and where they MU social justice and equal opportunity, which tackle perceived root
have already been established, they shall be strengthened within one (1) year TAU causes of offending;
from the effectivity of this Act. Membership in the LCPC shall be chosen MU
from among the responsible members of the community, including a TAU
representative from the youth sector, as well as representatives from (b) Secondary intervention includes measures to assist children at
MU risk; and
government and private agencies concerned with the welfare of children.
TAU
MU (c) Tertiary intervention includes measures to avoid unnecessary
The local council shall serve as the primary agency to coordinate with and
TAU contact with the formal justice system and other measures to
assist the LGU concerned for the adoption of a comprehensive plan on
delinquency prevention, and to oversee its proper implementation. MU prevent re-offending.
TAU
One percent (1%) of the internal revenue allotment of barangays,
MU
municipalities and cities shall be allocated for the strengthening and TAU
TITLE IV
implementation of the programs of the LCPC: Provided, That the MU
TREATMENT OF CHILDREN BELOW THE AGE OF CRIMINAL
disbursement of the fund shall be made by the LGU concerned.
TAU RESPONSIBILITY

SEC. 16. Appointment of Local Social Welfare and Development Officer. - MU


SEC. 20. Children Below the Age of Criminal Responsibility. - If it has been
All LGUs shall appoint a duly licensed social worker as its local social TAU
determined that the child taken into custody is fifteen (15) years old or below,
welfare and development officer tasked to assist children in conflict with the MUT
the authority which will have an initial contact with the child has the duty to
law. AU
immediately release the child to the custody of his/her parents or guardian, or
MU in the absence thereof, the child's nearest relative. Said authority shall give
SEC. 17. The Sangguniang Kabataan. - The Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) TAU notice to the local social welfare and development officer who will determine
shall coordinate with the LCPC in the formulation and implementation of MU the appropriate programs in consultation with the child and to the person
juvenile intervention and diversion programs in the community. having custody over the child. If the parents, guardians or nearest relatives
TAU cannot be located, or if they refuse to take custody, the child may be released
MU to any of the following: a duly registered nongovernmental or religious
TAU organization; a barangay official or a member of the Barangay Council for the
MU Protection of Children (BCPC); a local social welfare and development
CHAPTER 2
officer; or when and where appropriate, the DSWD. If the child referred to
COMPREHENSIVE JUVENILE INTERVENTION PROGRAM
herein has been found by the Local Social Welfare and Development Office to
be abandoned, neglected or abused by his parents, or in the event that the
SEC. 18. Development of a Comprehensive Juvenile Intervention parents will not comply with the prevention program, the proper petition for
Program. - A Comprehensive juvenile intervention program covering at least involuntary commitment shall be filed by the DSWD or the Local Social

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 36 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Welfare and Development Office pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 603, MU (k) Ensure that should detention of the child in conflict with the
otherwise ,known as "The Child and Youth Welfare Code". TAU law be necessary, the child shall be secured in quarters separate
MU from that of the opposite sex and adult offenders;
TAU
MU (l) Record the following in the initial investigation:
TITLE V TAU
JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE SYSTEM MU 1. Whether handcuffs or other instruments of restraint
TAU were used, and if so, the reason for such;
CHAPTER I MU
INITIAL CONTACT WITH THE CHILD
TAU 2. That the parents or guardian of a child, the DSWD,
MU and the PA0 have been informed of the apprehension
SEC. 21. Procedure for Taking the Child into Custody. - From the moment a TAU and the details thereof; and
child is taken into custody, the law enforcement officer shall:
MU
TAU 3. The exhaustion of measures to determine the age of a
(a) Explain to the child in simple language and in a dialect that child and the precise details of the physical and medical
MU
he/she can understand why he/she is being placed under custody examination or the failure to submit a child to such
TAU
and the offense that he/she allegedly committed; examination; and
MU
TAU
(b) Inform the child of the reason for such custody and advise the (m) Ensure that all statements signed by the child during
child of his/her constitutional rights in a language or dialect
MU
investigation shall be witnessed by the child's parents or guardian,
understood by him/her; TAU social worker, or legal counsel in attendance who shall affix
MU his/her signature to the said statement.
(e) Properly identify himself/herself and present proper TAU
identification to the child; MU A child in conflict with the law shall only be searched by a law enforcement
TAU officer of the same gender and shall not be locked up in a detention cell.
(d) Refrain from using vulgar or profane words and from sexually MU
harassing or abusing, or making sexual advances on the child in TAU SEC. 22. Duties During Initial Investigation. - The law enforcement officer
conflict with the law; MU shall, in his/her investigation, determine where the case involving the child in
TAU conflict with the law should be referred.
(e) Avoid displaying or using any firearm, weapon, handcuffs or MU
other instruments of force or restraint, unless absolutely necessary TAU The taking of the statement of the child shall be conducted in the presence of
and only after all other methods of control have been exhausted MU the following: (1) child's counsel of choice or in the absence thereof, a lawyer
and have failed; TAU from the Public Attorney's Office; (2) the child's parents, guardian, or nearest
MU relative, as the case may be; and (3) the local social welfare and development
(f) Refrain from subjecting the child in conflict with the law to TAU officer. In the absence of the child's parents, guardian, or nearest relative, and
greater restraint than is necessary for his/her apprehension; the local social welfare and development officer, the investigation shall be
MU conducted in the presence of a representative of an NGO, religious group, or
TAU member of the BCPC.
(g) Avoid violence or unnecessary force; MU
After the initial investigation, the local social worker conducting the same
(h) Determine the age of the child pursuant to Section 7 of this TAU
may do either of the following:
Act; MU
TAU
(a) Proceed in accordance with Section 20 if the child is fifteen
(i) Immediately but not later than eight (8) hours after MUT
(15) years or below or above fifteen (15) but below eighteen (18)
apprehension, turn over custody of the child to the Social Welfare AU
years old, who acted without discernment; and
and Development Office or other accredited NGOs, and notify the MU
child's apprehension. The social welfare and development officer
TAU (b) If the child is above fifteen (15) years old but below eighteen
shall explain to the child and the child's parents/guardians the
consequences of the child's act with a view towards counseling and
MU (18) and who acted with discernment, proceed to diversion under
rehabilitation, diversion from the criminal justice system, and the following chapter.
reparation, if appropriate; TAU
MU CHAPTER 2
(j) Take the child immediately to the proper medical and health
TAU DIVERSION
officer for a thorough physical and mental examination. The MU
examination results shall be kept confidential unless otherwise SEC. 23. System of Diversion. - Children in conflict with the law shall
ordered by the Family Court. Whenever the medical treatment is undergo diversion programs without undergoing court proceedings subject to
required, steps shall be immediately undertaken to provide the the conditions herein provided:
same;

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 37 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
(a) Where the imposable penalty for the crime committee is not MU SEC. 27. Duty of the Punong Barangay When There is No Diversion. - If
more than six (6) years imprisonment, the law enforcement officer TAU the offense does not fall under Section 23(a) and (b), or if the child, his/her
or Punong Barangay with the assistance of the local social welfare MU parents or guardian does not consent to a diversion, the Punong Barangay
and development officer or other members of the LCPC shall TAU handling the case shall, within three (3) days from determination of the
conduct mediation, family conferencing and conciliation and, absence of jurisdiction over the case or termination of the diversion
MU
where appropriate, adopt indigenous modes of conflict resolution proceedings, as the case may be, forward the records of the case of the child to
TAU
in accordance with the best interest of the child with a view to the law enforcement officer, prosecutor or the appropriate court, as the case
accomplishing the objectives of restorative justice and the MU may be. Upon the issuance of the corresponding document, certifying to the
formulation of a diversion program. The child and his/her family TAU fact that no agreement has been reached by the parties, the case shall be filed
shall be present in these activities. MU according to the regular process.
TAU
(b) In victimless crimes where the imposable penalty is not more MU SEC. 28. Duty of the Law Enforcement Officer When There is No
than six (6) years imprisonment, the local social welfare and TAU Diversion. - If the offense does not fall under Section 23(a) and (b), or if the
development officer shall meet with the child and his/her parents MU child, his/her parents or guardian does not consent to a diversion, the Women
or guardians for the development of the appropriate diversion and TAU and Children Protection Desk of the PNP, or other law enforcement officer
rehabilitation program, in coordination with the BCPC; MU handling the case of the child under custody, to the prosecutor or judge
concerned for the conduct of inquest and/or preliminary investigation to
TAU
(c) Where the imposable penalty for the crime committed exceeds MU determine whether or not the child should remain under custody and
six (6) years imprisonment, diversion measures may be resorted to correspondingly charged in court. The document transmitting said records
TAU shall display the word "CHILD" in bold letters.
only by the court.
MU
TAU SEC. 29. Factors in Determining Diversion Program. - In determining
SEC. 24. Stages Where Diversion May be Conducted. - Diversion may be
MU whether diversion is appropriate and desirable, the following factors shall be
conducted at the Katarungang Pambarangay, the police investigation or the
inquest or preliminary investigation stage and at all 1evels and phases of the
TAU taken into consideration:
proceedings including judicial level. MU
TAU (a) The nature and circumstances of the offense charged;
SEC. 25. Conferencing, Mediation and Conciliation. - A child in conflict MU
with law may undergo conferencing, mediation or conciliation outside the TAU (b) The frequency and the severity of the act;
criminal justice system or prior to his entry into said system. A contract of MU
diversion may be entered into during such conferencing, mediation or TAU (c) The circumstances of the child (e.g. age, maturity, intelligence,
conciliation proceedings. MU etc.);
TAU
SEC. 26. Contract of Diversion. - If during the conferencing, mediation or MU (d) The influence of the family and environment on the growth of
conciliation, the child voluntarily admits the commission of the act, a TAU the child;
diversion program shall be developed when appropriate and desirable as MU
determined under Section 30. Such admission shall not be used against the
TAU (e) The reparation of injury to the victim;
child in any subsequent judicial, quasi-judicial or administrative proceedings.
The diversion program shall be effective and binding if accepted by the parties
MU
concerned. The acceptance shall be in writing and signed by the parties TAU (f) The weight of the evidence against the child;
concerned and the appropriate authorities. The local social welfare and MU
development officer shall supervise the implementation of the diversion (g) The safety of the community; and
program. The diversion proceedings shall be completed within forty-five (45) TAU
days. The period of prescription of the offense shall be suspended until the MU
completion of the diversion proceedings but not to exceed forty-five (45) TAU (h) The best interest of the child.
days. MUT
SEC. 30. Formulation of the Diversion Program. - In formulating a
AU
The child shall present himself/herself to the competent authorities that MU diversion program, the individual characteristics and the peculiar
imposed the diversion program at least once a month for reporting and TAU circumstances of the child in conflict with the law shall be used to formulate
evaluation of the effectiveness of the program. an individualized treatment.
MU

Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the contract of diversion, TAU The following factors shall be considered in formulating a diversion program
as certified by the local social welfare and development officer, shall give the MU for the child:
offended party the option to institute the appropriate legal action.
TAU
(a) The child's feelings of remorse for the offense he/she
MU committed;
The period of prescription of the offense shall be suspended during the
effectivity of the diversion program, but not exceeding a period of two (2)
years. (b) The parents' or legal guardians' ability to guide and supervise
the child;

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 38 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
(c) The victim's view about the propriety of the measures to be MU (1) Diversion programs specified under
imposed; and TAU paragraphs(a)and (b) above;
MU
(d) The availability of community-based programs for TAU (2) Written or oral reprimand or citation;
rehabilitation and reintegration of the child. MU
TAU (3) Fine:
SEC. 31. Kinds of Diversion Programs. - The diversion program shall MU
include adequate socio-cultural and psychological responses and services for TAU (4) Payment of the cost of the proceedings; or
the child. At the different stages where diversion may be resorted to, the MU
following diversion programs may be agreed upon, such as, but not limited to: TAU
(5) Institutional care and custody.
MU
(a) At the level of the Punong Barangay: TAU CHAPTER 3
MU PROSECUTION
(1) Restitution of property; TAU
MU SEC. 32. Duty of the Prosecutor's Office. - There shall be a specially trained
(2) Reparation of the damage caused; TAU prosecutor to conduct inquest, preliminary investigation and prosecution of
MU cases involving a child in conflict with the law. If there is an allegation of
(3) Indemnification for consequential damages; TAU torture or ill-treatment of a child in conflict with the law during arrest or
MU detention, it shall be the duty of the prosecutor to investigate the same.
(4) Written or oral apology; TAU
MU SEC. 33. Preliminary Investigation and Filing of Information. - The
(5) Care, guidance and supervision orders; TAU prosecutor shall conduct a preliminary investigation in the following
instances: (a) when the child in conflict with the law does not qualify for
MU
diversion: (b) when the child, his/her parents or guardian does not agree to
(6) Counseling for the child in conflict with the law and TAU diversion as specified in Sections 27 and 28; and (c) when considering the
the child's family; MU assessment and recommendation of the social worker, the prosecutor
TAU determines that diversion is not appropriate for the child in conflict with the
(7)Attendance in trainings, seminars and lectures on: MU law.
TAU
(i) anger management skills; MU Upon serving the subpoena and the affidavit of complaint, the prosecutor shall
TAU notify the Public Attorney's Office of such service, as well as the personal
(ii) problem solving and/or conflict MU information, and place of detention of the child in conflict with the law.
resolution skills; TAU
MU Upon determination of probable cause by the prosecutor, the information
(iii) values formation; and TAU against the child shall be filed before the Family Court within forty-five (45)
MU days from the start of the preliminary investigation.

(iv) other skills which will aid the child in TAU


dealing with situations which can lead to MU CHAPTER 4
repetition of the offense; COURT PROCEEDINGS
TAU
(8) Participation in available community-based MU SEC. 34. Bail. - For purposes of recommending the amount of bail, the
programs, including community service; or TAU privileged mitigating circumstance of minority shall be considered.
MUT
(9) Participation in education, vocation and life skills AU SEC. 35. Release on Recognizance. - Where a child is detained, the court
programs. MU shall order:
TAU
(b) At the level of the law enforcement officer and the prosecutor: MU (a) the release of the minor on recognizance to his/her parents and
other suitable person;

(1) Diversion programs specified under paragraphs (a) TAU


(1) to (a)(9) herein; and MU (b) the release of the child in conflict with the law on bail; or
TAU
(2) Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds or MU (c) the transfer of the minor to a youth detention home/youth
instruments of the crime; rehabilitation center.

(c) At the level of the appropriate court: The court shall not order the detention of a child in a jail pending trial or
hearing of his/her case.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 39 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
SEC. 36. Detention of the Child Pending Trial. - Children detained pending MU discharge the child in accordance with this Act, to order execution of
trial may be released on bail or recognizance as provided for under Sections TAU sentence, or to extend the suspended sentence for a certain specified period or
34 and 35 under this Act. In all other cases and whenever possible, detention MU until the child reaches the maximum age of twenty-one (21) years.
pending trial may be replaced by alternative measures, such as close TAU
supervision, intensive care or placement with a family or in an educational
MU SEC. 41. Credit in Service of Sentence. - The child in conflict with the law
setting or home. Institutionalization or detention of the child pending trial shall be credited in the services of his/her sentence with the full time spent in
TAU
shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest possible actual commitment and detention under this Act.
period of time. MU
TAU
MU SEC. 42. Probation as an Alternative to Imprisonment. - The court may,
Whenever detention is necessary, a child will always be detained in youth after it shall have convicted and sentenced a child in conflict with the law, and
detention homes established by local governments, pursuant to Section 8 of TAU upon application at any time, place the child on probation in lieu of service of
the Family Courts Act, in the city or municipality where the child resides. MU
his/her sentence taking into account the best interest of the child. For this
TAU purpose, Section 4 of Presidential Decree No. 968, otherwise known as the
In the absence of a youth detention home, the child in conflict with the law MU "Probation Law of 1976", is hereby amended accordingly.
may be committed to the care of the DSWD or a local rehabilitation center TAU
recognized by the government in the province, city or municipality within the MU CHAPTER 5
jurisdiction of the court. The center or agency concerned shall be responsible TAU CONFIDENTIALITY OF RECORDS AND PROCEEDINGS
for the child's appearance in court whenever required. MU
TAU SEC. 43. Confedentiality of Records and Proceedings. - All records and
SEC. 37. Diversion Measures. - Where the maximum penalty imposed by MU proceedings involving children in conflict with the law from initial contact
law for the offense with which the child in conflict with the law is charged is TAU until final disposition of the case shall be considered privileged and
imprisonment of not more than twelve (12) years, regardless of the fine or fine confidential. The public shall be excluded during the proceedings and the
MU
alone regardless of the amount, and before arraignment of the child in conflict records shall not be disclosed directly or indirectly to anyone by any of the
with the law, the court shall determine whether or not diversion is appropriate.
TAU
parties or the participants in the proceedings for any purpose whatsoever,
MU
except to determine if the child in conflict with the law may have his/hes
TAU
SEC. 38. Automatic Suspension of Sentence. - Once the child who is under sentence suspended or if he/she may be granted probation under the Probation
eighteen (18) years of age at the time of the commission of the offense is MU Law, or to enforce the civil liability imposed in the criminal action.
found guilty of the offense charged, the court shall determine and ascertain TAU
any civil liability which may have resulted from the offense committed. MU The component authorities shall undertake all measures to protect this
However, instead of pronouncing the judgment of conviction, the court shall TAU confidentiality of proceedings, including non-disclosure of records to the
place the child in conflict with the law under suspended sentence, without MU media, maintaining a separate police blotter for cases involving children in
need of application: Provided, however, That suspension of sentence shall still TAU conflict with the law and adopting a system of coding to conceal material
be applied even if the juvenile is already eighteen years (18) of age or more at
MU information which will lead to the child's identity. Records of a child in
the time of the pronouncement of his/her guilt. conflict with the law shall not be used in subsequent proceedings for cases
TAU
MU involving the same offender as an adult, except when beneficial for the
Upon suspension of sentence and after considering the various chcumstances offender and upon his/her written consent.
TAU
of the child, the court shall impose the appropriate disposition measures as
provided in the Supreme Court Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law.
MU
A person who has been in conflict with the law as a child shall not be held
TAU
under any provision of law, to be guilty of perjury or of concealment or
MU
SEC. 39. Discharge of the Child in Conflict with the Law. - Upon the misrepresentation by reason of his/her failure to acknowledge the case or
recommendation of the social worker who has custody of the child, the court recite any fact related thereto in response to any inquiry made to him/her for
shall dismiss the case against the child whose sentence has been suspended
TAU any purpose.
and against whom disposition measures have been issued, and shall order the MU
final discharge of the child if it finds that the objective of the disposition TAU
measures have been fulfilled. MUT
AU TITLE VI
The discharge of the child in conflict with the law shall not affect the civil MU REHABILITATION AND REINTEGRATION
liability resulting from the commission of the offense, which shall be enforced TAU
in accordance with law. MU SEC. 44. Objective of Rehabilitation and Reintegration. - The objective of
rehabilitation and reintegration of children in conflict with the law is to
SEC. 40. Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law to Court. - If the court TAU provide them with interventions, approaches and strategies that will enable
finds that the objective of the disposition measures imposed upon the child in MU them to improve their social functioning with the end goal of reintegration to
conflict with the law have not been fulfilled, or if the child in conflict with the TAU their families and as productive members of their communities.
law has willfully failed to comply with the conditions of his/her disposition or MU
rehabilitation program, the child in conflict with the law shall be brought SEC. 45. Court Order Required. - No child shall be received in any
before the court for execution of judgment. rehabilitation or training facility without a valid order issued by the court after
a hearing for the purpose. The details of this order shall be immediately
If said child in conflict with the law has reached eighteen (18) years of age entered in a register exclusively for children in conflict with the law. No child
while under suspended sentence, the court shall determine whether to shall be admitted in any facility where there is no such register.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 40 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
SEC. 46, Separate Facilities from Adults. - In all rehabilitation or training MU If the community-based rehabilitation is availed of by a child in conflict with
facilities, it shall be mandatory that children shall be separated from adults TAU the law, he/she shall be released to parents, guardians, relatives or any other
unless they are members of the same family. Under no other circumstance MU responsible person in the community. Under the supervision and guidance of
shall a child in conflict with the law be placed in the same confinement as TAU the local social welfare and development officer, and in coordination with
adults. his/her parents/guardian, the child in conflict with the law shall participate in
MU
community-based programs, which shall include, but not limited to:
TAU
The rehabilitation, training or confinement area of children in conflict with the MU
law shall provide a home environment where children in conflict with the law (1) Competency and life skills development;
TAU
can be provided with quality counseling and treatment.
MU
(2) Socio-cultural and recreational activities;
TAU
SEC. 47. Female Children. - Female children in conflict with the law placed
MU
in an institution shall be given special attention as to their personal needs and (3) Community volunteer projects;
problems. They shall be handled by female doctors, correction officers and TAU
social workers, and shall be accommodated separately from male children in MU
conflict with the law. TAU (4) Leadership training;
MU
SEC. 48. Gender-Sensitivity Training. - No personnel of rehabilitation and TAU (5) Social services;
training facilities shall handle children in conflict with the law without having MU
undergone gender sensitivity training. TAU (6) Homelife services;
MU
SEC. 49. Establishment of Youth Detention Homes. - The LGUs shall set TAU (7) Health services; .
aside an amount to build youth detention homes as mandated by the Family MU
Courts Act. Youth detention homes may also be established by private and TAU (8) Spiritual enrichment; and
NGOs licensed and accredited by the DSWD, in consultation with the JJWC.
MU
TAU (9) Community and family welfare services.
SEC. 50. Care and Maintenance of the Child in Conflict with the Law. - The MU
expenses for the care and maintenance of a child in conflict with the law under
TAU In accordance therewith, the family of the child in conflict with the law shall
institutional care shall be borne by his/her parents or those persons liable to
MU endeavor to actively participate in the community-based rehabilitation.
support him/her: Provided, That in case his/her parents or those persons liable
to support him/her cannot pay all or part of said expenses, the municipality TAU
where the offense was committed shall pay one-third (1/3) of said expenses or MU Based on the progress of the youth in the community, a final report will be
part thereof; the province to which the municipality belongs shall pay one- TAU forwarded by the local social welfare and development officer to the court for
third (1/3) and the remaining one-third (1/3) shall be borne by the national MU final disposition of the case.
government. Chartered cities shall pay two-thirds (2/3) of said expenses; and TAU
in case a chartered city cannot pay said expenses, part of the internal revenue MU If the community-based programs are provided as diversion measures under
allotments applicable to the unpaid portion shall be withheld and applied to Chapter II, Title V, the programs enumerated above shall be made available to
TAU
the settlement of said obligations: Provided, further, That in the event that the the child in conflict with the law.
child in conflict with the law is not a resident of the municipality/city where
MU
the offense was committed, the court, upon its determination, may require the TAU
SEC. 53. Youth Rehabilitation Center. - The youth rehabilitation center shall
city/municipality where the child in conflict with the law resides to shoulder MU
provide 24-hour group care, treatment and rehabilitation services under the
the cost.
TAU guidance of a trained staff where residents are cared for under a structured
therapeutic environment with the end view of reintegrating them in their
All city and provincial governments must exert effort for the immediate MU families and communities as socially functioning individuals. A quarterly
establishment of local detention homes for children in conflict with the law. TAU report shall be submitted by the center to the proper court on the progress of
MUT the children in conflict with the law. Based on the progress of the youth in the
SEC. 51. Confinement of Convicted Children in Agricultural Camps and AU center, a final report will be forwarded to the court for final disposition of the
other Training Facilities. - A child MU case. The DSWD shall establish youth rehabilitation centers in each region of
TAU the country.
in conflict with the law may, after conviction and upon order of the court, be MU
made to serve his/her sentence, in lieu of confinement in a regular penal SEC. 54. Objectives of Community Based Programs. - The objectives of
institution, in an agricultural camp and other training facilities that may be TAU community-based programs are as follows:
established, maintained, supervised and controlled by the BUCOR, in MU
coordination with the DSWD. TAU (a) Prevent disruption in the education or means of livelihood of
MU the child in conflict with the law in case he/she is studying,
SEC. 52. Rehabilitation of Children in Conflict with the Law. - Children in working or attending vocational learning institutions;
conflict with the law, whose sentences are suspended may, upon order of the
court, undergo any or a combination of disposition measures best suited to the (b) Prevent separation of the child in conflict with the law from
rehabilitation and welfare of the child as provided in the Supreme Court Rule his/her parents/guardians to maintain the support system fostered
on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 41 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
by their relationship and to create greater awareness of their mutual MU SEC. 60. Prohibition Against Labeling and Shaming. - In the conduct of the
and reciprocal responsibilities; TAU proceedings beginning from the initial contact with the child, the competent
MU authorities must refrain from branding or labeling children as young criminals,
(c) Facilitate the rehabilitation and mainstreaming of the child in TAU juvenile delinquents, prostitutes or attaching to them in any manner any other
conflict with the law and encourage community support and MU derogatory names. Likewise, no discriminatory remarks and practices shall be
involvement; and allowed particularly with respect to the child's class or ethnic origin.
TAU
MU
(d) Minimize the stigma that attaches to the child in conflict with TAU SEC. 61. Other Prohibited Acts. - The following and any other similar acts
the law by preventing jail detention. shall be considered prejudicial and detrimental to the psychological,
MU emotional, social, spiritual, moral and physical health and well-being of the
TAU child in conflict with the law and therefore, prohibited:
SEC. 55. Criteria of Community-Based Programs. - Every LGU shall MU
establish community-based programs that will focus on the rehabilitation and TAU
reintegration of the child. All programs shall meet the criteria to be (a) Employment of threats of whatever kind and nature;
MU
established by the JJWC which shall take into account the purpose of the
TAU
program, the need for the consent of the child and his/her parents or legal (b) Employment of abusive, coercive and punitive measures such
guardians, and the participation of the child-centered agencies whether public MU as cursing, beating, stripping, and solitary confinement;
or private. TAU
MU (c) Employment of degrading, inhuman end cruel forms of
SEC. 56. After-Care Support Services for Children in Conflict with the TAU punishment such as shaving the heads, pouring irritating, corrosive
Law. - Children in conflict with the law whose cases have been dismissed by MU or harmful substances over the body of the child in conflict with
the proper court because of good behavior as per recommendation of the TAU the law, or forcing him/her to walk around the community wearing
DSWD social worker and/or any accredited NGO youth rehabilitation center MU signs which embarrass, humiliate, and degrade his/her personality
shall be provided after-care services by the local social welfare and TAU and dignity; and
development officer for a period of at least six (6) months. The service
MU
includes counseling and other community-based services designed to facilitate (d) Compelling the child to perform involuntary servitude in any
TAU
social reintegration, prevent re-offending and make the children productive and all forms under any and all instances.
members of the community. MU
TAU
MU CHAPTER 3
PENAL PROVISION
TAU
TITLE VII MU
GENERAL PROVISIONS TAU SEC. 62. Violation of the Provisions of this Act or Rules or Regulations in
General. - Any person who violates any provision of this Act or any rule or
MU
regulation promulgated in accordance thereof shall, upon conviction for each
CHAPTER 1 TAU
act or omission, be punished by a fine of not less than Twenty thousand pesos
EXEMPTING PROVISIONS MU (P20,000.00) but not more than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) or suffer
TAU imprisonment of not less than eight (8) years but not more than ten (10) years,
SEC. 57. Status Offenees. - Any conduct not considered an offense or not MU or both such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the court, unless a
penalized if committed by an adult shall not be considered an offense and TAU higher penalty is provided for in the Revised Penal Code or special laws. If
shall not be punished if committed by a child. MU the offender is a public officer or employee, he/she shall, in addition to such
fine and/or imprisonment, be held administratively liable and shall suffer the
SEC. 58. Offenses Not Applicable to Children. - Persons below eighteen (18) TAU penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification.
years of age shall be exempt from prosecution for the crime of vagrancy and MU
prostitution under Section 202 of the Revised Penal Code, of mendicancy TAU CHAPTER 4
under Presidential Decree No. 1563, and sniffing of rugby under Presidential APPROPRIATION PROVISION
MUT
Decree No. 1619, such prosecution being inconsistent with the United Nations
AU
Convention on the Rights of the Child: Provided, That said persons shall
MU SEC. 63. Appropriations. - The amount necessary to carry out the initial
undergo appropriate counseling and treatment program. implementation of this Act shall be charged to the Office of the President.
TAU
Thereafter, such sums as may be necessary for the continued implementation
MU
SEC. 59. Exemption from the Application of Death Penalty. - The of this Act shall be included in the succeeding General Appropriations Act.
provisions of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, Republic Act No. 9165,
otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, and TAU An initial amount of Fifty million pesos (P50,000,000.00) for the purpose of
other special laws notwithstanding, no death penalty shall be imposed upon MU setting up the JJWC shall be taken from the proceeds of the Philippine Charity
children in conflict with the law. TAU
Sweepstakes Office.
MU
CHAPTER 2
PROHIBITED ACTS
TITLE VIII
TRANSITORY PROVISIONS

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 42 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
SEC. 64. Children in Conflict with the Law Fifteen (15) Years Old and MU SEC. 71. Repealing Clause. - All existing laws, orders, decrees, rules and
Below. - Upon effectivity of this Act, cases of children fifteen (15) years old TAU regulations or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are
and below at the time of the commission of the crime shall immediately be MU hereby repealed or modified accordingly.
dismissed and the child shall be referred to the appropriate local social welfare TAU
and development officer. Such officer, upon thorough assessment of the child,
MU SEC. 72. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect after fifteen (15) days from
shall determine whether to release the child to the custody of his/her parents, its publication in at least two (2) national newspapers of general circulation.
TAU
or refer the child to prevention programs as provided under this Act. Those
with suspended sentences and undergoing rehabilitation at the youth MU
rehabilitation center shall likewise be released, unless it is contrary to the best TAU Approved: April 28, 2006
interest of the child. MU
TAU GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO
President of the Philippines
SEC. 65. Children Detained Pending Dial. - If the child is detained pending MU
trial, the Family Court shall also determine whether or not continued detention TAU
is necessary and, if not, determine appropriate alternatives for detention. MU
TAU 3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen, unless
If detention is necessary and he/she is detained with adults, the court shall MU he has acted with discernment, in which case, such minor
immediately order the transfer of the child to a youth detention home. TAU shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions
MU of Art. 80 of this Code.
SEC. 66. Inventory of "Locked-up" and Detained Children in Conflict with TAU When such minor is adjudged to be criminally irresponsible,
the Law. - The PNP, the BJMP and the BUCOR are hereby directed to submit MU the court, in conformably with the provisions of this and the
to the JJWC, within ninety (90) days from the effectivity of this Act, an TAU preceding paragraph, shall commit him to the care and
inventory of all children in conflict with the law under their custody. custody of his family who shall be charged with his
MU
TAU surveillance and education otherwise, he shall be committed
SEC. 67. Children Who Reach the Age of Eighteen (18) Years Pending to the care of some institution or person mentioned in said
MU
Diversion and Court Proceedings. - If a child reaches the age of eighteen (18) Art. 80.
TAU
years pending diversion and court proceedings, the appropriate diversion
authority in consultation with the local social welfare and development officer MU
or the Family Court in consultation with the Social Services and Counseling TAU This paragraph is already obsolete.
Division (SSCD) of the Supreme Court, as the case may be, shall determine MU
the appropriate disposition. In case the appropriate court executes the TAU
judgment of conviction, and unless the child in conflict the law has already MU
availed of probation under Presidential Decree No. 603 or other similar laws, TAU Paragraph 2 and 3 are identical. This is called the exempting circumstance of
the child may apply for probation if qualified under the provisions of the MINORITY.
MU
Probation Law.
TAU
-paragraph 2 - a person under nine years of age;
MU
SEC. 68. Children Who Have Been Convicted and are Serving Sentence. -
TAU -paragraph 3 – a person over nine years of age and under fifteen
Persons who have been convicted and are serving sentence at the time of the
effectivity of this Act, and who were below the age of eighteen (18) years at
MU
the time the commission of the offense for which they were convicted and are TAU
serving sentence, shall likewise benefit from the retroactive application of this MU
Question: When a minor is exactly nine years old. Where will he fit-the 2 nd
Act. They shall be entitled to appropriate dispositions provided under this Act
or 3rd paragraph?
and their sentences shall be adjusted accordingly. They shall be immediately TAU
released if they are so qualified under this Act or other applicable law. MU Answer: The Supreme Court said he falls under paragraph 2, because, as
TAU interpreted by the SC, “under nine” means nine years old or below.
MUT Otherwise, there will be a vacuum. So, if he is exactly 9, he is under the 2 nd
AU paragraph.
TITLE IX MU
FINAL PROVISIONS
TAU
MU
SEC. 69. Rule Making Power. - The JJWC shall issue the IRRs for the Suppose, the child is a wonder boy, whose mental development is advanced
implementation of the provisions of this act within ninety (90) days from the TAU and so can distinguish between a minor who is mentally advance and one who
effectivity thereof. is not. Insofar as the 2nd paragraph is concerned, there is a conclusive
MU presumption of law that when a minor is nine or below, he has no intelligence.
TAU He cannot distinguish right from wrong. That is conclusive and cannot be
SEC. 70. Separability Clause. - If, for any reason, any section or provision of MU
overcome.
this Act is declared unconstitutional or invalid by the Supreme Court, the
other sections or provisions hereof not dfected by such declaration shall
remain in force and effect.
But the prosecution would insist that it has proven that the boy knows what is
right and what is wrong. At the age of eight, he already wrote a book on

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 43 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
ethics, or he is a chess grandmaster. Question: Is that allowed? Answer: MU And therefore, since the prosecution admits there was no criminal intent, then
NO, the exemption is binding. If the child is 9 or below, he is exempt. That is TAU that is an admission that he acted without discernment because if there is no
conclusive and cannot be changed anymore—complete exemption. MU criminal intent, automatically there is no discernment.
TAU
Issue: Is the term “discernment” synonymous with “intent”? (Such that if
MU
there is no intent, there is no discernment)
Question: Suppose the minor is over 9 up to exactly 15, is he exempt? TAU
MU
Answer: This time it is conditional. The minor is exempt unless he acted TAU
with discernment. MU Held: The word “intent” has been defined as a determination to do a certain
TAU thing, an aim, the purpose of the mind including such knowledge as is
MU essential to such intent; or the design, resolve with which a person acts. It is
this intent which comprises the third element of dolo as a means of
TAU
Question: What does “acting with discernment” mean? committing a felony, freedom, and intelligence being the other two.
MU
Answer: Discernment means the mental capacity of the minor to TAU
distinguish what is right from what is wrong. So, if the minor did not act MU
with discernment, he is exempt. If he acts with discernment, he is liable, not TAU On the other hand, “discernment” conveys thoughts. While both are products
exempt. MU of the mental processes within a person, the former (intent) refers to the
TAU desired effect of one’s act; while the latter (discernment) relates to the moral
significance that a person ascribes to the said act. Hence, a person may not
MU
intend to shoot another but may be aware of the consequences of his negligent
Question: Who will prove that? TAU act which may cause injury to the same person in negligently handling an air
MU rifle.
Answer: The rule is that it is for the prosecution to prove that he acted with TAU
discernment because the presumption is he did not act with discernment, MU
therefore he is exempt. But the presumption can be overcome by proof of TAU
discernment. It is not correct, therefore, to argue as accused-petitioner Guevarra does, that
MU
since a minor over 9 but under 15 acted with discernment, then he intended
TAU
such act to be done. He may negligently shoot his friend, thus did not intend
MU to shoot him, and at the same time recognize the undesirable result of his
TAU negligence.
MU
TAU Intelligence embraces the concept of discernment. Discernment is not
MU equivalent to intent. Intelligence which includes discernment is a distinct
TAU element of dolo as a means of committing an offense. Therefore, discernment
is part of intelligence. And there are three things there to make the act
MU
voluntary—freedom, intelligence and intent. Intent is in the mind,
TAU
intelligence is in the mind, and discernment is embraced in intelligence.
MU
TAU
MU
In felonies committed by means of culpa, three elements are indispensable-
GUEVARRA vs. ALMODOVAR TAU intelligence, freedom of action and negligence. Intent is wanting in such
MU felonies. However, intelligence remains as an essential element. Therefore, it
196 SCRA 476 TAU is necessary that the minor between 9 to15 be possessed with intelligence in
committing a negligent act. To be liable, he must discern the rightness or
MUT
wrongness of the act. (ART. 80 is repealed by PD 603)
AU
Facts: Guevarra was an 11-year old kid who was playing a rifle with a MU
playmate. Accidentally, the rifle was discharged and exploded fatally hitting TAU
the playmate. Of course, he did not really intend to kill his playmate. There MU Meaning, I did not shoot you intentionally, but I’m aware that what happened
was no dolo there. He was charged with reckless imprudence resulting to is wrong. That is what is meant by discernment-you know what is wrong.
homicide. TAU But you did not intend it to happen.
MU
TAU
MU
He contended that he should be exempt because, as a minor, he did not act
with discernment. It was for the prosecution to allege that he acted with 4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due
discernment in order to hold him liable. When the prosecutor charged him care, causes an injury by mere accident without fault or
with reckless imprudence resulting to homicide, that is an automatic intention of causing it.
admission by the prosecution that there was no criminal intent on his part.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 44 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
5. Any person who act under the compulsion of irresistible MU However, he was seen by the leader of the band. They struck him with the
force. TAU barrel of their rifles and compelled him to bury the corpses. He was caught by
MU the authorities and was charged as accessory in the murder of the Americans
TAU for concealing the body of the crime.
Elements: MU
TAU
(i) that the compulsion is by means of physical force; MU
(ii) that the physical force must be irresistible; Held: Baculi was not criminally liable as accessory for concealing the body
(iii) that the physical force must come from a third person. TAU of the crime of murder committed by the band because he acted under the
MU compulsion of an irresistible force.
TAU
MU
TAU
6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an The second one (uncontrollable fear) is more common. The offender is
MU compelled to commit a crime against his will by means of threats. In order to
uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury. TAU avail of this, there must be a demonstration that:
MU
Elements TAU
MU
(i) that the threat which cause the fear is of an evil greater than, or at TAU (i) There is no possibility of defending yourself from the threat.
least equal to that which he is required to commit; Meaning if you threaten me with a gun, I have no obligation
MU to fight back just to avoid committing the crime.
(ii) that it promises an evil of such gravity and imminence than the
ordinary man would have succumbed to it. TAU
MU
TAU (ii) There is no possibility of escaping from the threat. If there is a
The basis of paragraph 5 and 6 is the absence of freedom of action. There is MU chance of escaping so that you will commit the crime, then
you are not covered.
intelligence, there is intent, but there is no freedom. You were literally
TAU
compelled against your will to commit the felony.
MU
TAU (iii) The threat must be of equal or greater injury. It must be clear,
concrete, not speculative.
MU
Actus invito factus non est meus actus. An act done against my will is not my TAU
act. MU PEOPLE vs. MORENO
TAU
MU 77 SCRA 549
Question: Distinguish irresistible force from uncontrollable fear? TAU
MU
Answer: The difference is that in irresistible force, the offender was TAU
compelled to commit a crime through the use of physical force, like torture. MU Facts: Accused Moreno was charged with murder for killing fellow Filipinos
He was tortured until he had no more choice but to commit the crime. In TAU upon order of Major Sasaki of Japanese Imperial Army. Moreno claimed that
uncontrollable fear, the manner by which he was compelled to commit a crime MU he could not refuse to comply with that order because the Japanese officer
was not through force, but through threat or intimidation. The second is made a threat. The testimony of Major Sasaki showed that the threat was not
more common than the first. really serious. It was to the effect that if Moreno will not comply, the
TAU Japanese soldiers will take him along with them.
MU
TAU
When you allege that there is an irresistible inner force which makes me MUT
commit a crime. I was possessed by a demon. That is NOT covered. It may AU Held: A speculative, fanciful and remote fear is not “uncontrollable fear”. If
be insanity, but definitely you cannot invoke irresistible force there. the only evidence relating to a sort of threat is the testimony of the defendant.
MU
As they insisted and 1 informed them that I could not do it, Capt. Susuki told
TAU me “You have to comply with that order of Major Sasaki; otherwise you have
MU to come along with us”, that threat is not of such a serious character and
US vs. CABALLEROS imminence as to create in the mind of the defendant an uncontrollable fear
TAU than an equal or greater injury would be inflicted upon him if he did not
MU comply with the alleged order to kill the deceased.
4 PHIL 350
TAU
MU 6. Any person who fails to perform an act required by
law, when prevented by some lawful insuperable
Facts: This is a case where some American school teachers were murdered cause.
by a band. Accused Baculi was then in a plantation gathering bananas. Upon
hearing the shooting, the poor farmer ran towards the scene of the crime. ELEMENTS:

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 45 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
(i) that an act is required by law to be done; MU Answer: A cause beyond the control of the peace officer.
(ii) that a person fails to perform such act, TAU
(iii) that his failure to perform such act was due to some lawful or
MU
insuperable cause.
TAU
Example is an officer who is prosecuted under Article 125 for the crime of
MU
Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons to Proper Judicial Authorities. In
This exempting circumstance applies exclusively to people who are charged TAU
case of lawful warrantless arrests, a peace officer or a private person may
with felony by omission. Here, the offender is not prosecuted for doing an MU
arrest another even without a warrant and detain him. But there is a limit as to
act, but for failing to do an act. TAU maximum number of hours within which the detaining officer is allowed to
MU detain the person arrested. If the arresting officer wants to detain him further,
TAU he’d better file the necessary criminal information in court. If the person
arrested is detained beyond that period without being lawfully charged in
Question: What is your defense when you failed to do an act as required by MU
court, the detaining officer is liable.
law? TAU
MU
Answer: I was prevented by a lawful cause or an insuperable cause. That is TAU
the defense.
MU ARTICLE 125, RPC. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper
TAU judicial authorities – The penalties provided in the next preceding article
MU shall be imposed upon the public officer or employee who shall detain any
person for some legal ground and shall fail to deliver such person to the
Example: The accused is a Filipino citizen who is a priest. Somebody in the TAU
proper judicial authorities within the period of:
confessional confessed to him as being a co-conspirator in the crime of MU
treason. So, the priest learned about it. If he does not report the matter to the TAU
authorities, he violates the law, as criminally liable for misprision of treason MU
 twelve (12) hours for crimes or offenses punishable by light
penalties, or their equivalent;
under Article 116 of the RPC. If he reports the matter to comply with the
TAU  eighteen (18) hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by
Penal Code, he violates the seal of confession. Then later, the conspirator was correctional penalties, or their equivalent: and
MU
arrested, investigated and he admitted that the person to know about it was the  Thirty-six (36) hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by
priest. So, the priest is now charged with Misprision of Treason. TAU
afflictive or capital penalties, or their equivalent.
MU
TAU
MU In every case, the person detained shall be informed of the cause of his
Question: What is the defense of the priest? TAU detention and shall be allowed upon request, to communicate and confer at
any time with his attorney or counsel.
MU
Answer: He was prevented by a lawful cause (secrecy of confession) from
TAU
revealing the matter.
MU
TAU Suppose a policeman caught somebody without warrant because he was
MU actually committing murder or homicide in the hinterlands – a certain very far
Question: What do you mean by prevented by an insuperable cause? TAU away barangay. He was to bring him to town and to formally charge him in
MU court. But it takes 3 to 4 days to reach the town proper from the said barangay.
Answer: A cause beyond the control of the peace officer. So, how can he comply with his duty within 36 hours (because murder or
TAU
homicide is a grave felony) to charge the person arrested. He should keep him
MU
within 36 hours only, otherwise he should be liable.

Example is an officer who is prosecuted under Article 125 for the crime of TAU
Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons to Proper Judicial Authorities. MU
TAU So, necessarily, he detained him for more than 36 hours. By the time he
MUT reached the town, it is more than 36 hours. So, the policeman is charged of
Example: The accused is a Filipino citizen who is a priest. Somebody in the
Delay in the delivery of detained person.
confessional confessed to him as being a co-conspirator in the crime of AU
treason. So, the priest learned about it. If he does not report the matter to the MU
authorities, he violates the law, as criminally liable for misprision of treason TAU
under Article 116 of the RPC. If he reports the matter to comply with the MU Question: What is his defense?
Penal Code, he violates the seal of confession. Then later, the conspirator was
arrested, investigated and he admitted that the person to know about it was the TAU Answer: He was prevented from doing the act because of the cause beyond
priest. So, the priest is now charged with Misprision of Treason. Question: MU his control – insuperable cause. How can he do something within 36 hours
What is the defense of the priest? Answer: He was prevented by a lawful TAU when it will take him more than 36 hours to reach the town?
cause (secrecy of confession) from revealing the matter.
MU

Question: What is the effect of exempting circumstance in general?


Question: What do you mean by prevented by an insuperable cause?

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 46 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Answer: When there is an exempting circumstance, the offender is not liable. MU For example, a buy-bust operation against drug pusher. A peace officer will
He is exempt from criminal liability. TAU pretend to be a user or drug addict and he will buy from the pusher. Upon
MU giving the signal to his companions, the pusher is arrested. That is entrapment.
TAU
MU
Question: How about civil liability?
TAU Take note that in entrapment, the idea of crime did not come from the
Answer: He is civilly liable because the exemption from criminal liability MU policeman but from the person arrested. The policeman only resorted to ways
does not include exemption from civil liability in the cases provided in TAU and means to catch the criminal in the act of selling prohibited drugs. But in
paragraph 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of Article 12. So, he is not criminally liable, except MU instigation, the idea of committing a crime came from the policeman himself.
in paragraph 4 (accident) and paragraph 7 (lawful or insuperable cause). In TAU It was he who induces an innocent person to commit a crime.
these two instances, not only is there an exemption from criminal liability, but MU
also exemption from civil liability.
TAU
MU Question: Suspecting that Juan was a drug pusher, SPO2 Mercado, leader of a
TAU NARCOM Team, gave Juan a P100-bill and asked him to buy some marijuana
Question: Enumerate at least ten exempting circumstances. MU cigarettes. Desirous of pleasing SPO2 Mercado, Juan went inside a shopping
TAU mall, while the officer waited in one corner of the mall. After 15 minutes,
Answer: Seven are in Article 12. Others are: MU Juan returned with 10 sticks of marijuana cigarettes which he gave to SPO2
TAU Mercado, who thereupon placed Juan under arrest and charged him with
1. Article 6 – when a person did not perform all acts of execution violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act for selling marijuana cigarettes. Is Juan
which would produce the felony because of his own voluntary MU guilty of any offense punishable under the Dangerous Drugs Act?
desistance. One who voluntarily desists from committing a crime TAU
is exempt from any criminal liability because of public policy. MU Answer: There is instigation here. This is not an entrapment. Juan was not a
TAU pusher. In fact, it was SPO2 Mercado who asked Juan to buy marijuana
2. Article 7 – light felonies are punishable only when they are MU cigarettes for him. It was only because Juan wanted to please Mercado that the
consummated, except those committed against persons or property. TAU latter bought the said marijuana cigarettes. Therefore, Juan is not guilty of any
So, the rule is: attempted or frustrated light felonies are not MU violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act.
punishable if they are not committed against persons or property.
TAU
This is an exemption from liability for reason of public policy. But
if the light felony is committed against persons or property, they MU
are punishable even if attempted or frustrated. TAU The exempting circumstances under Article 12 are based in the philosophy
MU that there was lack of voluntariness because of the absence of freedom,
TAU intelligence or intent. The other exempting circumstances, which are not
3. Article 16 – where accessories are not liable for light felonies.
MU found under Article 12, exempt the offender from criminal liability not
TAU because there was no voluntariness but because of public policy.
4. Article 20 – where the accessory who is related to the principal is MU
exempt from criminal liability TAU
MU
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE vs. EXEMPTING
5. Instigation TAU
CIRCUMSTANCE
MU

Question: Distinguish instigation from entrapment. JUSTIFYING EXEMPTING


TAU
CIRCUMSTANCE CIRCUMSTANCE
MU
Answer: In instigation, a public officer or a private detective induces an
TAU The act committed by a person is The offender committed a crime,
innocent person to commit a crime and would arrest him upon or after the
MUT justified; it is in accordance with but when he committed it, there
commission of the crime by the latter. It is an absolute cause. And
jurisprudence says the person instigated who commits a felony is exempt from AU
the law. No crime is committed was no voluntariness on his part
by the accused. because he acted without freedom,
a criminal liability. The reason is public policy. Peace officer should be the MU
intelligence or intent.
last person in the world to induce people to commit crimes. It’s not a sound TAU
practice to allow public officers who should be the one apprehending the MU
There is no civil liability, except There is civil liability, except in
criminals to be the very person who will induce somebody to commit a crime.
in paragraph 4 (state of necessity). paragraph 4 (accident) and
TAU paragraph 7 (lawful or insuperable
In entrapment, a person has planned, or is about to commit, a crime, and MU
cause).
ways and means are resorted to by a public officer to trap and catch the
TAU
criminal. Entrapment is not a defense. In entrapment, the person has decided
MU
to commit a crime and the police officer went along with him, pretending to
be agreeing to its commission. Then when the criminal is in the act of
committing the crime, the peace officer who pretended to do along with him
will now be instrumental in arresting him. Now, that is not a defense when
you entrapped. It is not an exempting circumstance.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 47 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
TAU
MU Elements of Uncontrollable Fear
TAU
MU
Gr 1) Threat causes fear of equal or Greater evil than that required to
TAU
commit it.
MU
TAU Im 2) Evil so Imminent and grave that ordinary man would succumb
MU to it.
Memory Aid (from the notes of Atty. Teodoro V. Angel) TAU
MU (Recall GrIm)
TAU
The following are exempt from criminal liability: MU
TAU
I 1. An Imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted
MU Art. 13. Mitigating circumstances. — The following are
during a lucid interval. xxx
TAU Fail due to lawful
mitigating / insuperable cause:
circumstances;
U 2. A person Under nine years of age. MU 1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter, when all
D 3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen, unless he has TAU Fa 1) Accused Fails to perform an act.
the requisites necessary to justify or to exempt from
acted with Discernment, in which case, such minor shall be MU
proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Art. 80 of Re
criminal liability in the respective cases are not
2) Act Required by law to be done.
this Code. xxx TAU attendant.
Acc 4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, MU In 2. That 3)the offender
Failure is under
due to lawful eighteen
or Insuperable year of age or
cause.
causes an injury by mere Accident without fault or intention of TAU over seventy years. In the case of the minor, he shall be
causing it.
MU proceeded
(Recall FaReIn) against in accordance with the provisions of
For 5. Any person who act under the compulsion of irresistible Force.
Fear 6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable TAU Art. 80.
Fear of an equal or greater injury. MU 3. That the offender had no intention to commit so
Fail 7. Any person who Fails to perform an act required by law, when TAU grave a wrong as that committed.
prevented by some lawful insuperable cause.
MU MITIGATING
4. That sufficient provocation CIRCUMSTANCES
or threat on the part of
TAU the offended party immediately preceded the act.
MU 5. That the act was committed in the immediate
(Recall IUDAccForFearFail) TAU vindication
Question: of a grave
Define mitigating offense tointhe
circumstances one committing the
general.
MU felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants, or relatives by
TAU affinity
Answer: within mitigating
In general, the samecircumstances
degrees. refers to those circumstances
MU 6. That
which, of having
if present acted upon
in the commission an impulse
of a felony, makes thesooffender
powerfulliableasbut
Elements of Accident (Paragraph 4) TAU naturally
it would reduce to have produced
or mitigate the imposable passion or obfuscation.
penalty because when he committed
the7.felony,
Thathethecommitted
offenderit with
hadreduction or diminution
voluntarily of freedom, intent or
surrendered
MU
A 1) Accused performing a lawful Act. intelligence.
himself to a person in authority or his agents, or that
TAU
MU he had voluntarily confessed his guilt before the court
C 2) With due Care.
prior to the presentation of the evidence for the
I 3) Causes Injury to another by mere accident. TAU prosecution;
Therefore, there was less degree of voluntariness in committing the crime. Or
MU 8. That
because the offender
the offender has shown is in
deaf and dumb,
the commission of blind oror afterwards
the crime
N 4) No fault or intention TAU otherwise suffering some physical
a lesser degree of moral depravity or perversity. defect which thus
MUT restricts his means of action, defense, or
(Recall ACIN) communications with his fellow beings.
AU
MU 9. Such illness of the offender as would diminish the
This refers of
exercise to the
INCOMPLETE
will-power ofJUSTIFYING
the offenderorwithout INCOMPLETE
TAU EXEMPTING circumstance. For example – incomplete self-defense,
MU however depriving him of the consciousness of his acts.
incomplete defense of relative, incomplete state of necessity, incomplete
10. And, finally, any other circumstances of a similar
accident, incomplete irresistible force, incomplete uncontrollable fear.
Elements of Irresistible Force (Paragraph 5) TAU nature and analogous to those above mentioned.
MU
TAU
P 1) Compulsion by means of Physical force.
MU
I 2) Physical force is Irresistible.
T 3) Physical force from Third person/outsider.

(Recall PIT)

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 48 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU 2. That the offender is under eighteen year of age or over
TAU seventy years. In the case of the minor, he shall be
MU proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Art.
TAU 80.
MU
TAU
MU This is also known as mitigating circumstance of MINORITY and
SENILITY because the offender is below 18 or over 70 years old.
TAU
MU
TAU
MU You will note that the age of a person plays a big role in determining his
TAU mental liability, or the proper imposable penalty under the Penal Code.
MU
TAU
MU
AGE DESCRIPTION EFFECTS
TAU
MU 9 years & Age of complete Exempting (Article
TAU below irresponsibility 12(2)
MU
TAU Over 9 under 15 Age of conditional - Exempting, if the
criminal responsibility minor acted without
MU
discernment-Art.12
TAU (3)
MU
TAU -Mitigating, if he
MU acted with
TAU discernment
MU
16 to 17 years Age of mitigated Mitigating (Article
TAU
old criminal responsibility 13(2)
MU
TAU 18 to 70 years Age of complete None
MU old criminal responsibility
TAU
Over 70 years Age of mitigated Mitigating (Article
MU
old criminal responsibility 13(2)
TAU
MU * Basis: impaired
TAU intelligence
MU

TAU
MU Question: Is a baptismal certificate admissible in evidence to prove minority
of an accused?
TAU
MUT Answer: If we go by the Rules of Evidence, a baptismal certificate is not
Suppose I am the accused, I prove that I am a victim of unlawful aggression, AU
competent to prove a person’s age because it is not recognized as an official
that’s why I had to kill the victim. But I did not use reasonable means to
MU document. It does not prove your name, status, age. What is competent is the
defend myself. So, unlawful aggression is present but the other two requisites
of self-defense are not present. That is no longer self-defense, but that
TAU official birth certificate.
constitutes mitigating circumstance under paragraph 1 of Article 13. MU

TAU
MU PEOPLE vs. REGALARIO
The same thing with paragraph 4 of Article 11 (state of necessity), paragraph TAU
6 of Article 12 (uncontrollable fear). Those circumstances that have requisites, MU 220 SCRA 368
but not all are present. But there are circumstances where you cannot apply
paragraph 1 of Article 13, like imbecility. That is exempting but there is no
such thing as incomplete imbecility.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 49 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Minority, as a mitigating circumstance, is presumed in case of doubt. A MU SCRA 282), we have consistently ruled that, although the accused did not
baptismal certificate or other evidence of this character may be admitted to TAU offer any evidence to support his claim of minority, this fact will remain as
show minority. MU such, until disproved by the prosecution.
TAU
MU
That ruling, about legal interpretation of minority, should not be confused TAU In other words, the answer to the question of whether or not the accused’s
with insanity which must be proven by clearly and convincingly. For example, MU lone testimony as to his minority would be sufficient is YES. It can be done.
I want to prove that the accused is a minor through his own testimony. TAU That is where we apply the rule on liberality. Anyway, the prosecution will
MU present its own evidence, and it is there that we will know if the accused is
TAU telling the truth. But if his testimony is unchallenged, then it would suffice.
MU
COUNSEL: When were you born?
TAU
ACCUSED: I was born on June 2, 1990 (this is theoretically hearsay) MU
TAU
COUNSEL: How did you know that you were born on that date? MU 3. That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a
TAU wrong as that committed.
ACCUSED: My mother told me. (This is an exception to the hearsay rule… MU
because of family reputation or tradition)
TAU
COUNSEL: Ah, that is self-serving. Maybe you just made that so that you can
MU Obviously, this only applies to intentional felonies. This will not apply to
TAU culpable felonies. This is related to Article 4 (1) on praeter intentionem.
prove that you are below 18 years old.
MU
TAU
MU PROBLEM: A, with the intent of inflicting physical injuries on B, hit B with
Question: Is there a need for corroborative evidence? (i.e. aside from the TAU
his fist. The latter fell down and his head hit a concrete pavement, thereby
accused’s testimony, you will present his birth certificate or the testimony of
MU fracturing his skull. And he subsequently dies. Question: Is A liable for the
his father or mother or anybody older than the accused). To establish the
mitigating circumstance of minority, will the testimony of the accused be
TAU crime of slight physical injuries which he intended, or is he liable for
homicide that resulted? Answer: He is liable for homicide, the crime that
sufficient, or must he present corroborative evidence to prove his age MU
resulted, applying Article 4 (1), that one is liable for the felony actually
considering the fact that his statement might be considered as self-serving on TAU
committed although it is different from the one which he intended.
his part? MU
TAU
Answer: In the case of People vs. Lugto (190 SCRA 754), the Supreme Court MU
said that the accused has the burden of proof to show that he was a minor at
TAU Question: Is A entitled to any circumstance in his favor, assuming that he is
the time of the commission of the crime. So, if you have the burden of proof,
MU liable for the crime that resulted?
your testimony alone does not seem sufficient. You have to present
corroborative evidence to make it convincing. TAU
MU Answer: YES, he is entitled to the mitigating circumstance under Article 13
(3) that the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that
TAU
committed.
MU
However, the Supreme Court re-examined the Lugto ruling:
TAU
MU 4. That sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the
TAU offended party immediately preceded the act.
PEOPLE vs. TISMO
MUT
AU
204 SCRA 535 There are actually two circumstances here:
MU
TAU
1) That sufficient provocation on the part of the offended party
MU immediately preceded the act;
The appellant’s claim that he was 17 years old at the time the crime was 2) That sufficient threat on the part of the offended party immediately
committed, even without any proof to corroborate his testimony, is sufficient. TAU preceded the act.
Considering that the prosecution failed to present contradictory evidence, we MU
have applied to appellant therein the privilege mitigating circumstance of TAU
minority under the second paragraph of Article 13 of the Revised Penal Code. MU Sufficient Provocation

It seems to be closely linked to the 3 rd element oh self-defense – lack of


sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. So, we will
The Lugto ruling appears to be an aberration from the long line of decisions connect this with self-defense.
antedating it. From US vs. Bergantino (3 Phil 118) to People vs. Ebora (141

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 50 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU A threat also amount to provocation because when you are threatening
TAU somebody, you are provoking him. Like for example, Answer: You watch
The best illustration is the case of Alconga. The deceased attacked Alconga MU out! One of these days, I am going to kill you. B: You are threatening me? It
with a piece of wood. Alconga defended himself by shooting the deceased. TAU would be good if I kill you first! So, B killed A. That is the mitigating because
When the deceased realized he was slightly wounded, he turned his back and the offended party (A) gave sufficient threat preceding the act.
MU
ran away. Alconga chased him, overtook him and killed him on the spot.
TAU
MU
TAU PROBLEM: A wanted to kill B. A drew his gun and told B, I’ll kill you now!
Question: Is Alconga entitled to the justifying circumstance of self-defense MU When B realized that A is going to kill him, B drew out his gun ahead and
for the death of the victim? TAU killed A. So, B is accused of homicide for the death of A. B went to a lawyer,
MU who advised him to invoke the mitigating circumstance under Article 13 (4).
Answer: NO, because there was no unlawful aggression. While it is true that
TAU
there was unlawful aggression on the part of the victim earlier, it has already
ceased when the victim ran away. There is no more danger to the life and limb MU
of Alconga, and therefore, there was no more reason for him to defend TAU Question: Is the lawyer correct?
himself. As a matter of fact, in the second stage of the fight, Alconga became MU
the unlawful aggressor. TAU Answer: NO, he should invoke self-defense, not the mitigating circumstance
MU of sufficient provocation or threat.
TAU
MU
Question: If Alconga is liable for homicide for the killing of the victim, is he
entitled to any circumstance in his favor? TAU The rule is when the threatened act is about to happen, that is equivalent to
MU actual aggression. That is justifying because the threat is imminent, at the
Answer: YES, he is entitled to the mitigating circumstance under Article 13 TAU point of happening and therefore, that constitutes unlawful aggression. But if
(4) that sufficient provocation on the part of the offended party immediately MU the threat is still in the future, and not at the point of happening, then it is not
preceded the act. TAU equivalent to unlawful aggression. That may constitute the mitigating
MU circumstance under Article 13 (4). So, that is the connection between the
threat here and the threatened assault in Article 11 (1).
TAU
Question: Can Alconga not claim the benefit of incomplete self-defense MU
under Article 13 (1)? TAU
MU 5. That the act was committed in the immediate vindication
Answer: NO, because there is lacking the requisites. Where there is no TAU of a grave offense to the one committing the felony (delito),
unlawful aggression, nothing exists. Therefore, there is no self-defense, MU
his spouse, ascendants, or relatives by affinity within the
complete or incomplete. TAU same degrees.
MU
TAU
Question: Suppose, when Alconga was chasing the victim, the victim was MU The essence of this circumstance is REVENGE. Somebody commits a wrong,
forced to fight back and in the process he killed Alconga, can he claim self- TAU a grave offense to you or a member of your family, a relative, and you seek
defense under Article 11 (1)? revenge. Like for example, somebody kills your brother, so you look for the
MU
killer to kill him. Now, that revenge can never be justified under the law. It
Answer: NO, because of the absence of the third element – lack of sufficient TAU does not exempt you from liability if you kill somebody because he killed a
provocation on the part of the person defending himself. The reason why MU member of your family. That can never be justified. “Revenge is mine”, says
Alconga attacked is because earlier he attacked Alconga. So, he gave the law.
TAU
sufficient provocation. Because of the absence of the third element, he is not
entitled to complete self- defense. MUT
AU
MU However, the law understands the feeling of the accused. He did it because a
TAU grave offense was committed against him, or a member of his family. So, the
Question: Can Alconga’s victim claim any circumstance in his favor? law recognizes the “diminution” of one’s penalty if he acts in retaliation.
MU

Answer: YES, he can claim the mitigating circumstance of incomplete self- TAU
defense because there was unlawful aggression, the means he used to defend
MU The relatives mentioned in this paragraph 5 are identical with the relatives
himself was reasonable, but he gave sufficient provocation.
TAU mentioned in Article 11 (2) – defense of relatives. All of them are the same
MU except one, relatives by affinity within the fourth civil degree. They are not
mentioned in this Article.
Sufficient Threat

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 51 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Question: What do you mean by “grave offense”? Does this mean to say you MU month. So, he kills the killer for killing his own father. Would you say that the
are a victim of a grave felony, as defined in Article 9? TAU killing was “immediate” after the grave offense was committed against the
MU father?
Answer: NO, the word “grave” here is not identical with the technical TAU
definition of grave felony. What it means is somebody offended you seriously. Answer: It is not. It is not immediate. There was a gap of one month. But
MU
If it is serious, it is not necessarily a grave felony. there is a relation of cause and effect between the crime committed by the
TAU killer and the crime which the son now commits against the killer. So, the
MU word “immediate” there is misnomer because the word “immediate” is an
TAU incorrect translation of the original Spanish word proxima. The appropriate
Question: And how do you determine if the wrong committed upon you or MU translation would be “proximate”. That the act was committed in the
your relative is serious? TAU PROXIMATE vindication of a grave offense.
MU
Answer: It depends on many factors. You consider the nature of the act
TAU
committed by the victim, the age of the offender, the social standing. What is
serious to one may not be serious to another. MU Question: What is the difference between “proximate” and “immediate”?
TAU
MU Answer: In “proximate”, the act is not immediate in point of time of the grave
TAU offense, but what is also important is that there is still the relation of cause and
US vs. AMPAR MU effect between them.
TAU
37 PHIL 201 MU
TAU
MU 6. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as
TAU naturally to have produced passion or obfuscation.
Facts: There was party during a fiesta where the accused who is an old man
went to the victim who was serving lechon. Ampar asked for lechon. The MU
victim played a joke on Ampar. In the presence of many guests, the deceased TAU
insulted the old man, saying: “There is no more. Come here and I will make MU Question: What do you mean by “passion or obfuscation”?
roast pig out of you”. It was a joke, and all the guests laughed. But the TAU
Answer: Where a person is overwhelmed by passion or his mind is
deceased made a mistake. Maybe the joke would not have bothered if it was a MU
obfuscated, he becomes “illusionado”, his action is more of a product of
young man, but to the old man, it was something else. So, the old man left, got TAU
emotion rather than of a careful knowing. So, somehow, the freedom and
an ax. A little later, while the deceased was squatting down, the old man came
MU intelligence are also impaired.
up behind him and struck him on the head with the ax.
TAU
MU
TAU
Sometimes, we experienced that. When you become very angry, sometimes
Held: He acted in vindication of a grave offense committed against him. It MU
you think or utter words which you will later regret. When you have cooled
was just a joke, but considering his age and the occasion, it was something TAU
down, you realize that you should have not uttered such words. But why is
serious. You should not play jokes on or ridicule in the presence of others. MU that when you are angry or when you are not thinking, you do things which
TAU you actually do not mean?
MU
Take note that the law says that you x x x committed the act in the immediate
vindication x x x you committed the act in immediate vindication. Just like TAU
Why? Because your mind is obfuscated. That in the mind, the decision was
in the previous mitigating circumstance, that sufficient provocation or threat MU
prompted by emotion rather than by reason. That is why there is this nice
on the part of the offended party immediately preceded the act. TAU
saying: When you are angry, do not make any decision. When you are happy,
MUT
do not make any promises. That is fair enough.
AU
MU
However, there is a difference between the word “immediate” in paragraph 4
and the word “immediate” in paragraph 5. In the previous mitigating
TAU
Principles:
circumstance, sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party MU
immediately preceded the act. In paragraph 4, the interpretation of the word
There are some principles on this:
“immediate” there is literal. There must be no gap between the threat or TAU
provocation and the crime. You commit a crime immediately after the MU
provocation or threat. In paragraph 5, the use of the word “immediate” is not TAU The passion or obfuscation must arise from lawful
really literal. MU sentiments.

US vs. HICKS
Question: For example, a man is killed and after the funeral of the deceased,
14 PHIL 217
the son looks for the killer and kills him. And he finds the killer after one

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 52 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU Answer: No, he is entitled to only one because numbers 4, 5 and 6 have the
TAU same source. They have a common denominator – that the mind is actually
Facts: A married man was maintaining an illicit relationship with a woman, a MU overwhelmed by anger or emotion. So, he cannot claim three mitigating
concubine. After a while, the concubine told him. I think I have to stop this TAU circumstances. Assuming that all of them will apply, the application of one is
relationship. I have no future with you. In the first place, you are married. I sufficient. You cannot claim three separate mitigating circumstances.
MU
want to have my own life. Of course, the man became emotional and killed
TAU
the woman because he could not bear the thought of this woman separating
from him, when they have been together for 7 years. MU
TAU 7. That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to
MU a person in authority or his agents, or that he had
TAU voluntarily confessed his guilt before the court prior to the
In his defense, he pleaded the circumstance of passion and obfuscation, that he MU
presentation of the evidence for the prosecution;
was obfuscated when the girl said that she wanted to part ways with him.
TAU
MU
TAU These (voluntary surrender and voluntary confession) are the most common
mitigating circumstances invoked in court. If the two are present, definitely
Held: Defense untenable. It was a passion which arose an ILLICIT MU
the accused is entitled to two mitigating circumstances.
relationship. TAU
MU Voluntary Surrender
PEOPLE vs. CALISO TAU
MU After the killing, the accused went to the police and gave up. The reason
58 PHIL 283 TAU behind this is that he has shown a lesser degree of perversity that he is willing
MU to answer for the crime he committed. He is better that the one who has
TAU remained at large.

Facts: Here, the yaya killed the child because she was angry, because the MU Question: To whom shall the accused surrender?
parents of the child scolded her earlier. Because of the scolding, she became TAU
emotional. She got so emotional that she killed the baby. MU Answer: The accused should surrender to the right person, to a person in
TAU authority or his agent.
MU
TAU
Held: We cannot accept the fact under passion or obfuscation because that
MU
was a passion or obfuscation generated by the spirit of revenge. So, it was not Question: Who is a person in authority or his agent?
a valid emotion. TAU
MU Answer: The guide is in Book II
PEOPLE vs. SANICO TAU
MU
TAU
MU ARTICLE 152, RPC. Person in authority and agents of person in authority –
Facts: A man was accused of rape. His explanation was: I was in a very TAU Who shall be deemed as such – In applying the provisions of the preceding
scenic spot. There were no people around. Then, I saw the victim. She was and other articles of this Code, any person directly vested with jurisdiction,
MU
alone, bathing in the river. So, my initial instinct was that I was around, I had whether as an individual or as a member of some court or government
to rape her. I acted with passion. corporation, board or commission, shall be deemed a person in authority. A
TAU
barrio captain and barangay chairman shall also be deemed a person in
MU authority.
TAU
Held: That is not the kind of passion contemplated by law. That is libido. MUT
AU
MU A person who by direct provision of law or by election or by appointment by
competent authority, is charged with the maintenance of public order and the
TAU
protection or security of life and property, such as barrio captain, barrio
MU
councilman, barrio policeman and barangay leader and any person who comes
Question: Now, suppose a person became of an act – a terrible act committed to the aid of persons in authority, shall be deemed an agent of a person in
by the victim against him, retaliated by killing the victim. So, he says I killed TAU authority.
him because of sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended MU
party immediately preceding the act, so I am entitled to the mitigating TAU
circumstance #5 because I committed the act in the immediate vindication of MU
a grave offense committed against me, and also I am entitled to #6 because I In applying the provisions of Article 148 and 151 of this Code, teachers,
acted on an impulse so powerful as would naturally produce passion. So, I am professors and persons charged with the supervision of public or duty
entitled to three mitigating circumstances. Is that correct? recognized private schools, colleges and universities, shall be deemed persons
in authority.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 53 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU Issue: Is there mitigating circumstance if it took 2 years and 5 months after
TAU the issuance of the warrant of arrest against the accused before he
So, if you surrender to a clerk of the City Hall, you will not fall under this MU surrendered?
because an ordinary clerk of the government is not a person in authority. He is TAU
not also an agent of a person in authority. He must fit the definition in Article
MU
152. Also, you must surrender yourself. Like in one case, the accused killed
TAU Held: The mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender cannot, as appellant
somebody. And then, he sent his weapon to the police, the murder weapon. Is
that necessary? The Supreme Court said that is not surrender, because you MU pleads, be considered in his favor. He did not surrender voluntarily. It took 2
should surrender your body, not the weapon. TAU years and 5 months after the issuance of a warrant of arrest against him before
MU he surrendered. Apparently, when he gave himself up, it was not to save the
TAU state from the time and effort needed to capture him. But because he had
MU gotten tired of the life of a fugitive, or saw no other reasonable alternative to
Question: When should you surrender? continue absence from his home.
TAU
Answer: One thing that the Supreme Court has emphasized is that the MU PEOPLE vs. MORATO
surrender must be SPONTANEOUS. TAU
MU
224 SCRA 361
PEOPLE vs. LEE TAU
MU Issue: Is there voluntary surrender if the accused gave himself up after a
204 SCRA 900 TAU shoot-to-kill order was issued against him and he was persuaded to surrender
MU because of his employer?
TAU
MU
Issue: Is there a voluntary surrender if an accused gives himself up to ensure
TAU
his safety? Meaning, his life may be in danger. There might some people who Held: The fact that the Provincial Commander had announced over the radio
wanted him dead, so he decided to surrender.
MU
that he would issue a shoot-to-kill order unless the accused-appellant
TAU voluntarily surrendered, and that the accused-appellant was persuaded to
MU surrender by his employer, do not militate against the consideration of his
TAU voluntary surrender as mitigating circumstance. The stone-cold fact remains
Held: For a surrender to be voluntary, it must be spontaneous, and should MU that he was not arrested and that he presented to the Provincial Commander.
show the intent of the accused to submit himself unconditionally to the TAU
authorities, either:
MU
TAU
The ruling of Morato seems to go against the ruling of the Supreme Court in
MU 1990 decision, which has the very same fact. A man committed a crime. He
o Because he acknowledges his guilt, or TAU was convinced by his superior to surrender, so he surrendered to the NBI.
o Because he wishes to save them (police and government) the MU
trouble expenses to be necessity incurred for his search and TAU
capture.
MU
TAU ESTACIO vs. SANDIGANBAYAN
In the absence of these two reasons, and in the event the only reason where the MU
accused is supposed to surrender is to ensure his safety – his arrest being 183 SCRA 12
inevitable, the surrender is NOT spontaneous, and hence not voluntary. TAU
MU
This is similar to an old case where a wanted criminal was tracked down by
TAU
the authorities. They found hid hideout, and then they surrounded his hideout The mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender may properly be
MUT appreciated in favor of the accused when the following requisites concur:
early one morning. They shouted, “Come out peacefully because there is no
way for you to escape. You are surrounded!” The criminal looked at all the AU
directions, and found out that they were all sealed. So, knowing that there is MU
no more escape, he came out. Now, he is asking for the mitigating TAU
circumstance of voluntary surrender. That cannot be. He did not surrender; he MU  The offender has not actually been arrested;
was caught. In other words, that was not really surrender in the sense that the  The offender surrendered himself to a person in authority or an
agent of person in authority;
criminal gave up spontaneously. He had no choice. TAU  The surrender was voluntary.
MU
PEOPLE vs. PAGSANJAN TAU
MU The foregoing requisites are not present in the case at bar. The evidence of
221 SCRA 735 record shows us that the accused went to the NBI upon the instruction of his
superior, not upon his own accord.

Voluntary Confession of Guilt

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 54 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
This is manifested in Criminal Procedure by a plea of guilty entered by the MU this as a type of insanity, by applying what is known as the irresistible
accused during the arraignment. That is when you voluntarily confess your TAU impulse test.
guilt to the court prior to the trial, prior to the presentation of evidence by the MU
prosecution. TAU
MU
He cannot resist the impulse to commit a crime. Now, is that recognized in the
TAU Philippines? NO. As a matter of fact, another case where the Supreme Court
MU thoroughly discussed this type of mental illness is in the 1991 case of People
TAU vs. Rafanan (204 SCRA 65). The discussion in the Rafanan case is related to
Question: Can I withdraw? Can a person who entered a plea of “not guilty” MU the test in People vs. Dugno.
later on change his mind and withdraw that plea and change it to “guilty”? Is TAU
he still entitled to this mitigating circumstance? MU
TAU
Answer: Yes, because what is important is that he has confessed his guilt In the case of Rafanan, the Supreme Court adhered to the guidelines it laid
before the prosecution has laid its evidence. In order to prevent speculation on MU down in the earlier case of People vs. Golez, a 1915 decision. And the
the part of the accused: If the evidence is strong, I will surrender. If the TAU Supreme Court in the case of Rafanan says: “The required standards of legal
evidence is weak, trial goes on! MU insanity were elaborated in the 1950 case of People vs. Golez”. And the
TAU Supreme Court said: “A linguistic or dramatical analysis of this standard
MU suggest that Golez established two distinguishable tests”.
TAU
In other words, you should not speculate. Even before seeing and knowing the
MU
evidence of the prosecution, you admit your guilt – that shows that you have
less perversity. TAU Of course, this is another viewpoint. There are supposed to be three tests
MU according to Dungo. That is correct, but based on another point of view, based
TAU on Rafanan, there are actually two tests: the test of cognition and the test of
MU volition, according to the Supreme Court.
So, you can change your plea of “not guilty” to “guilty”. What is important is TAU
that you must confess your guilt prior to the presentation of the evidence for MU
the prosecution.
TAU
Question: What is the test of cognition?
MU
TAU Answer: The test of cognition means the complete deprivation of intelligence
Question: Can you change your plea of “not guilty” in the middle of the trial? MU in committing the criminal act.
Can that be done? TAU
MU
Answer: Of course, you can change your mind and enter plea of “guilty”
TAU
anytime, even before trial, during trial, and even before the trial ends. But if Question: What is the test of volition?
MU
you do it much later, it will no longer be considered as a mitigating
circumstance. That’s the difference. TAU Answer: There must be a total deprivation of the freedom of the will.
MU
8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise TAU In the Dungo case, that is called the irresistible impulse test. And the test of
suffering some physical defect which thus restricts his MU cognition – complete deprivation of intelligence – in the Dungo case, was
called the Right or Wrong Test.
means of action, defense, or communications with his fellow
beings. TAU
But in the case of Rafanan, quoting the case of Golez, it is the test of cognition
MU
versus the test of volition. Now, which of the two is considered as covered by
TAU
insanity, under the mitigating circumstances?
Any physical defect by the accused is automatically mitigating even if it does MUT
not have something to do with the crime. Like, you are deaf and dumb, or AU
blind or you are cripple. The mere fact that the person is not physically
MU
normal, that is considered automatically as a mitigating circumstance in his
TAU The Supreme Court continued: “We have gone over all decided cases before
favor because that is a diminution of his freedom – freedom of action.
MU this Court. We will still have to see one where we acquitted somebody simply
because there was no freedom on the will. We have not done it, where the
9. Such illness of the offender as would diminish the accused failed to show complete impairment or loss of intelligence, the Court
exercise of the will-power of the offender without however TAU
has recognized it a most as a mitigating circumstance, not an exempting
depriving him of the consciousness of his acts. MU
circumstance, in accord with Article 13 (9) of the RPC”.
TAU
MU
This is the mitigating circumstance which should correlate with Article 12 (1)
on insanity, because medically this will be a form of insanity. An illness of the So the test of volition is the recognized test in the mitigating circumstances
offender which diminishes the exercise of the will-power of the offender. If under Article 13 (9). For insanity, the test of cognition.
you follow the guideline in the case of Dungo, some countries may recognize

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 55 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
10. And, finally, any other circumstances of a similar nature MU mitigating circumstance, the privileged, it is better because,
and analogous to those above mentioned. TAU penalty is fixed within the according to the law, the penalty
MU minimum period within the same should be lowered by one or two
TAU penalty. The presence of an degrees. Now, if penalty is
So, any circumstance that is similar to any paragraph 1 to 9. And the Supreme MU ordinary mitigating circumstance punishable by prision correcional,
Court applied this in so many cases. There was this case of an old man. He will call for the imposition of the the privilege mitigating
TAU
was around 65, but he could hardly walk, he could hardly see: The Supreme penalty within the minimum circumstance will even lower the
MU period of that particular penalty. penalty not only to the minimum of
Court gave to his benefit the circumstance analogous to “above 70”. Although
he was not really above 70, considering his physical condition, that is TAU prision correcional, but to the
analogous. MU penalty next lower in degree, which
TAU under the scheme of penalties is
And there was the case of the creditor who could not collect from the debtor. MU arresto mayor.
Each time he would go to the debtor to collect the account, the debtor would TAU
always tell him to come back the next day. One day, the creditor got so sick MU - An ordinary mitigating - A privilege mitigating
and tired of the debtor’s alibis, that he mauled the latter. Is he liable for circumstance is offset by an circumstance cannot be cancelled or
TAU aggravating circumstance. They offset by an aggravating
physical injuries? According to the Supreme Court, the feeling of the creditor
is analogous to one of passion or obfuscation. So, in this case, the creditor was
MU eliminate each other. circumstance.
given the benefit of mitigating circumstance. TAU
MU Memory Aid (from the notes of Atty. Teodoro V. Angel)
Or in the case of a thief who stole the property of the victim. After one or two TAU
days, he was filled with remorse that he returned the stolen property. Is he MU The following are mitigating circumstances:
liable for attempted theft? No more. That is already consummated. From the TAU
moment he took the property which then came to his possession and control, N 1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter, when all the
MU requisites necessary to justify or to exempt from criminal liability
the theft was already consummated. Desistance was too late. Returning the
TAU in the respective cases are Not attendant.
property cannot be desistance. You cannot desist when all the elements have
already been completed. But definitely, what he did as a point in his favor. He MU
is to be given the mitigating circumstance, analogous to voluntary surrender. TAU U 2. That the offender is Under eighteen year of age or over seventy
This analogous to somebody who commits a crime and voluntarily surrenders MU years. In the case of the minor, he shall be proceeded against in
himself to the authorities or their agents. TAU accordance with the provisions of Art. 80.
MU
I 3. That the offender had no Intention to commit so grave a wrong
TAU as that committed.
Question: What are the mitigating circumstances in the Penal Code?
MU
Answer: There are two: TAU S 4. That Sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended
MU party immediately preceded the act.
(a) Ordinary Mitigating Circumstance TAU
A 5. That the Act was committed in the immediate vindication of a
MU
– these are the mitigating circumstances found in TAU grave offense to the one committing the felony (delito), his spouse,
Article 13. ascendants, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees.
MU
TAU N 6. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as Naturally
MU to have produced passion or obfuscation.
(b) Privilege Mitigating Circumstance
TAU S 7. That the offender had voluntarily Surrendered himself to a
person in authority or his agents, or that he had voluntarily
– they are all scattered all over the RPC, especially in MU
confessed his guilt before the court prior to the presentation of the
Book II. You cannot find them; you have to identify them one by TAU
evidence for the prosecution;
one. MUT
AU S 8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise Suffering
MU some physical defect which thus restricts his means of action,
Question: So, if there is privilege mitigating circumstance, you are entitled to
TAU defense, or communications with his fellow beings.
a penalty that is one degree lower. But will the aggravating circumstance
bring it back to one degree higher?
MU
I 9. Such Illness of the offender as would diminish the exercise of
the will-power of the offender without however depriving him of
Answer: No, that cannot be done because a privilege mitigating circumstance TAU the consciousness of his acts.
cannot be offset by an aggravating circumstance. MU N 10. And, finally, any other circumstances of a similar Nature and
TAU analogous to those above mentioned.
MU
Question: Distinguish one from the other. (Recall NUISANSSIN)

ORDINARY PRIVILEGED

- If there is an ordinary - If the mitigating circumstance is

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 56 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
TAU
MU Art. 14. Aggravating circumstances. — The following are aggravating
TAU circumstances:
1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position.
MU 2. That the crime be committed in contempt or with insult to the public
TAU authorities.
3. That the act be committed with insult or in disregard of the respect due the
MU offended party on account of his rank, age, or sex, or that is be committed in
TAU the dwelling of the offended party, if the latter has not given provocation.
Chapter Four 4. That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or obvious
CIRCUMSTANCE WHICH AGGRAVATE CRIMINAL MU ungratefulness.
TAU 5. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief Executive or in his
LIABILITY presence, or where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their
MU duties, or in a place dedicated to religious worship.
TAU 6. That the crime be committed in the night time, or in an uninhabited place,
Question: How do we define the concept of mitigating circumstances? or by a band, whenever such circumstances may facilitate the commission of
MU the offense.
TAU Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have acted together in the
Answer: They are circumstances which, if attending the commission of a commission of an offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed by a
felony, would tend to increase the prescribed penalty to the maximum MU band.
period of the prescribed penalty. TAU 7. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck,
earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune.
MU 8. That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men or persons who
TAU insure or afford impunity.
9. That the accused is a recidivist.
MU A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one crime, shall have been
Question: Why? What is the reason?
TAU previously convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same
title of this Code.
MU
Answer: Because the offender has shown a greater perversity or moral 10. That the offender has been previously punished by an offense to which the
depravity as manifested by the following: TAU law attaches an equal or greater penalty or for two or more crimes to which it
attaches a lighter penalty.
MU 11. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price, reward, or
TAU promise.
12. That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire, poison,
MU explosion, stranding of a vessel or international damage thereto, derailment of
1. By the time of the commission of the crime; TAU a locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice involving great waste and ruin.
2. The place of the commission of the crime; 13. That the act be committed with evidence premeditation.
3. The ways and means employed or involved in the commission of MU 14. That the craft, fraud or disguise be employed.
the crime; TAU 15. That advantage be taken of superior strength, or means be employed to
4. The motive or motivation behind the crime; or MU weaken the defense.
5. Because of the personal background of the offender and the 16. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia).
offended party.
TAU There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the
MU person, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof which
tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself
TAU arising from the defense which the offended party might make.
You will notice that there are only 10 mitigating circumstances under Article MU 17. That means be employed or circumstances brought about which add
13, there are 21 aggravating circumstance under Article 14. More than double. TAU ignominy to the natural effects of the act.
18. That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry.
It simply proves true the statement that there are more ways to do evil that to There is an unlawful entry when an entrance of a crime a wall, roof, floor,
MU
do good, and the road to hell is wider that the road to heaven. door, or window be broken.
TAU 19. That as means to the commission of a crime a wall, door or window be
MU broken.
20. That the crime be committed with the aid of persons under fifteen years of
age or by means of motor vehicles, motorized watercraft, airships, or other
TAU similar means. (As amended by RA 5438).
MU 21. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately
augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commissions.
TAU
MUT
AU
MU
TAU
MU

TAU
MU
TAU
MU 1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public
position.

FIRST – This will not apply to private individuals. The offender here must be
a public officer.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 57 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
SECOND – That not every public officer who commits the crime will MU the public officer or authority is not the victim, that he is just a spectator. You
automatically be affected. The law says that he must take advantage. If he did TAU commit a crime in his presence.
not take advantage of his public position, his liability should not be MU
aggravated. TAU
MU
US vs. TORRIDA Question: Suppose I will commit a crime within the presence of the PNP
TAU Superintendent. His presence did not prevent me from committing the crime.
MU Is this covered by paragraph 2?
23 Phil. 189 TAU
MU Answer: No, paragraph 2 will not apply in the above case. The aggravating
TAU circumstance does not apply to crimes committed within the presence of
constabulary soldiers or PNP men.
Facts: The accused, shortly after entering upon his duties as councilor of the MU
town of Aparri, ordered that deaths of all large animals must be reported to TAU
him as councilman. As a result of this instruction, the owners of several such MU
animals were induced to pay the accused supposed fines on the belief that TAU
Question: Why?
such were required by a municipal ordinance. He spent the money paid to and MU
received by him as fines.
TAU Answer: Because in order to apply, the crime must be committed in contempt
MU of or with insult to the public authorities.
TAU
Held: The fact that the accused was councilor at the time placed him in a MU
position to commit these crimes. If he were not a councilor he could have not TAU Question: What do you mean by “public authority”?
induced the injured parties to pay there alleged fines. It was on account of his MU
being councilor that the parties believed that he had the right to collect fines TAU Answer: Public authority refers to persons in authority, like mayors,
and it was for this reason that they made the payment. It is true that he had no governors, etc. If you commit the crime in the presence of a PNP
MU
right to either impose or collect any fine whatsoever and it is likewise true that Superintendent, that is not contemplated because he is not a person in
a municipal councilor is not an official designated by law to collect public TAU authority. He is an agent of a person in authority.
fines, but these facts do not destroy or disprove the important fact that the MU
accused did by taking advantage of his public position deceive and defraud the TAU
injured parties out of the money they paid him. MU
TAU Note: However, such doctrine was reversed in 1981.
ARTICLE 62, par. 1 (a). When in the commission of the crime, advantage was MU
taken by the offender of his public office; the penalty to be imposed shall be in
TAU PEOPLE vs. RODIL
its maximum regardless of mitigating circumstance
MU
Article 14 (1) talks of an ordinary aggravating circumstance which can be TAU 109 SCRA 308
offset also by a mitigating circumstance. But Article 62 (1) is a special MU
aggravating circumstance which cannot be offset by a mitigating circumstance TAU
because the latter says regardless of any mitigating circumstance. MU
Facts: The crime was committed in the presence of constabulary captain, who
TAU is considered as an agent of a person in authority.
Question: Does this mean Article 14 is now useless because of that
MU
amendment?

TAU
Answer: To apply Article 62 (1-a), it must be alleged in the complaint. If it is
not alleged in the complaint but is proved during the trial, apply Article 14 (1). MU Issue: Whether or not paragraph 2 applies.
If it was alleged in the complaint and proved during trial, then you apply TAU
Article 62. MUT
AU
Held: The term “public authorities” are not confined to persons in authorities
MU because if the intention of the law was to confine paragraph 2 to persons in
TAU authority, then the law should have been specific. The law should have been
2. That the crime be committed in contempt or with insult to MU worded as: the crime be committed in contempt of or with insult to PERSONS
the public authorities. IN AUTHORITY, but the law did not use “person in authority” but instead the
TAU term “public authorities”. “Public authorities” is broader; it includes agents of
MU persons in authority.
The best example of this is when the mayor is conducting an official
TAU
inspection, or when he is outside of his office, talking to the people, or he is 3. That the act be committed with insult or in disregard of
inaugurating something, and they you, the accused commit a crime in his MU
the respect due the offended party on account of his rank,
presence – meaning, his presence did not prevent you from committing the
crime, and you know he is there. That would be an insult to him! Then the
age, or sex, or that is be committed in the dwelling of the
crime is considered aggravated because of the place and time. But be sure that offended party, if the latter has not given provocation.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 58 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
An analysis of this paragraph would show that there are four circumstances MU Question: Suppose, it’s the other way around. Suppose a 70-year old man
there. That the crime be committed in disregard of respect due to the offended TAU physically assaulted a 20-year old, will the aggravating circumstance apply?
party on account of his: MU
TAU Answer: Yes, because the law does not distinguish who is older and who
i. Rank; should be younger.
MU
ii. Age;
iii. Sex; or TAU
iv. That the crime be committed in the dwelling of the offended party, MU
if the latter has not given provocation. TAU Sex
MU
Question: Suppose the four are present in one case, would you say that there TAU The offender and the offended should belong to the opposite sexes. Now, this
are four separate aggravating circumstances. MU is one way. The offender here is male: the offended party is female. It cannot
TAU be the other way around. It is absurd that if a woman will maul a man, then
Answer: Numbers (i) and (iii) should be treated as one. But if it is also MU the man will accuse a woman of physical injuries with the aggravating
committed in the dwelling of the offended party, then that should be regarded TAU circumstance of disregard for his sex. In other words, there is something
as separate aggravating circumstance. The basis for this is that rank, age and wrong there.
MU
sex have a common characteristic – they are part of the personal background
of the victim. You are perverse considering the personal circumstances of the
TAU
offended party, as compared to yours. MU
TAU However, this will not apply if the difference is INHERENT in the crime, like
MU rape or seduction. By nature, the offender is male and the offended party is
TAU female. So, you do not say that a man is guilty of raping a woman with the
But dwelling, on the other hand, is based not on personal qualification, but on MU aggravating circumstance of disregard of respect due to the victim because of
place. her sex. But you are not to rape except a woman!
TAU
MU
TAU
Rank MU Also, when a crime is committed with passion or obfuscation, this paragraph
TAU is automatically out. Because you cannot deliberately disregard respect to the
It means that there is a difference in social standing between you (the MU victim when you are already acting with passion or obfuscation, because the
offender) and the victim. Social standing could mean many things. The best TAU two are inconsistent positions.
example is in the military. If a private assaults a captain, then the crime should MU
be aggravated. In an office, if the rank-and-file employee assaults the manager Dwelling
TAU
of the company, that should be considered as an aggravating circumstance.
MU Question: What was the reason behind this?
TAU
MU Answer: A man’s home is supposed to be his castle. One who goes to his
Or in a community, if a well-known civic leader, a well-known person in the TAU house to commit a crime against him is more perverse than somebody who
community whose stature is high is assaulted by somebody in the community MU offends him somewhere else. If the offender waits for you to go out of your
who is not so well-known, or by an “istambay”, that is aggravated. house before he commits a crime, at least he knows to respect the rules of
TAU
man. It is worse when somebody goes to your house, then goes to your
MU
bedroom and attacks you inside. This guy is more perverse. And the perversity
is shown by the place of the commission of the crime.
TAU
Age MU
TAU
The law does not contemplate that the offender is simply younger than the
MUT Question: What is meant by “dwelling”?
victim. What the law refers to is somebody, whose difference in age (with
respect to the victim) should be one or such that one qualifies to be the parent AU Answer: It is supposed to be a structure used for rest or comfort. Dwelling
of the other. The age difference should be substantially farther. The wider is MU includes the dependencies of the house, the staircase and the enclosure under
the gap between the offended and the offender, the circumstance, becomes TAU the house. That’s the concept. It includes even the garage beside the house
clearer. MU where you clean your car.

TAU
MU
For example, the age gap is 20 years. This can now apply. The older the “Dependencies” of one includes the jamb of the house. The staircases part of
TAU
victim, the better. You are 20 years old, and then you assault somebody who the dwelling.
MU
is 70 years old, who is old enough to be your grandfather. Then that becomes
aggravating.

Question: Is it necessary for the offender to go inside the house to commit a


crime?

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 59 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Answer: No. In the case of People vs. Ambo, where the accused shot the MU the house. However, this exception does not apply in a boarding house, where
victim from the street – meaning he shot him through the window and killed TAU the offender and the offended party are both boarders.
the occupant inside the house – the Supreme Court applied the aggravating MU
circumstance of dwelling. TAU
MU
If, for example, in a boarding house, a boarder enters your room, an exclusive
TAU room, and commits crime against you. There, he assaults you. It should be
Also, it is NOT necessary that the crime is finally consummated inside the MU aggravated by dwelling, although both of the offender and the victim are
house of the victim. Like what happened in one where the offender went to TAU living in the same house on the theory that, while it is true that you share the
the house of the victim to kill him. In this case, is dwelling aggravating? Yes, MU same dining room, the same sala, the room of one boarder is exclusively his.
because the initial attack started in the residence of the victim. “Dwelling” in TAU
Spanish is known as the aggravating circumstance of morada. MU
TAU
The decided case is a case on trespass to dwelling wherein a boarder forcibly
MU entered the room of another boarder. The Supreme Court said: there is
TAU trespass to dwelling because the offender had no right to enter the room of the
MU victim.
Question: When is dwelling not aggravating? When does dwelling not apply TAU
as an aggravating circumstance? MU
TAU
Answer: There are several: Question: Suppose the person who is the victim is staying in that house
MU
temporarily. He does not own it. He is just a house guest and he commits a
TAU
1.) It is not aggravating if the offended party crime there while he is a guest. Is this aggravating?
MU
has given provocation.
TAU Answer: Yes. Dwelling is aggravating even if the stay of the victim in the
MU house is a transient, it is only temporary. This is already considered covered
Meaning, your house is your castle. People are expected to respect that. They TAU by paragraph 3.
should not go there to commit a crime against you. But you should not use MU
this castle as a fortress to abuse others. TAU
MU
TAU 4. That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or
obvious ungratefulness.
For example, you are in your house. Everyone, who passes by, you insult. In MU
other words, you taunt them. One of them goes pissed. He went inside your TAU
house and attacked you. Question: Is the dwelling aggravating? Answer: No, MU
There are situations here. That the act is committed with:
you gave provocation. In this sense, you have waived the sanctity of your own TAU
dwelling by doing that. MU 1. abuse of confidence;
TAU 2. obvious ungratefulness
MU
2.) That the crime be committed in contempt TAU Abuse of Confidence
or with insult to the public authorities. MU
One of the ways of aggravating a crime is through the ways and means
TAU employed in its commission.
Example: Trespass to Dwelling. In the crime of trespass to dwelling, dwelling
MU
is not aggravating anymore; it is already part of the crime. Or robbery of an TAU
inhabited house. That is a crime necessarily committed in your house, and MUT
This will not apply again if the abuse of confidence is already a part of the
such is no longer aggravating. AU
elements of the crime. A good example is estafa through abuse of confidence.
MU
When you misappropriate goods entrusted to you, that is estafa. That is not
TAU aggravating because that type of estafa is coupled with abuse of confidence.
MU That is already considered a part of the crime.
3.) That the act be committed with insult or in
disregard of the respect due the offended TAU
party on account of his rank, age, or sex, MU
or that is be committed in the dwelling of TAU Or qualified theft by an employee who committed it with abuse of confidence.
the offended party, if the latter has not MU No more. The abuse of confidence there is already an integral part of the
given provocation. crime, so it is no longer considered aggravating.

You cannot complain that the sanctity of your house is violated. The offender
would just retort that the house is also his. Both of you have the right to live in

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 60 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
This was applied in the case where a “yaya” killed the child entrusted to her MU Answer: The distinction is: If the public authority is in the discharge of his
care and custody. So, the killing of the child was considered as aggravated by TAU duties inside his office and you commit a crime in his presence, you fall under
abuse of confidence on the part of the offender. MU paragraph 5. If he is engaged in the discharge of his duties outside his office
TAU and you committed a crime in his presence, you are covered by paragraph 2.
That is the difference.
MU
With Obvious Ungratefulness TAU
MU
For example, you take somebody to your house. You pity him because he is TAU Moreover, in paragraph 2, a public authority, like a mayor, should not be the
homeless. He has no place to go; he is starving. And you are a Good MU victim of the crime. It was simply committed in his presence. In paragraph 5,
Samaritan. You know the Bible, you put clothing on his back, and you feed TAU he may or may not be the victim of the crime. If you committed a crime in his
the hungry, etc… because whatever you have done to the least of My brethren MU presence inside his office, you are covered. If you assault the mayor inside his
you have done unto Me. So, you believe in that too. You took pity on him. office, while he is engaged in the discharge of his duties, you are covered by
TAU
When you wake up one morning, your appliances are gone. What kind of man paragraph 5.
MU
is that! No “utang na loob”! That is the essence of obvious ungratefulness. He
repays your kindness with a crime. That is what makes the crime aggravated. TAU
MU 6. That the crime be committed in the night time, or in an
TAU uninhabited place, or by a band, whenever such
MU circumstances may facilitate the commission of the offense.
5. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief TAU
Executive or in his presence, or where public authorities are MU Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have
engaged in the discharge of their duties, or in a place TAU acted together in the commission of an offense, it shall be
dedicated to religious worship. MU deemed to have been committed by a band.
TAU
MU
What makes the crime aggravated is the place where it was committed. There
TAU There are three circumstances here:
are actually four separate circumstances here:
MU
(i) committed in the night time;
TAU
MU (ii) committed in an uninhabited place; or
1. That it is committed in the place of the Chief Executive TAU
Malacañang Palace. Now, the Chief Executive need not be there. MU
(iii) committed by a band
What is important is the place.
TAU
2. In the presence of the Chief Executive. MU
This is whatever he may be, for as long as the crime is committed TAU
Question: What happens if the felony is committed at night time, in an
in his presence. MU
uninhabited place and committed by a band? So, all the three present, how
TAU many aggravating circumstance are there?
3. Where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their MU
duties.
A good example is when a crime is committed in front of a judge TAU Answer: There seems to be a conflict here:
while he is presiding in the courtroom. Or if the crime is MU
committed in the presence of the city mayor while he is  The authors of many books cite the Supreme Court of Spain based
discharging his duties at the mayor’s office. Now, suppose the TAU on the identical provisions of the Spanish Penal Code. In one
decision, the Spanish Supreme Court said that the three should be
crime is committed inside the courtroom, or inside the mayor’s MU treated only as one.
office when he is already gone. Meaning, after the court session TAU  But in another decision, the same Supreme Court said that there
has ended or after office hours. It is not aggravating. The law MUT should be three because they do not have any common
requires that it be committed in his presence. denominator. Night time is aggravating because of the time, an
AU uninhabited place because of the place, band because of the ways
4. That the crime be committed in a place dedicated to religious MU and means employed. So, one who commits a crime when all three
worship. TAU are present is more perverse than one who committed it only with
Now, suppose there is no religious worship. That is immaterial. MU one of them present.
What is important is that it is committed in a place dedicated to
worship. There need not be a religious ceremony going on at that TAU
time. So, the church, the mosques – or any other place where MU Nocturnidad
people pray that is considered a holy place. This is because of all
TAU Question: What do you mean by nighttime?
places where you could commit it, why commit in that place? He
could commit the crime anywhere else. Why choose to commit it – MU
of all places – in a place dedicated to religious worship. Answer: Well, we have in the Civil Code, for instance, sunset to sunrise. So,
if the crime is committed during daytime, it will not be aggravating. In the
Question: How do you compare (iii) with paragraph 2 – that the crime be first place, does daytime facilitates the commission of the crime? On the
committed in contempt of or with insult to the public authorities? contrary, in the dark, the possibility of detection, the possibility of being
recognized is low.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 61 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU Answer: Yes. It is not sufficient that at that very moment, there were many
TAU people around. That is not the test. The test is by its very nature. Are there
However, not every crime committed at nighttime becomes aggravating. MU people there? Meaning, by accident, it turns out that there were people.
There are two tests to determine whether or not the crime is aggravating - the TAU
objective test and the subjective test. In order that nighttime may be In the same manner that even if nobody helps you, if the place is NOT
MU
considered as aggravating, at least one test should apply. uninhabited place, it will not also be aggravating.
TAU
MU Question: A person was attacked at night in the middle of the subdivision. He
TAU was shouting for help, nut nobody came out to help him. Does the aggravating
Question: What is subjective test? MU circumstance of solitude apply?
TAU
Answer: Subjective test: whether or not nighttime is purposely sought by the MU Answer: No, because he was attacked in the middle of the subdivision.
offender in order to successfully commit the crime with impunity.
TAU
MU
TAU Question: But nobody helped him; nobody came out…
Question: What is objective test? MU
TAU Answer: That is not the test. The test is the very nature of the place, not the
Answer: Objective test: even if nighttime is not especially sought for, it MU accidental fact that nobody went to his rescue.
facilitated the commission of the crime.
TAU
MU
TAU Question: The victim was killed in the middle of Manila Bay. He was there
PROBLEM: Suppose a crime is committed by the accused against you inside MU fishing. So, the offender followed him in a motorboat and killed him. What
a movie house? You go to movie house during daytime – when you have just TAU are the aggravating circumstances present?
entered, chances are, and you cannot see anything because your eyes have not MU
yet adjusted to the darkness. But after a few minutes, after you have adjusted TAU Answer: There is one – uninhabited place. Nobody lives in the middle of
to the dark, you can now see. So, at that very moment, the accused assaulted Manila Bay.
MU
you. Obviously, the darkness of the movie house has facilitated the
TAU
commission of the crime. Quadrilla
MU
TAU The law gives us the definition of a band: wherever more than three armed
MU malefactors shall have acted together in the commission of an offense, it shall
Question: Is that aggravating? TAU be deemed to have been committed by a band.
MU
Answer: No. Even if it will pass the test, still it is not nighttime. Nighttime Take note that the law says MORE THAN THREE, so there are at least four.
TAU
speaks of sunset to sunrise. If you enter the movie house at 12:00 noon, it
cannot be nighttime, no matter how you look at it. That when you go outside,
MU
Question: Suppose 100 people attacked you. Three of them are armed, the 97
it is daytime, and when you enter again, it is nighttime again. TAU
are unarmed. Is the crime aggravated?
MU
TAU Answer: NO, because the law says that more than three armed men. Hence,
MU more than three should have been armed.
Despoblado
TAU
Uninhabited place is also known as the aggravating circumstance of MU
SOLITUDE. Question: Suppose 100 people attacked you. Three of them are armed, the 97
TAU
are unarmed. Is band an aggravating applicable?
MUT
AU Answer: Still the answer is NO, because the law says “more than three armed
Question: When is a place uninhabited? MU men”.
TAU
Answer: Where there are no houses around; the place is of considerable MU
distance from the town or proper. Or even if there are some houses, they are
so far from each other that you cannot reach or seek help from your nearest TAU Question: These four or more offenders are armed with what?
neighbor. The test is on whether or not there is a possibility of calling for help. MU
Answer: The law says “armed”. Suppose one has a bolo, one has a gun, and
TAU the other one has a club. Then, in effect they are armed because it is not
Question: There was a case in which the crime was committed in the middle
of the forest. Because the offender found it best to commit the crime in a place MU necessary that they are armed with firearms or guns.
where no one could help. But accidentally, there were hunters who were
around at that time. Was the crime aggravated by despoblado?

PEOPLE vs. MANLOLO

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 62 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
169 SCRA 394 MU left the motor launch after robbing their co-passengers and killing some of the
TAU passengers. They were convicted here in Davao and the judge here said that
MU the crime was aggravating by paragraph 7 because it was committed on the
TAU occasion of misfortune. What is misfortune? That the motor launch was left
Facts: Somebody, when he was going home, was attacked by a group of MU just floating out there in the sea?
istambays. They hit him and then they get stones and threw stones and rocks TAU
at him. They were about 4 or 5. This happened in Pasay City.
MU
TAU When the case reached the Supreme Court, the court rejected the application
MU of the aggravating circumstance because the misfortune contemplated by the
Issue: Whether or not a crime was committed by a band. TAU law is not that which will affect only a small number of people in the motor
MU launch. It should be big in magnitude. When we say shipwreck, earthquake, it
involves a lot of people in a water area rather than the people who were stuck
TAU
in the motor launch.
MU
Held: Exactly, the offenders, who were many, attacked the man by throwing
TAU
stones at him. There was an intention to cause death when the accused threw 8. That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men or
stones at the victim – thus, including stones under the term “armed”, under the MU persons who insure or afford impunity.
phrase “more than 3 armed malefactors acted together”. So, there is an TAU
aggravating circumstance of band. MU
TAU Question: How do you distinguish this from a crime committed bay a band?
MU
Answer: In here, there are also some armed men. In band, there should be
TAU
four or more armed men.
MU
TAU
7. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a
MU
conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other
TAU Question: Suppose there are only two or three men?
calamity or misfortune.
MU
TAU Answer: Then it falls under paragraph 8, when the crime is committed with
the aid of armed men.
Take note that on occasion like these, people should help one another. But in MU
your case, you took advantage of the confusion to commit the crime. The best TAU
example is during fire or conflagration. People go out there not to help but to MU
steal. Looters. That is precisely what is contemplated in this aggravating TAU
Moreover, to constitute a band, the four armed men should act together in the
circumstance. As a matter of fact, based on the amendment of Article 310 of
MU commission of the felony. Meaning, their participation was direct and they
the RPC (qualified theft by a special law), when the crime of theft is
TAU should have acted together. But here, it is not necessary that the armed men
committed during fire, the crime is no longer simple theft but is considered as
MU acted directly in the commission of the felony. It is enough that the crime be
qualified theft, raising it to the category of a higher offense.
committed with the aid of armed men. Meaning that they acted indirectly is
TAU
sufficient.
MU
TAU
However, if it is not properly alleged in the information, the crime is simple MU
theft, aggravated by paragraph 7. But if it is properly alleged, paragraph 7 is
Like for example, one commits the crime and then he relies on the armed men
converted from an ordinary aggravating to a qualifying circumstance.
TAU behind him to help if necessary. So, meaning, you are emboldened to commit
MU a crime because you have a “back-up”. But they did not act directly. They are
TAU accomplices. In this case, the liability of the principal is aggravated by
paragraph 8.
Question: What is an example of other calamity or misfortune? MUT
AU
Answer: Based on statutory construction, it should be of the same magnitude MU
as a conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake or epidemic. TAU PEOPLE vs. BUELA
MU
227 SCRA 534
A good example is the Mt. Mayon eruption. While the people are fleeing for TAU
their lives, you are committing a crime during the height of a volcanic MU
eruption or during the height of a typhoon. TAU
MU Issue: Is the aid of armed men aggravating if the three persons were all armed
under the same plan and with the same purpose?

There was a case before decided by the former CFI of Davao City where a Held: When the crime is committed by three persons, who were all armed, the
motor launch runs out somewhere between Davao and Davao del Sur. Some aggravating circumstance of the crime having been committed with the air of
of the passengers decided to rob their fellow passengers and escaped. They armed men under Article 14 (8) of the RPC cannot be appreciated in this case

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 63 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
because if they acted with the same plan and with the same purpose – MU
meaning, in order for it to be aggravated in the situation, their participation TAU
should be indirect rather than direct. MU So, if the two felonies are not embraced in the same title of the Code, there is
TAU no recidivism. The best example is, you were convicted before for physical
injuries, and you are found guilty of homicide. Physical injuries and homicide
MU
are both Crimes against Persons. Or you were convicted before of the crime of
Question: What happens if the crime is committed by a band when 4 or 5 TAU theft, and you are found guilty of robbery or estafa – which fall under Crimes
persons acted together? What happens to paragraph 8? MU against Property.
TAU
Answer: That is already absorbed by a band. MU
TAU
9. That the accused is a recidivist. MU Question: Suppose a person was convicted before for the crime of homicide,
A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one crime, TAU and the case is not now on appeal with the Court of Appeals. And now, he is
shall have been previously convicted by final judgment of found guilty of the crime of physical injuries, a Crime against Person. Can his
MU liability of physical injuries be aggravated by recidivism?
another crime embraced in the same title of this Code. TAU
MU Answer: Yes. The law does not require service of sentence. The law just
10. That the offender has been previously punished by an TAU states x x x has been previously convicted by final judgment. Meaning, even if
offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty MU he was pardoned, the pardon may erase the penalty, but it will not erase the
or for two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter TAU fact of conviction. The important thing is the conviction, not the service of
penalty. MU sentence.

TAU
Question: What are the four types of criminal repetition in the Penal Code? MU
Meaning, the offender is not committing the crime for the first time. TAU Reiteracion
MU
Answer: In the RPC, there are four types of criminal repetition: TAU Take note that in paragraph 10, habituality need not embrace similarity of the
MU previous offense and present offense. Should not be, because if they are
(i) recidivism
TAU embraced in the same title, then it becomes recidivism.

(ii) habituality or (reiteration) MU


TAU
(iii) habitual delinquency (multi-recidivism) MU For example, a person commits or was convicted before and punished for a
TAU Crime against Property for which he was sentenced to the penalty of reclusion
(iv) quasi-recidivism
MU temporal. Now, he is found guilty of a Crime against Persons. So, it is not
TAU embraced in the same title of the Penal Code for which he is sentenced by the
MU trial court prision mayor. Reiteracion applies because he has been previously
punished for another offense for which the law attaches a higher penalty.
Recidivism and habituality are ordinary aggravating circumstances which are TAU
found in Article 14. The third one, habitual delinquency, is what called MU
extraordinary aggravating circumstances. And the last one, quasi-recidivism, TAU
is a special aggravating circumstance. MU Question: Suppose the penalty for the first felony is a prision mayor, and the
penalty for the new felony is also a prision mayor?
TAU
MU Answer: Then reiteracion applies because the law says he has been punished
Reindicia for a crime to which the law attaches an equal penalty, either higher or same.
TAU
Question: Who is a recidivist? MUT
AU
Answer: A recidivist is a person, who, while on trial for one offense, has been MU PROBLEM: Suppose a man, several years ago, was found guilty of slight
previously convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced within the TAU physical injuries – light felony and he was sentenced to one day of arresto
same title if the Penal Code. So obviously, he is at least a second offender, and MU menor. And then after a year, he was found guilty of slight oral defamation.
he must be found guilty for the second offense. He was sentenced a penalty of one day imprisonment of arresto menor. And
TAU now, he is found guilty of rape, and he is punished with the penalty of
MU reclusion perpetua. If you look at his record, no two crimes are embraced in
the same title of the Penal Code. The first one is slight physical injuries
He has a previous criminal record; he has a previous conviction for another TAU (Crimes against Persons); slander (Crimes against Honor); and rape (Crimes
felony. So, the previous conviction is not of a special law, but for the same MU against Persons). So, he is not a recidivist.
felony. And what is important is that the felony which he previously
committed, for which he was convicted, and the present felony for which he is
now found guilty, are embraced within the same title of the Revised Penal
Code.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 64 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Question: The first offense is a light felony; the second offense is also a light MU
felony. As a matter of fact, he was only sentenced to one day of arresto mayor. TAU
This time the felony (rape) is punishable with reclusion perpetua. Is there MU Now, in the book of Reyes, he cited some old decisions which appear to be
reiteracion? TAU conflicting. The case of People vs. Parro (36 Phil. 923) and US vs. Maharaja
(38 Phil. 1), where the Supreme Court said that the aggravating circumstance
MU
Answer: Yes, because he has been previously punished for two offenses to applies both to the one giving the price or reward AND the person who
TAU
which the law attaches a lesser penalty. receives the price or reward. But in another case also cited in his book, the
MU case of People vs. Talledo (85 Phil. 539), the implication was that it is only
TAU aggravating for the person who receives the reward or price. It will not affect
MU the giver because the law says xxx that the crime be committed in
PROBLEM: Suppose a person was found guilty of the crime of homicide and TAU consideration xxx. And the implication is that “committed” refers to the one
was sentenced to a penalty of reclusion temporal, but was pardoned by the MU committing it. Meaning, the principal by direct participation, not the
President. So, he did not serve any single day in jail. Later on, he was found mastermind.
TAU
guilty of robbery, another felony? And the penalty for homicide before was
MU
higher.
TAU
MU However, the case of Talledo, has been misinterpreted because the Supreme
TAU Court has already corrected that in 1971. Whatever statements that appears in
Question: Is there reiteracion? MU the book of Reyes about the doubt, there is no more doubt as that has been
TAU settled. Paragraph 11 is already settled as applied to both the participants and
Answer: NO. What is important in reiteracion is he was previously punished, the inducer.
MU
not convicted.
TAU
PEOPLE vs. ALINCASTRE
Note: In recidivism, all that the law requires is a PREVIOUS FINAL MU
JUDGMENT of conviction. TAU
40 SCRA 391
MU
In reiteracion, the law requires that he has PREVIOUSLY BEEN TAU
PUNISHED, not merely convicted. MU
TAU The price, reward or promise is aggravating for both not only the receiver but
MU also the giver. If a person is considered as morally depraved for committing a
TAU felony in exchange of a material reward, then the person who gave the offer to
commit the crime in exchange for a reward is also a depraved person.
11. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price, MU
reward, or promise. TAU
MU
TAU The general rule about aggravating circumstances is that even if the
What makes the crime aggravating is the motivating power. The best example
MU aggravating circumstance is not alleged in the complaint or information, but
would be the hired assassin. You hire somebody to kill for you. That guy has
no grudge against the victim; he does not even know the victim. But because TAU
proven during the trial, it should be appreciated. It is not necessary to allege it.
The important thing is that it was established during the trial.
he is willing to commit a felony – that shows perversity on the part of the MU
offender. Hired guns, hired killers, guns for hire, mercenaries are best TAU
examples. The crime was committed in consideration of price, reward or MU
promise.
However, the rule does not seem to apply to recidivism because, based on
TAU some decisions of the Supreme Court, recidivism should be alleged in the
MU information. To appreciate recidivism, it is necessary to allege it in the
TAU information. Absence of this allegation bars the trial court from allowing of
What is contemplated by the law here is that there was a previous proposal
MUT evidence regarding the matter. So, it should be properly alleged.
and a previous conspiracy. Because, how can you hire somebody if he will not
agree if there is no agreement? So, they did not stop the conspiracy. In other AU
words, the crime was fully executed by one. We call the one hired him as MU
principal by inducement, and one that commits the crime is called principal TAU
by direct participation under Article 17 of the RPC. MU 12. That the crime be committed by means of inundation,
fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel or international
TAU damage thereto, derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of
MU any other artifice involving great waste and ruin.
Question: If I hire someone to kill my enemy, whose liability under
TAU
paragraph 11 will be aggravated? The liability of the killer only, or should
price, reward or promise be aggravating for both of us? MU
Now, what qualifies it as aggravating is the manner, ways and means of the
crime. Do not confuse this with paragraph 7. In paragraph 7, the crime was
Answer: It is not only the one who receives the price, but it also includes the committed on the occasion of a conflagration, or fire, etc. So, the timing x x x
giver. ON THE OCCASION x x x. Here, the crime was committed BY USE OF x x
x. However, this would not apply if the use of fire is included in the definition

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 65 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
of the crime. Like arson, since the means is fire, fire can no longer be MU
aggravating, being already considered as part of the elements of the crime. TAU
MU Evident premeditation WILL NOT APPLY in error in
TAU personam.
MU
Another example would be that the crime was committed by means of poison.
When you kill somebody by poisoning him under Article 248, the crime is TAU PROBLEM: A planned to kill X and he has planned to kill X for so long. He
murder. This is one of the qualifying circumstances of murder. If properly MU planned and he made preparations to kill X. One day, he started to implement
alleged in the information, in which case, the use of poison is no longer TAU it. He killed X but it turned out to be Y. He did not kill X because of error in
aggravating. It is already part of the elements of the crime. MU personam. Of course, based on Article 4, he will not be prosecuted for the
TAU death of X because he did not kill X. He will now be prosecuted for the death
of Y and it was established that he has been planning to kill X for so long.
MU
TAU
However, if a person is charged only with homicide, and in the course of the
trial, it was established that he killed the victim by poisoning him. What crime MU
did he commit? It is still homicide under the Rules of Criminal Procedure TAU Question: Is the killing of Y by evident premeditation? Answer: No, there is
because you cannot convict a person for an offense higher than the one being MU none because he did not premeditate the death of Y. The evidence would show
charged. So, the crime is homicide, aggravated by the fact that he committed it TAU that he premeditated the death of X. So, Y was not a part of that
by means of poison. But if it is alleged in the information, it is called murder, MU premeditation.
qualified by the use of poison under Article 248, not under Article 14. TAU
MU
TAU However, that should not be confused with the ruling that it is not necessary to
Question: Suppose the husband killed his wife by poisoning her. The use of MU premeditate for a specific victim. So, for example, where the accused planned
poison was alleged in the information. Is the use of poison aggravating under TAU to be amok. He will kill every person he meets. Is my liability aggravated by
paragraph 12?. MU evident premeditation? Yes. But I did not ponder. You did not ponder, but
TAU there is no error in personam. Why? Because when I premeditate, I will kill
Answer: Yes, because if the husband kills the wife, the crime is not murder, MU the people I will meet. Whoever I meet is part of my premeditation. There is
but PARRICIDE. And the qualifying circumstance in parricide is not poison, no error. That is the phrase to whom that my concern. Therefore, it is a
TAU meditated act.
but relationship. So, since the qualifying circumstance is relationship, the use
MU
of poison becomes an aggravating circumstance under Article 14 (12). So,
that’s how you apply the circumstances in relation to Book II. TAU
MU
TAU 14. That the craft, fraud or disguise be employed.
MU
13. That the act be committed with evidence premeditation. TAU Now, actually, craft and fraud are identical. There is an employment of tricks.
MU The offender resorted to tricks to commit the crime. The only difference is the
TAU manner the trickery was committed. If the trickery is more of scheme or
In Spanish, it is called premeditacion. Now, this is the exact opposite of the
MU action, rather than the use of words – intellectual trickery or action, it is more
mitigating circumstances that the crime was committed with passion or
TAU of craft. Whereas, fraud refers more to the trickery or to the use of words by
obfuscation. In passion or obfuscation, the offender did not have sufficient
the offender. Insidious machination by the offender.
time to reflect the commission of the crime, so it was more of emotion than MU
reason. It is the other way around here. He has all the time to reflect; he has all
the time to reconsider, but still he proceeded. Despite the careful deliberation, TAU
thinking still proceeded to commit the crime. MU
For example, somebody rides a taxi, tells the driver to bring him to this place,
TAU
and then when they reach the place, the passenger now announces a hold-up
This is one of the hardest aggravating circumstances to prove because it is not MUT
and divests the driver of his income at that time, or even kills the driver. The
enough that you prove that the accused committed the crime, you must also AU
robbery there is definitely aggravated by the use of craft. And what is the
prove that the accused already planned or was determined to commit the
MU trick? The offender who is actually a robber pretended to be a paying
crime, even before the date it was actually committed. You must have
TAU passenger. He tricked the driver to bring him to a designated spot. If the driver
previous history of the party.
MU knows your intention, he will not get you as a passenger. Why will he allow
himself to be robbed or even killed? Just for that distinction, craft and fraud
TAU are almost identical. There is the use of trick or scheme by the offender.
And the last requisite is a matter of computation. There must be sufficient MU
time between the determination to commit the crime and the day the crime TAU
was committed to show that he has the time to reflect. Now, what is sufficient MU
time is relative. Suppose, he planned to commit the crime one or two days PEOPLE vs. EMPACIS
before it can be, how about 15 minutes? The number of hours is sufficient.
The longer the time gap, the better, the application of this circumstance 222 SCRA 59
becomes clearer. The longer the time he has to reflect, the premeditation
becomes more evident. The stratagem and ruses that constitute craft and fraud are the following:

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 66 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
 Where are accused pretended to be constabulary soldiers and by that MU disguise would have been successful. So, the Supreme Court considered the
ploy, gained entry into the residence of their prey, to rob them TAU circumstance still as applicable.
thereafter; MU
 They pretended to be needful of medical treatment, and due to this,
they were able to enter the house of the victim and there robbed and TAU
killed him; MU
 When they pretended to be customers wanting to buy a bottle of wine; TAU
 When they pretended to be the co-passengers of the victim in a public MU
15. That advantage be taken of superior strength, or means
utility vehicle; be employed to weaken the defense.
 They posed as customers to buy cigarettes, or as being thirsty asking TAU
to drink a glass of water, etc. MU
TAU This generally applies to Crime against Persons. Now, in order for the
MU aggravating circumstance of superior strength to apply, there must be
In all those instances, the crime was aggravated with craft and fraud. evidence that the offender is of superior strength than the other. It cannot be
TAU
presumed. It has to be clearly established. And when we say “superior
MU
strength”, shall it mean to say you have more assets than that of the other?
TAU
MU
TAU
MU Like for example, when the two or more people committed the crime,
TAU superiority in number would definitely give the offender superior strength. Or
Disguise MU when one is armed with the weapon and the other is not armed with a weapon,
and then superior strength is really apparent. And not only that. He clearly
TAU
When the offender tries to conceal his identity. took advantage of it because if the crime is the product of anger or emotion,
MU then we cannot say that he deliberately took advantage. There is no showing
TAU that the offender really relied on superior strength.
MU
PEOPLE vs. SONSONA TAU
MU
TAU That means be employed to weaken the defense.
MU
Facts: The offender covered his face with a handkerchief in order to prevent The other one is a little bit different. Maybe, the parties are of equal strength,
TAU
his being identified. But despite that, the victim recognized him. no one is superior to the other. But the accused saw it that the victim will be at
MU
the disadvantage. So, if you are now in a disadvantage, in effect, my strength
TAU becomes superior.
MU
Held: Disguise is not aggravating because he was not successful. Actually, he TAU
was still recognized even if he disguised. MU
TAU It has been applied to cases:
MU
 Where the accused threw sand into the eyes of the victim. If your eyes
TAU
PEOPLE vs. CABATO are filled with sand, you cannot see. You have to close your eyes. So
MU how can you defend yourself?
 Where the offender deliberately intoxicated his victim and the victim
160 SCRA 98 was already drunk he could hardly stand. That is the time he is
TAU
assaulted.
MU
TAU
Facts: The accused disguised himself by covering his face and the disguise MUT
fell down, or the cover of his face accidentally fell down. Therefore, he was AU
recognized. MU 16. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia).
TAU There is treachery when the offender commits any of the
MU crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or
Held: The disguise is aggravating.
forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and
TAU specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself
MU arising from the defense which the offended party might
TAU make.
Question: What makes this case different? MU
Requisites:
Answer: In the Solsona case, nothing fell down. The cover is still intact, but 1. That offender consciously adopted this particular means;
2. That the means would ensure commission of crime without risk to
just the same, he was not successful. In Cabato case, the disguise could have himself arising from defense that offended party might make.
been successful, only that it fell down. Meaning, had it not fell down, the

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 67 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
An attack from behind or at the back is always treacherous but even a frontal MU yong pinagsasabi mo." Felix tried to locate the voice of the woman who was
attack constitutes treachery if it is so sudden, unexpected and unprovoked. TAU calling him, with Gina following him down the steps.1âwphi1.nêt
MU
In People vs. Lu-aw, there can be no treachery if there are no particulars on Before Gina could catch up with her brother, accused Casimiro Jose suddenly
how aggression commenced, or circumstances showing how acts leading to TAU appeared from the back of their house. From a distance of five (5) meters,
death actually unfolded. MU Gina saw accused Casimiro hack her brother in the left side of the neck with a
TAU bolo. Felix was facing the accused and was about a meter away from him. The
Treachery sometimes absorbs superior strength or evident premeditation, and attack was sudden and unprovoked.
if there is unlawful killing, the other aggravating circumstances like dwelling, MU
nighttime, uninhabited place, abuse of confidence, band, etc. would become TAU Though it was still dark, Gina recognized accused Casimiro as the assailant of
mere generic aggravating circumstances which can be offset by ordinary MU her brother because the light coming from a sixty-watt bulb in their kitchen
mitigating circumstances. illuminated the place. She was familiar with accused Casimiro as the latter is
TAU her cousin's husband.
Notes: MU
 There is no treachery when attack is preceded by a warning or if TAU After the attack, accused Casimiro immediately fled and in his haste, left
accused gave the deceased a —chance to prepare. No treachery if MU behind his slippers.
there is a quarrel.
 Treachery is never presumed. It must be proven as clearly and TAU Held: The killing of Felix Zacarias is qualified by alevosia. "For treachery to
convincingly as the crime itself because it increases the penalty. MU be present, two conditions must concur, namely: (a) the employment of means
 This applies only to crime against persons. TAU of execution that gives the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself
 Mere suddenness of attack is not enough to constitute treachery. or retaliate, and (b) the means of execution was deliberately or consciously
Mode of attack must be deliberately and consciously adopted, such MU adopted."
as when victim was asleep, or being held, or attacked from behind. TAU
 When aggression is CONTINUOUS, treachery must be present in MU In the present case, the victim was intoxicated and unarmed. Accused-
the beginning of the assault. appellant Casimiro Jose surreptitiously appeared from behind the house of the
TAU
 If NOT CONTINUOUS, and there was an INTERRUPTION, it is victim, armed with a bolo, and hacked the victim without any provocation at
sufficient that treachery was present at the precise moment the fatal MU all. The unruly behavior of the victim and the verbal invectives hurled against
blow was given. TAU no one in particular would not justify the act of accused-appellant. "What is
 If principal by inducement did not specify details on MEANS to MU decisive is that the execution of the attack made it impossible for the victim to
carry out assault, treachery cannot be taken against the inducer. defend himself or to retaliate."
 When there is conspiracy, treachery is considered against ALL TAU
offenders. MU
 Treachery, evident premeditation and superior strength are by their TAU 17. That means be employed or circumstances brought about
nature inherent in the crime of treason.
MU which add ignominy to the natural effects of the act.
 Nighttime and craft are absorbed in treachery, except if treachery
rests upon an independent factual basis. TAU
Ignominy – adopted to increase moral suffering or humiliation and disgrace of
 Treachery cannot co-exist with passion and obfuscation. MU the victim.
 In People vs. Verchez, 233 SCRA 174 (1994) where SC held there TAU
was no treachery employed by Verchez, et. Al. who were
suspected bank robbers in a hideout when they shot it out with PC MU
Requisites of ignominy:
agents. This is because the lawmen should have been prepared to TAU
1. Crime must be against chastity, less serious physical injuries, light
deal with any resistance when they attacked the hideout of Verchez MU
or grave coercion, and murder;
et al.
 In People vs. Jose, (Jan. 31, 2000) SC held it was murder qualified
TAU 2. The circumstance consciously adopted to make the crime more
humiliating and shameful to the victim.
by treachery when Jose suddenly hacked Felix Zacarias at the MU
back, at around 1:00 a.m. after victim became drunk and boisterous TAU
and challenged anyone to a fight. Treacherous because victim was MU
Notes:
unarmed, and attacked unprovoked and unexpected, under cover of
 IGNOMINY refers to circumstance pertaining to the MORAL
darkness. Challenging anyone to a fight does not constitute
TAU order; or that which adds disgrace 4nd obloquy to the material
sufficient provocation.
injury caused by the crime.
MU  This is applicable to crimes against chastity, and persons.
TAU  In People vs. Torrefiel, where SC said there was ignominy when
PEOPLE vs. JOSE MUT accused raped a woman after winding cogon grass around his
genital organ.
January 31, 2000 AU
 Means employed or circumstances brought about which tend to
MU make the crime more humiliating or put offended party to greater
Facts: At about 1:00 o'clock in the morning of September 15, 1996, Gina TAU shame, or ridicule, like a married man being raped before the
Zacarias was awakened from her sleep by the noise caused by her drunken husband.
brother, Felix Zacarias. Felix came home from the wake of Federico Herrera, MU
brother of accused Casimiro Jose's father-in-law, whose house was about two
hundred (200) meter's away from the victim's house, both located in Barangay TAU
Dusoc, Bayambang, Pangasinan. Felix worked in Manila and he was in the MU
province on a three-day vacation.
To pacify Felix who was then ascending the front steps of their house, Gina TAU
stepped out of her room and asked her brother to stop shouting because their MU
neighbors were still asleep. Felix did not listen and continued shouting "Mga
PEOPLE vs. JOSE
walanghiya kayo!" directed against no one in particular. February 6, 1971

Instead of proceeding to the house, Felix suddenly went down the steps. A Note: This is the famous Maggie de la Riva case, so kumpletuhin na ang facts.
neighbor, Beatriz Calimlim, called Felix and angrily uttered "Pedro, Pedro ano

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 68 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Facts: The complainant, Magdalena "Maggie" de la Riva, was, at the time of MU Cañal sitting beside her, all of them smiling meaningfully. Pineda told the
the incident, 25 years old and single; she graduated from high school in 1958 TAU complainant: "Magburlesque ka para sa amin." The other three expressed
at Maryknoll College and finished the secretarial course in 1960 at St. their approval and ordered Miss De la Riva to disrobe. The complainant
MU
Theresa's College. Movie actress by profession, she was receiving P8,000.00 ignored the command. One of the appellants suggested putting off the light so
per picture. It was part of her work to perform in radio broadcasts and TAU that the complainant would not be ashamed. The idea, however, was rejected
television shows, where she was paid P800.00 per month in permanent shows, MU by the others, who said that it would be more pleasurable for them if the light
P300.00 per month in live promotional shows, and from P100.00 to P200.00 TAU was on. Miss De la Riva was told to remove her stocking in order, according
per appearance as guest in other shows. to them, to make the proceedings more exciting. Reluctantly, she did as
MU directed, but so slowly did she proceed with the assigned task that the
So it was that at about 4:30 o'clock in the morning of June 26, 1967, Miss De TAU appellants cursed her and threatened her again with the Thompson and the
la Riva, homeward bound from the ABS Studio on Roxas Blvd., Pasay City, MU acid. They started pushing Miss De la Riva around. One of them pulled down
was driving her bantam car accompanied by her maid Helen Calderon, who the zipper of her dress; another unhooked her brassiere. She held on tightly to
TAU
was also at the front seat. Her house was at No. 48, 12th Street, New Manila, her dress to prevent it from being pulled down, but her efforts were in vain:
Quezon City. She was already near her destination when a Pontiac two-door MU her dress, together with her brassiere, fell on the floor.
convertible car with four men aboard (later identified as the four appellants) TAU
came abreast of her car and tried to bump it. She stepped on her brakes to MU The complainant was now completely naked before the four men, who were
avoid a collision, and then pressed on the gas and swerved her car to the left, kneeling in front of her and feasting their eyes on her private parts. This
at which moment she was already in front of her house gate; but because the TAU ordeal lasted for about ten minutes, during which the complainant, in all her
driver of the other car (Basilio Pineda, Jr.) also accelerated his speed, the two MU nakedness, was asked twice or thrice to turn around. Then Pineda picked up
cars almost collided for the second time. This prompted Miss De la Riva, who TAU her clothes and left the room with his other companions. The complainant
was justifiably annoyed, to ask: "Ano ba?" Forthwith, Pineda stopped the car tried to look for a blanket with which to cover herself, but she could not find
which he was driving, jumped out of it and rushed towards her. MU one.
TAU
The girl became so frightened at this turn of events that she tooted the horn of MU Very soon, Jose reentered the room and began undressing himself. Miss De la
her car continuously. Undaunted, Pineda opened the door of Miss De la Riva's Riva, who was sitting on the bed trying to cover her bareness with her hands,
TAU
car and grabbed the lady's left arm. The girl held on tenaciously to her car's implored him to ask his friends to release her. Instead of answering her, he
steering wheel and, together with her maid, started to scream. Her strength, MU pushed her backward and pinned her down on the bed. Miss De la Riva and
however, proved no match to that of Pineda, who succeeded in pulling her out TAU Jose struggled against each other; and because the complainant was putting up
of her car. Seeing her mistress' predicament, the maid jumped out of the car MU stiff resistance, Jose cursed her and hit her several times on the stomach and
and took hold of Miss De la Riva's right arm in an effort to free her from other parts of the body. The complainant crossed her legs tightly, but her
Pineda's grip. The latter, however, was able to drag Miss De la Riva toward TAU attacker was able to force them open. Jose succeeded in having carnal
the Pontiac convertible car, whose motor was all the while running. MU knowledge of the complainant. He then left the room.
TAU
When Miss De la Riva, who was being pulled by Pineda, was very near the The other three took their turns. Aquino entered the room next. A struggle
MU
Pontiac car, the three men inside started to assist their friend: one of them held ensued between him and Miss De la Riva during which he hit her on different
her by the neck, while the two others held her arms and legs. All three were TAU parts of the body. Like Jose, Aquino succeeded in abusing the complainant.
now pulling Miss De la Riva inside the car. Before she was completely in, MU The girl was now in a state of shock. Aquino called the others into the room.
appellant Pineda jumped unto the driver's seat and sped away in the direction TAU They poured water on her face and slapped her to revive her. Afterwards,
of Broadway Street. The maid was left behind. three of the accused left the room, leaving Pineda and the complainant. After
MU some struggle during which Pineda hit her, the former succeeded in forcing
The complainant was made to sit between Jaime Jose and Edgardo Aquino at TAU his carnal desire on the latter. When the complainant went into a state of
the back seat; Basilio Pineda, Jr. was at the wheel, while Rogelio Cañal was MU shock for the second time, the three other men went into the room again
seated beside him. Miss De la Riva entreated the appellants to release her; but poured water on the complainant's face and slapped her several times. The
all she got in response were jeers, abusive and impolite language that the
TAU complainant heard them say that they had to revive her so she would know
appellants and threats that the appellants would finish her with their MU what was happening. Jose, Aquino and Pineda then left the room. It was now
Thompson and throw acid at her face if she did not keep quiet. In the TAU appellant Canal's turn. There was a struggle between him and Miss De la
meantime, the two men seated on each side of Miss De la Riva started to get MU Riva. Like the other three appellants before him, he hit the complainant on
busy with her body: Jose put one arm around the complainant and forced his different parts of the body and succeeded in forcing his carnal lust on her.
lips upon hers, while Aquino placed his arms on her thighs and lifted her skirt.
The girl tried to resist them. She continuously implored her captors to release TAU Mention must be made of the fact that while each of mention must be made
her, telling them that she was the only breadwinner in the family and that her MU the four appellants was struggling with the complainant, the other three were
mother was alone at home and needed her company because her father was TAU outside the room, just behind the door, threatening the complainant with acid
already dead. Upon learning of the demise of Miss De la Riva's father, Aquino and telling her to give in because she could not, after all, escape what with
remarked that the situation was much better than he thought since no one MUT their presence.
could take revenge against them. By now Miss De la Riva was beginning to AU
realize the futility of her pleas. She made the sign of the cross and started to MU After the appellants had been through with the sexual carnage, they gave Miss
pray. The appellants became angry and cursed her. Every now and then De la Riva her clothes, told her to get dressed and put on her stockings, and to
Aquino would stand up and talk in whispers with Pineda, after which the two TAU wash her face and comb her hair, to give the impression that nothing had
would exchange knowing glances with Cañal and Jose. MU happened to her. They told her to tell her mother that she was mistaken by a
group of men for a hostess, and that when the group found out that she was a
The car reached a dead-end street. Pineda turned the car around and headed TAU movie actress, she was released without being harmed. She was warned not to
towards Victoria Street. Then the car proceeded to Araneta Avenue, Sta. Mesa inform the police; for if she did and they were apprehended, they would
Street, Shaw Boulevard, thence to Epifanio de los Santos Avenue. When the
MU simply post bail and later hunt her up and disfigure her face with acid. The
car reached Makati, Aquino took a handkerchief from his pocket and, with the TAU appellants then blindfolded Miss De la Riva again and led her down from the
help of Jose, blindfolded Miss De la Riva. The latter was told not to shout or MU hotel room. Because she was stumbling, she had to be carried into the car.
else she would be stabbed or shot with a Thompson. Not long after, the car Inside the car, a appellant Jose held her head down on his lap, and kept it in
came to a stop at the Swanky Hotel in Pasay City The blindfolded lady was that position during the trip, to prevent her from being seen by others.
led out of the car to one of the rooms on the second floor of the hotel.
Issue: Whether or not there was ignominy as to aggravate the crimes of the
Inside the room Miss De la Riva was made to sit on a bed. Her blindfold was accused.
removed. She saw Pineda and Aquino standing in front of her, and Jose and

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 69 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Held: Yes, since the appellants in ordering the complainant to exhibit to them MU
her complete nakedness for about ten minutes, before raping her, brought TAU
about a circumstance which tended to make the effects of the crime more 20. That the crime be committed with the aid of persons
MU
humiliating.
TAU under fifteen years of age or by means of motor vehicles,
MU motorized watercraft, airships, or other similar means.
18. That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry. TAU
Basis:
There is an unlawful entry when an entrance of a crime a MU  To counteract the great facility afforded modern criminals in their
wall, roof, floor, door, or window be broken. TAU means of committing crimes, especially in absconding and fleeing
MU from the crime scene.
Unlawful entry— when entrance is effected by a way not intended for the  Necessary that the motor vehicle be an important tool to commit
TAU
purpose. Must be to effect entrance, and not exit. crime and must be motorized vehicle (bicycles not included).
MU  To punish criminal taking advantage of minors irresponsibility
It is inherent and therefore, not aggravating in TAU when committing crimes. (Minority is privileged mitigating, and if
1. Trespass to dwelling; MU below 9 years, even exempting).
2. Robbery with force upon things; and
3. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons. TAU Notes:
MU  Motor vehicle: aggravating where accused used the motor vehicle
Notes: TAU in going to the place of the crime, in carrying away the effects
 Breaking a door falls under par. 19, not under this paragraph thereof, and in facilitating their escape.
because entry here must be effected through entrance not intended
MU  If motor vehicle used only to facilitate escape, it is not aggravating.
for such purpose. TAU
 Basis: greater perversity of the offender for not respecting walls MU
erected by men to safeguard their lives and property. TAU 21. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be
 Unlawful entry is inherent in ROBBERY with force upon things.
MU deliberately augmented by causing other wrong not
TAU necessary for its commissions.
PEOPLE vs. BAELLO MU Cruelty is when offender derives pleasure in increasing physical pain of
224 SCRA 218 (1993) TAU victim. e.g. stabbing a dying victim repeatedly while in the throes of death to
MU augment the physical pain of victim. Several stab wounds on victim’s body,
Facts: On 10 October 1990, at about five 5:00 o'clock in the morning. even a decapitated body, does not automatically mean cruelty absent proof
Barangay Captain Eustaquio R. Borja awoke to find out that the front door of TAU that offender deliberately performed acts to increase the physical suffering of
his residence at No. 164 Evangelista Street, Barangay Santolan, Pasig, Metro- MU victim.
Manila, was open and that their television set in the sala was missing. TAU
Eustaquio told his wife about what he saw and together they proceeded But if the victim is already dead, there is no more cruelty.
upstairs to the second floor to check on their 22-year old daughter, Veronica
MU
Borja. They noticed that the door to her room was open. Upon entering the TAU Notes:
room, they were shocked to find the bloodied corpse of their daughter lying in MU  Ignominy is adding insult to injury by increasing the moral
bed. The window of her room was open. Eustaqiuo instructed his wife not to TAU suffering or shame of the victim. E.g. In People vs Jose, where the
touch the body while he summoned the authorities. He proceeded to the accused Jose, Pineda, et al forced actress Maggie de la Riva to strip
Barangay Hall from where he called the police. The couple later discovered MU naked for them and dance suggestively while they ogled over her
that a cassette player, a camera, and various pieces of jewelry in their TAU naked body, SC held this act constitutes ignominy.
daughter's cabinet, all worth about P50,000.00, were likewise missing.  MU  Cruelty and ignominy are never presumed but must be specified
TAU and alleged in the Information and proven beyond reasonable
The accused in his sworn statement said that he and Jerry had a prior doubt during trial, just like the elements of the crime committed.
agreement to commit robbery in the house of Eustaquio Borja. Together they MU  There is no cruelty when other wrong was done after victim was
went to the latter's house at 4:00 o'clock in the morning of 10 October 1990, dead.
entered the house through the window at the second floor, and once inside, he TAU  In People vs. llaoa (supra) where SC held that the fact that victim’s
got the television set while Jerry got the other items, and then, together again, decapitated body bore 43 stab wounds, 24 of which were fatal, and
they left the house with their loot. MU
was found dumped in the street is not sufficient basis for a finding
TAU of cruelty absent proof that accused llaoa derived pleasure and
Held: The aggravating circumstance of unlawful entry was properly MUT satisfaction in increasing the physical pain of victim. Number of
appreciated against the accused as he and his companion, Jerry, had entered wounds alone not sufficient criterion for appreciation of cruelty
AU
the Borja residence through the second-floor window, a way not intended for nor dismemberment of the victim’s dead body.
ingress. MU
TAU PEOPLE vs. ILAOA
MU June 16, 1994
19. That as means to the commission of a crime a wall, door
or window be broken. TAU Facts:
MU One. The deceased Nestor de Loyola was seen at about eleven o’clock in the
Requisites: evening of 4 November 1987, in a drinking session with his compadre Ruben
1. A wall, roof, window or door must be broken. TAU Ilaoa together with Julius Eliginio, Edwin Tapang and a certain "Nang
2. Such were broken to effect entrance. MU Kwang" outside Ruben’s apartment.
Two. The drunken voices of Ruben and Nestor engaged in an apparent
When breaking of wall, door or window is LAWFUL: argument were later on heard. Nestor was then seen being kicked and mauled
1. Involving an officer who would break wall, etc to make a lawful by Ruben and his brother Rodel, Julius Eliginio and Edwin Tapang. Nestor
arrest where accused is believed to be; was crying all the while, "Pare, aray, aray!" Afterwards, Nestor, who appeared
2. Involving an officer who may break open any door or window to
execute search warrant or to liberate himself.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 70 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
drunk, was seen being "dragged" into Ruben Ilaoa’s apartment. Nestor was MU A 8. That the crime be committed with the Aid of armed men or
heard saying, "Pare, bakit ninyo ako ginaganito, hirap na hirap na ako!"  TAU persons who insure or afford impunity.
MU
Three. Ruben Ilaoa and Julius Eliginio borrowed Alex Villamil’s tricycle at R 9. That the accused is a Recidivist.
about two o’clock the following morning allegedly for the purpose of bringing TAU
to the hospital a neighbor who was about to give birth. Ruben was seen MU
driving the tricycle alone, with a sack which looked as though it contained a TAU P 10. That the offender has been Previously punished by an offense.
human body, placed in the sidecar. The tricycle was returned an hour later to
Alex who noticed bloodstains on the floor. The latter thought that they were MU P 11. That the crime be committed in consideration of a Price,
those of the pregnant woman. TAU reward, or promise.
MU
Four. Blood was found on Ruben’s shirt when he was asked to lift it during I 12. That the crime be committed by means of Inundation, fire,
TAU
the investigation by the police. Moreover, Ruben’s hair near his right forehead poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel or international damage
was found partly burned and his shoes were splattered with blood. Susan MU
thereto, derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of any other
Ocampo, Ruben’s live-in partner, was likewise seen in the early morning of 5 TAU
November 1987 sweeping what appeared to be blood at the entrance of their MU artifice involving great waste and ruin.
apartment. 
TAU E 13. That the act be committed with Evident premeditation.
Held: The fact that appellant quarreled with the deceased, then mauled and MU
pulled him to the apartment where the latter was last seen alive, in addition to TAU E 14. That the craft, fraud or disguise be Employed.
borrowing a tricycle which was found with bloodstains when returned,
sufficiently point to Ruben as the culprit responsible for the crime. The fact MU A 15. That Advantage be taken of superior strength, or means be
that the deceased was his compadre, hence, presumably would have no motive TAU
employed to weaken the defense.
to kill the latter, is not enough to exculpate appellant. It is a matter of judicial MU
knowledge that persons have been killed or assaulted for no apparent reason at
TAU T 16. That the act be committed with Treachery (alevosia).
all, and that friendship or even relationship is no deterrent to the commission
of a crime.  MU
TAU I 17. That means be employed or circumstances brought about
The fact that Nestor de Loyola’s decapitated body bearing forty-three (43) MU which add Ignominy to the natural effects of the act.
stab wounds, twenty-four (24) of which were fatal, was found dumped in the
street is not sufficient for a finding of cruelty where there is no showing that TAU U 18. That the crime be committed after an Unlawful entry.
appellant Ruben Ilaoa, for his pleasure and satisfaction, caused Nestor de MU
Loyola to suffer slowly and painfully and inflicted on him unnecessary TAU
physical and moral pain. Number of wounds alone is not the criterion for the D 19. That as means to the commission of a crime a wall, roof, floor,
MU Door, or window be broken.
appreciation of cruelty as an aggravating circumstance. Neither can it be
inferred from the mere fact that the victim’s dead body was dismembered. TAU A 20. That the crime be committed with the Aid of persons under
fifteen years of age or by means of motor vehicles, motorized
MU
watercraft, airships, or other similar means.
TAU A 21. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be
MU deliberately Augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for
Memory Aid (from the notes of Atty. Teodoro V. Angel) TAU its commissions.
The following are aggravating circumstances: MU
TAU (Recall: AIDA DUSA RP PIE EAT IUDA A)
A 1. That Advantage be taken by the offender of his public position. MU
TAU
I 2. That the crime be committed in contempt or with Insult to the MU
public authorities. Requisites of Evident Premeditation:
TAU T 1) Time when offender came to DETERMINATION to commit
D 3. That the act be committed with insult or in Disregard of the
respect due the offended party on account of his rank, age, or sex, MU crime; and
or that is be committed in the dwelling of the offended party. TAU
MUT A 2) Overt Acts indicating that offender clung tenaciously to his
A 4. That the act be committed with Abuse of confidence or obvious AU determination to commit crime; and
ungratefulness. MU
La 3) Sufficient Lapse of time between determination and
TAU execution allowing offender to calmly reflect on consequences of
D 5. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief
MU his actions.
Executive or in his presence, or where public authorities are
engaged in the Discharge of their duties, or in a place dedicated to
TAU (Recall: TALa)
religious worship.
MU
U 6. That the crime be committed in the night time, or in an TAU
Uninhabited place, or by a band MU
Requisites for Superior Strength (Three Test)
S 7. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration,
Shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune. 1. Notoriously Inequality of forces;
2. Numerically superiority of accused over victim; and

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 71 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
3. Kind of weapon used by accused out of proportion to defense MU 3. Crime of treason
available to victim. TAU
(Recall: INK) Lack of Education: Not illiteracy alone, but also lack of intelligence
MU
necessary for this to apply. Lack of education cannot be taken into account
TAU where defendant admitted he studied in the 1st grade in a public elementary
MU school.
TAU
Article 15 only applies to one who really has not received any instruction.
MU
Requisites of Treachery: TAU
Ordinarily, lack of education is mitigating in all crimes, except:
MU a. Crimes against property like estafa, theft and robbery, arson;
1. That offender Consciously adopted this particular means; and TAU b. Crimes against chastity; Treason; and Murder.
2. That the Means would ensure commission of crime without Risk
to himself Arising from Defense that offended party might make. MU
(Recall: CoMe / RADe) TAU Notes:
MU  It is aggravating if habitual and intentional or subsequent to plan to
TAU commit felony.
 Relationship is aggravating in crimes against persons mitigating in
MU crimes against property.
TAU  Education is aggravating if one uses his high educational
ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES
  MU attainment to commit crime with impunity, especially a lawyer, for
TAU instance but mitigating if accused has so little, or is bereft of any
Art. 15. Their concept. — Alternative circumstances education that he could not fully appreciate the gravity of his
are those which must be taken into consideration as MU actions.
aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and TAU  In People vs. Bandian, where accused mother charged with
MU infanticide was acquitted by the SC because of lawful, insuperable
effects of the crime and the other conditions attending cause, as well as her very low level of education that she did not
its commission. They are the relationship, intoxication TAU know that she was already giving birth when answering the call of
and the degree of instruction and education of the MU nature, especially because she was a primipara.
offender. TAU  In People vs. Atop (1998), SC held rape was not qualified by
aggravating circumstance of relationship when 11- year-old Regina
The alternative circumstance of relationship shall be MU
was raped four times by her lola’s live-in partner because law
taken into consideration when the offended party in TAU cannot be stretched to include common law relations. In this case,
the spouse, ascendant, descendant, legitimate, natural, MU no blood relationship is attendant, nor any legal bond that links
or adopted brother or sister, or relative by affinity in TAU Atop to his victim, Regina.
 In People vs. Renejane 158 SCRA 258 (1998) SC held that
the same degrees of the offender. MU drunkenness is not necessarily an aggravating circumstance. Fact
The intoxication of the offender shall be taken into TAU that accused was with the two victims and they were drinking prior
consideration as a mitigating circumstances when the MU to crime did not necessarily qualify it as aggravating. Intoxication
is aggravating only if habitual or intentional. No finding of either
offender has committed a felony in a state of TAU
by lower court, and it was an ordinary drinking party. Neither can
intoxication, if the same is not habitual or subsequent MU this be considered mitigating in absence of proof that intake of
to the plan to commit said felony but when the TAU alcohol blurred accused’s sense of reason and deprived him of
intoxication is habitual or intentional, it shall be MU certain degree of control. Policemen victim around one month
earlier arrested Renejane for illegal possession of marijuana.
considered as an aggravating circumstance. TAU
MU Absolutory Causes
TAU Absolutory causes are those where the act committed is a crime, but for
MU reasons of public poIicy and sentiment, there is no penalty imposed.
TAU
MUT Entrapment vs. Instigation
AU Entrapment Instigation
Entrapment is a scheme used by Instigation is where a public
MU
police officer to facilitate and officer directly induces accused
Kinds of Alternative Circumstances: TAU secure apprehension of accused; into committing the offense which
1. Intoxication MU mens rea, however, still emanated accused would otherwise not have
2. Relationship from accused and public officer had committed on his own. Hence,
3. Education TAU merely facilitate commission of a instigation is an absolutory cause
(Recall: IRE) crime. Hence, it is not an where accused is not criminally
MU absolutory cause and accused is liable akin to an exempting
Intoxication is Mitigating: TAU criminally liable. circumstance.
1. If not Habitual MU In ENTRAPMENT, ways and In INSTIGATION, police officer
2. Not Intentional or subsequent to the plan to commit the felony. means are resorted to by the practically induces accused into
(Recall: HaIn) public officer for purpose of commission of offense and
trapping and capturing accused in accused merely adopts idea, and
Not mitigating in the following crimes: the act of executing his criminal carries it into execution; mens rea
1. Crimes against property plan; mens rea came from accused emanates from police officer
2. Crimes against chastity, including rape. hence, it is not a bar to hence, it is a BAR to prosecution

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 72 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
prosecution and conviction of a and conviction of acci1éd. MU While it is true that a person’s rights die with him, his honor is not suspended
lawbreaker. TAU to die with him. His honor is supposed to live after him forever. So no one has
Instigation is an exempting MU the right to defame the honor of another person just because he is already
circumstance, just like an dead.
absolutory cause in Article 247. TAU
MU
TAU
MU Now, we are not interested here in the victim. We are interested in the persons
TITLE TWO TAU who are criminally;
MU
PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES TAU 1. Principals;
2. Accomplices; and
MU 3. Accessories
TAU
In every felony, there are generally two parties involved: MU
TAU There is an analogy about the movies, the principal or main actor is the lead,
1. The offended party – the victim; and MU and the story revolves around them. Now, what about the accomplices? They
2. The person who commits the felony. are the supporting cast and minor characters. How about the accessories?
TAU
These are the extras; they are seen only in a scene or two.
MU
TAU
Now, the person who commits the felony must be a natural person. Therefore,
MU
only human beings are contemplated by law. That is obvious because in every
TAU
felony, there is an act or omission.
MU Art. 16. Who are criminally liable. — The following are
TAU criminally liable for grave and less grave felonies:
MU 1. Principals.
Act means a physical action, a physical movement. A corporation has no TAU 2. Accomplices.
physical existence. It is only a person under the law. Also, for a person to be MU 3. Accessories.
liable for a felony, he must have the;
TAU
MU The following are criminally liable for light felonies:
1. Freedom; 1. Principals
2. Intelligence; and TAU
3. Intent MU 2. Accomplices.
TAU
MU
These are faculties belonging to a human being. A corporation can be held
liable for committing a criminal act, but generally the one who will go to jail TAU
are the officers because the corporation can only act through its officers. MU
TAU
MU
Article 16 immediately gives us the principle. For grave and less grave
TAU
However, the victim of a corporation can be a juridical. You can swindle felonies, all of them are liable. But for light felonies, only the principals and
MU accomplices are liable. So, conclusion: Accessories are exempt from
another company and you commit Estafa by running away with corporate
funds. criminal liability in light felonies.
TAU
MU In effect, Article 16 is an exempting circumstance based on public policy. The
TAU reason behind this is similar to that in Article 7 where the general rule also is:
So, a corporation cannot be an offender, but it can be an offended party. Of MUT Light felonies are only punishable when they are consummated.
course, the one who will file the case is the officer in behalf of the AU
corporation. But definitely, whether you are the offender or the offended MU Question: Why?
party, you must be a person because if you are not a person, you have no right TAU
under the law. Answer: The role of an accessory is very minor. Even in grave or less grave
MU felonies, the penalty given to an accessory is very light, very much lower than
the principal. How much more if the felony is light? If the felony is light, even
TAU the penalty for principal is also light. So, what would be the penalty for the
Logically, a dead man cannot be a victim of any felony except the crime of MU accessory? Very Negligible. So, there is no more liability. It creates an
libel or oral defamation under article 253. The concept of libel can be TAU exempting circumstance under Article 16.
committed to blacken the memory of the dead person because libel is a crime MU
against honor.

With this, you will notice that there are certain principles to remember about
light felonies. Light felonies defined in Article 9. There are 2 principles which

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 73 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
create exempting circumstances: One is found in Article 7 and the other is MU The problem will arise if there are two or more people involved in the
in Article 16. TAU commission of the felony because it is possible that one is the principal,
MU another is an accomplice and the third one is an accessory; or principal and
TAU accessory only without accomplice.
MU
Article 16 says: Only accessories are exempt from criminal liability in light
felonies regardless of whatever crime that is a light felony, TAU
MU It is also possible that all of them are principals. What type of principal? One
whether it is against persons or property. TAU of them by direct participation, another one by inducement and the other one
MU by indispensable cooperation. It could also be principal by direct participation
TAU and inducement without the third or principals hhby direct participation and
Art. 17. Principals. — The following are considered MU indispensable cooperation without the second or it is still possible that all of
principals: TAU them are co-principals by direct participation.
1. Those who take a direct part in the execution of the MU
act; TAU
2. Those who directly force or induce others to commit MU So, it is possible for a felony to be committed by 10 people? Yes, they are
it; TAU classifies as principals by direct participation. Therefore, that is now our
3. Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense MU problem.
by another act without which it would not have been TAU
accomplished.
MU
TAU
PRINCIPALS BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION
MU
TAU Question: When do you classify? 2 or more persons as co-principals by direct
MU participation?
While the law divides persons criminally liable into 3 classes, Article 17,
TAU
further provides or classifies principals into 3 types:
MU Answer: 2 or more persons committing a felony are classified as co-principals
TAU by direct participation when two requisites are present:
1. PRINCIPALS BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION
Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act. MU
1. That these people participate in the criminal resolution
TAU 2. That the offenders, co-principals carried out the resolution by
MU performing acts which tend to accomplish the objective
TAU
2. PRINCIPALS BY INDUCEMENT OR INDUCTION
Those who directly force or induce others to commit it. MU
TAU First Requisite: That these people participate in the
MU criminal resolution
TAU
That is tantamount to saying that you were in CONSPIRACY with each other.
3. PRINCIPALS BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION MU
There must be a conspiracy between them – a conspiracy which is defined in
Those who cooperate in the commission of the crime by another act TAU
Article 8 as an agreement between 2 or more persons and they agreed.
without which it would have not been accomplished. MU

TAU
When the felony is committed by only one person and you are asked what you
MU So you say that you will present somebody who was listening when they were
agreeing. That is difficult, chances are when two or more persons agree, there
think his role. Then without thinking you say that he is a principal by direct TAU
are no other persons present then. So you can hardly prove the agreement by
participation. He cannot be an accomplice. If he is an accomplice, who is the MUT
direct evidence. But the agreement can be proven indirectly. Why? The
principal? There is no accomplice if there is no principal. So, necessarily, if he AU
agreement is here (In the HEAD); it is a MEETING OF THE MINDS. When
is only one, he must be the principal, and necessarily, he must be a principal MU
there is a meeting of the minds between two persons, there is an agreement.
by direct participation. TAU
MU

TAU Question: What Principle to apply?


Now, there would be no principal by inducement if there is no principal by
direct participation. There could be no principal by indispensable cooperation, MU
Answer: The best evidence of what is in the mind is through one’s actions.
without a principal by direct participation. That is why when you say that TAU
The principle has evolved in this analogy; when two or persons commit a
there is a crime committed by one person without looking you can say that he MU
crime together, each performing an act in harmony with each other and
is a principal by direct participation. There could be no other role.
everything is veered towards the same criminal objective, then, there action
betrays the conspiracy. The conspiracy is proven by their own actions. That is
the principle to remember.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 74 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU MAMBOLO. At about around 9:30 P.M., while Dino and Raffy were walking
TAU along Padre Faura St. in Manila, Johnny hit them with a rock, injuring Dino,
Example: 3 or more people (A, B, C, D and E) simultaneously enter a bank MU and then Bobby stabbed Dino. But suddenly Jerry, Vic, Vaness and Ken
and armed. A will disarm the security guard. B will herd all the people in the TAU surrounded Dino, and then Jerry stabbed Dino. Vic, Vaness and Ken kept on
bank. C and D will start scooping the money from the teller’s booth and vault. hitting Dino and Raffy with rocks. As a result, dino died. Johnny, Jerry, Vic,
MU
Then all of them will simultaneously withdraw from the bank. Then the Vaness and Ken were charged with Homicide.
TAU
vehicle outside was driven by E; they ride the vehicle.
MU
TAU
MU Question: Is there conspiracy in this case? It is clear that they acted in unison
Based on what you have witnessed, do you think there is a conspiracy among TAU extending towards the culmination of the same criminal resolution. So, what is
these 5 people? Is there an agreement among them to commit robbery? Or can MU the conclusion?
we say that, “No, that could have been merely a coincidence, they entered the
TAU
bank together. Answer: There is conspiracy because their action betrays their agreement.
MU
TAU
MU
And the by instinct A, disarmed the guard and B also, by instinct, herded TAU PROBLEM: Ben, a widower, driven by bestial desire, poked a gun at his
everybody into a corner. C and D without knowing each other got all the MU daughter, forcibly undressed her and tied her legs to bed. He also burned her
money and then without any agreement, they all withdrew form the bank. And TAU face with a lighted cigarette and like a madman, laughed while he was raping
accidentally, there was somebody waiting, and then they took a ride. Then he her.
MU
said to each other, “Who are you?” this is impossible scenario.
TAU
MU
TAU Question: What aggravating circumstances are present?
The human mind will be taxed to its limits. That is the essence of criminal MU
resolution because direct proof of conspiracy is very hard and the best proof TAU Answer: 1.) Ignominy and;
of it is by action. MU
2.) Alternative circumstances of Relationship.
TAU
MU
Question: What is the importance of this element of conspiracy? TAU
MU Question: It is possible that 2 or more persons commit a crime and appear to
Answer: The importance is, if there is conspiracy, the act of one is the act of TAU be acting in a conspiracy but in reality; they are acting independently of each
all. Then all of them are equally liable for the crime. All of them will get the MU other? Meaning, just a coincidence that the incident happened. Is that
sane penalty for robbery. So, they have collective criminal liability. possible?
TAU
MU
TAU
Therefore in that particular sense, A and B cannot say, “we are not guilty of MU Answer: Yes, because when we say that when 2 or more persons act together
robbery because in robbery, you commit the crime by taking the property. We TAU towards the commission of the crime, there is a presumption of conspiracy
did not take anything.” A will say, “What I did was to disarm the security MU because it is very hard to say that there is none.
guard.” B says, “Me too, all I did was to herd off the people. It was C and D
who took the money. Then they shall be liable for robbery because I did not TAU
take anything.” Then E will say, “Neither will I be liable, because I did not MU
even enter the bank.” In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. PROBLEM: A has an enemy, X. B, another person is also the enemy of X.
TAU One day, a decided to maul X. B, on the other hand has already looked for X
MUT to kill him. And both of them acting independently started looking for X. A
AU saw X, immediately approached him and started to hit him. At the precise
In one case, 4 or 5 people conspired to kill the victim. So, they cornered him MU moment, B arrived. During the fray, B stabbed X. X died.
inside the restaurant. They started to assault the victim and one of them held TAU
the victim. The 4th person stabbed him. According to the third member, “I am MU
not liable; it was the 4 th guy who stabbed the victim. My job was only to hold
the victim’s hands. Then the other one says, “Neither will I be liable, I was TAU Question: Is there conspiracy?
just at the door. My role is to prevent the victim form running away.” No, it is
MU Answer: Based on the facts, there is no conspiracy.
as if all of you stabbed him. The act of one is the act of all. That is the
TAU
importance of the conspiracy.
MU

Since A’s intention is to inflict physical injuries – and he merely inflicted fist
I noticed last 2002, there was a problem in the BAR and that principle was blows upon the victim is only liable as a principal by direct participation for
applied. Actually, I already mention this problem earlier. This is the case of physical injuries against the victim. On the other hand, the one who stabbed
the victim is liable as principal by direct participation for the crime of

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 75 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
homicide. So, in effect, there were 2 separate crimes, 2 criminals acting MU Two principles here that you have to balance:
independently. That is called individual liability, as distinguished from TAU
collective liability. MU 1.) In a conspiracy the act of one is the act of all.
2.) The co-conspirators are not liable for any act of another
TAU conspirator not contemplated in the conspiracy.
MU
Question: Now, what happen if 2 or more persons conspire to commit a TAU
Question: Now, when do you apply one and when do you apply the other?
crime, but while committing the crime, one of them went beyond the MU
How come that in that case where 5 people conspired to injure the victim, the
agreement and committed another crime not contemplated in the conspiracy? TAU
SC said all of them are implicated. But in another case, the conspirators
Are his companions also liable for the crime? Are all co-conspirators liable for MU
conspired to kill A but one of them killed B, the SC said only the of B is
the crime committed by their companion who was not within the scene of TAU
liable.
their conspiracy? MU
TAU
MU
Answer: When you try to examine, there is really a difference. In the first
Example: Robbery committed by a band paragraph 2 under Article 296 TAU
example, the contemplated victim is A, and the one who was killed was A. so,
provides any member of a band who is present at the commission of a robbery MU
the same victim. Moreover, in crimes against persons, when the victim is
by the band shall be punished as a principal of any of the assaults committed TAU
killed, the physical injuries are absorbed. The conspirators are not separately
by the band unless it is shown that he attempted to prevent the same. So, at MU
liable. The physical injuries are absorbed I the killing, in result there is only
least 4 persons conspired to commit the robbery. So, they entered the house of TAU
one crime.
A, one of them point a gun and they divested A of his belongings and then,
MU
one of them attacked the victim and killed him. This is robbery with homicide.
TAU
MU
TAU But in the second example, there were really 2 crimes, because there were 2
victims. The killing of A is a separate crime from the killing of B so you do
Question: Who is liable for the robbery with homicide? Others would say MU
not say that the killing of B is absorbed in the killing of A. unlike in the first
that, only one who attacked and killed A is liable. TAU
instance, the victim is A and the person killed is A. and the physical injuries
MU are absorbed in the killing of A.
Answer: All of them is liable because according to Article 296 in Robbery by
TAU
a band, all of them are liable fir any assault committed by their companions
MU
unless you can show that you tried to prevent it. So if you do not try to
prevent it, you are liable. In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. TAU
MU But in the other case, the intended victim is killed, another person is also
killed. So, there are 2 crimes. So you cannot say that the death of B is
But Article 296 applies to Robbery with Homicide and committed by a band. TAU
absorbed in the killing of A because there is an entirely different victim. So,
So, if there are only three persons, this will not apply. MU
based on that, in the first case, all of them are liable for the death of A. in a
TAU conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. But in the second case, all of them
MU are liable for the death of A but only one them is liable for the death of B. that
Question: Suppose there are only 2 or 3 robbers and they conspired to TAU is entirely separate crime to be charged separately. That seems to be distinct.
commit robbery only and then one of them killed the victim. Will all of them MU
be liable for the assault or only him? TAU
MU
Answer: this time we can apply another principle: That the conspirators are
only liable for the crime contemplated in the conspiracy if there is no direct TAU
provision on that. Second Requisite: That the offenders, co-principals carried
MU
TAU out the resolution by performing acts which tend to
MUT accomplish the objective
Example X and Y conspired to kill A then, X killed B. now, who is liable for AU
the death of B? The conspirators conspired to kill A, they never conspired to MU
kill B. X is the only one liable. TAU In effect, they should be present in the commission. So, we plan and we
MU implement the plan. That is the second element.

TAU People vs. Timbol


Question: In another case, the offenders conspired to injure A. So, all of them
MU
mauled A. but one of the conspirators pulled out the knife and killed A. who is
TAU
liable for the homicide?
MU Facts: The accused, 4 brothers, conspired to kill somebody. They met several
times and planned. In the final meeting, they decided to implement the plan.
Answer: All of them are liable because in a conspiracy the act of one is the
Then the following day, one of the brothers had cold feet. He did not show up.
act of all.
So, only 3 brothers were there at the meeting place, and they agreed to
proceed with the crime. So, they went with the plan, minus the other brother.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 76 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU But the normal way of falling under this classification is when you are
TAU induced. When you persuade the other party to commit the crime and he
Held: SC said that one who did not show up is not liable. The second element MU agreed to do it, what is now the effect? There is conspiracy again. So a
is missing. He did not appear at the scene of the crime. TAU principal by direct participator is also in conspiracy with principal by
inducement. So what binds them together will be conspiracy.
MU
TAU
Question: Was the first element present? MU
TAU Question: How do you persuade? How do you induce another or convince
Answer: Yes, because evidence shows that he participated in the planning of MU him to commit the crime?
the crime. The second element is missing. So he could not be a co-principal TAU
because the SC said if he participated in the planning only, he is guilty of MU Answer: There are many ways; by words of inducement, by promise of price
conspiracy to commit a felony. or reward.
TAU
Article 8 – Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony – conspiracy and MU
proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in which the law TAU
specially provides a penalty therefore. MU To be classified as principal by inducement 2 requisites must be present:
TAU
MU 1.) That the principal by inducement made the inducement with the
intention of procuring the commission of the crime; and
TAU 2.) That the inducement was the determining cause of the commission
People vs. Delos Reyes MU of the crime without which the crime could not have been
TAU committed.
Facts: A group of people tried to commit a crime. Then, while the crime was MU
in progress, one of them left and the question is; whether or not he is liable? TAU First: That the inducement was made with the intention of procuring –
MU meaning the inducer is serious. He was really interested in committing
Held: To extricate himself from criminal liability, the conspirator himself TAU the crime. He was not joking because the concept of inducement has the
must have performed an overt act to disassociate or detach himself form the MU same definition as proposal under Article 8.
unlawful plan to commit the felony. While he did leave the scene of the crime
TAU
while it was in progress, such abandonment came too late. In legal
contemplation, there as no longer a conspiracy to be repudiated because he
MU
had already participated in it. TAU
Question: How do you induce?
MU
TAU Answer: Through proposal. Promise, price or reward.
MU
Let us now review the second type of principal: TAU
MU
TAU Question: How do we define proposal?

PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT MU
Answer: There is a proposal when a person who was decided to commit a
TAU felony proposes its execution. It should be decided and not merely a joke.
Those who directly force and induce others to commit a crime. MU

TAU
MU Let us illustrate. There was a case where a woman claimed that she could no
Question: How do you fall under this classification? TAU longer bear her husband. My husband is like this and like that. What shall I
MUT do? The friend in joking manner said; “Whew, it is simple, kill your
Answer: There are two ways: husband!” so the woman killed her husband. She implicated her friend. When
AU
she made the proposal, there was no intention to kill. It would have been an ill
1.) You directly force the principal by direct participation to commit MU advice. The effect was fatal. This is not the type of inducement here.
the crime; or TAU
2.) You induce him to commit a crime. MU

TAU Or in one case, somebody needs money. Then someone advised him and said;
Force or Induce
MU “It is simple, just hold-up a bank.” He indeed held-up a bank, but
unfortunately he was caught. He implicates the other. The statement was not
How do you force? By the use of irresistible force or by forcing under TAU
made with the intention of procuring the commission of the crime.
uncontrollable fear. However, if you do that, the principal by direct MU
participation has a very good defense – Article 12. That there was no
voluntariness. That there was no freedom. That leaves you alone liable.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 77 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Second: Without such inducement, the crime would not have been MU call a person making the proposal a principal by inducement. He is classifies
committed. The inducement was the only reason for the commission of the TAU as principal by direct participation. This is he distinction between the two.
crime. Without it the principal by direct participation would not have been MU
committed the crime. TAU
MU
TAU
PRINCIPAL BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION
Example: Guns-for-Hire. You are told to kill the victim. He said; “Give me a MU Those who cooperate in the execution of the offense by another act which the
picture in order to identify him.” He gave you because are being paid. Without TAU crime would not have been committed. Briefly, it is called, Principal by
the payment, he will no ask you. Nothing personal, everything is business and MU indispensable cooperation.
that is how assassins worked. The assassin would say; “I will kill people for TAU
money but you, you are my friend. I kill you for nothing. Normally, I do not MU
kill people if it not for money. But since you are my friend, I will kill you for
TAU
nothing. Just to show that it is for free. Sometimes, there is a confusion on whether a principal by direct participation
MU
or by indispensable cooperation. Because how do you become a principal by
TAU
direct participation with another person? By cooperating with him. So, when I
MU cooperate with you in the commission of the crime, I am also a principal by
Note: The words of inducement must be offered PRIOR to the commission of TAU direct participation. But I would also be a principal by indispensable
the crime. How can you say that the inducement was the determining cause MU cooperation.
when it is made after the crime? For example, somebody approaches you and TAU
says; “I would like to tell you something, I killed so and so.” You killed?
MU
Well, congratulations! That is a good thing.” I am not a principal by
TAU
inducement. The crime has already been committed. I only praised you but Question: what is the difference?
you do not say that my word is the determining factor. MU
TAU Answer: The distinction is only on what the cooperation is all about.
MU
TAU
And another principle is; the principal by direct participation had no reason to MU
commit crime on his own. That is why your inducement is the only Question: In what way do I cooperate?
TAU
determining factor.
MU
Answer: If I cooperate in the execution of the crime, I am principal by direct
TAU participation. But if I cooperated by another act without which a crime would
MU not have been committed, I am principal by indispensable cooperation. So, the
People vs. Omine TAU cooperation in this type of principal is not I the execution of the crime but
MU another act, an act other than the execution of the crime without the crime
61 Phil. 611 TAU would not have been committed.
MU
TAU
MU Example: A person cooperates with the principal by another act, other than
Facts: There was a quarrel between A and B. A is the principal by direct
TAU the execution of the crime. And please take note that what binds a principal by
participation. B is the victim. A was approaching B one night. A was holding
MU direct participation with a principal by indispensable cooperation is that there
a knife and he was approaching B. at that moment, X arrived. X shouted to A;
“yes kill him, stab him!”, A killed B with the knife. X who uttered the shouts is again an agreement – conspiracy. Hence, what is common between these
before the stabbing was impleaded as a principal by inducement. But the SC TAU people is criminal conspiracy. They are in conspiracy. That is why we apply
acquitted him. MU the rule on conspiracy – the act of one is the act of all. They are in conspiracy
TAU with each other.
Held: Do not tell me that without the shouting of X, A would not have MUT
stabbed B. A was really going to stab B. there as a personal reason on the part AU People vs. Limbuangko
of A. so, do not say that if it were not for the shouting of X, A would not stab MU
B. it is just an additional. In other words, just firewood to keep the fire
TAU 14 Phil. 184
burning but actual, although without the shout there was already a reason for
MU
the principal to do that. Facts: The principal by direct participation got hold of some blank checks of
somebody. So he planned to forge or counterfeit the signature of the drawer
Question: Principal by inducement is closely related to a person making a TAU and encash in the bank the check. But he knows he will not succeed because
proposal to commit a felony under Article 8. What are the distinctions? MU the bank can easily detect that his signature is not really that of the drawer.
TAU There is an employee in the bank whose job is specifically to compare the
Answer: Principal by inducement, there must be a principal by direct MU specimen. So what did he do? He befriended the employee in the bank, the
participation. Even if keep on inducing you, but you will not commit a crime, signature verifier. He said to him to cooperate. He succeeded in encashing the
there is still no principal by inducement. But in certain crimes, like treason, check.
rebellion, coup d’etat, the mere proposal to commit a felony is punishable. It
is not necessary that the other party will actually commit it. And you do not

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 78 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Held: Can we prosecute him for Estafa through falsication of commercial MU
document, the complex crime of Estafa? Who is the by direct participation? TAU
The one who forged. He was the one who counterfeited the signature of the MU
drawer. He was the one who encashed it. So he executed the crime. How TAU
Art. 18. Accomplices. — Accomplices are those persons
about the signature verifier? He did not counterfeit the signature. He was not who, not being included in Art. 17, cooperate in the
MU execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous
the one encashed the check. But he cooperated with the principal without such
TAU acts.
the crime would not have been succeeded. So he is liable as principal by
indispensable cooperation. That is the perfect example. MU
TAU
MU
TAU So if you are a principal, you cannot be an accomplice at the same time. So if
Sometimes it is easy; sometimes it is really very hard to determine whether MU you are falling under Article 17, Article 18 will not apply to you.
you are a principal by direct participation or principal by indispensable
cooperation. In one case, you cooperated with the other principal. Sometimes, TAU Question: How do you become an accomplice?
is the act or cooperation in executing, a crime a cooperation by another act? MU
TAU Answer: Obviously, if you are not in conspiracy with the principal by direct
MU participation – because if you are in conspiracy, you fall under Article 17.
Example: I will agree that you kill somebody. I hold him so he will not What do you do? You cooperate. You cooperate with whom? You cooperate
TAU
escape. What’s that? What is my cooperation? In the execution of the crime of with the principal by direct participation through previous or simultaneous
Homicide, or by another act? Just like in rape. A wants to rape the girl. So, he
MU
acts. That is why we must distinguish what type of cooperation is this. If you
sought the help of B and C to subdue the girl, to prevent the girl from TAU commit a crime and I cooperate with you. I could be a co-principal by direct
disturbing him while he rapes her. B & C complied. MU
participation; I would be a principal by indispensable cooperation; I could also
TAU be an accomplice, because an accomplice also cooperates.
They held the girl, the victim was subdued. And A raped her. There is no MU
question; B & C are also liable. TAU
MU Question: How do you distinguish cooperation by a principal from
Question: How many are the principals? Principal by direct participation in
TAU cooperation by an accomplice?
the crime of rape or principal by indispensable cooperation? By direct
MU Answer: If the cooperation is pursuant to a conspiracy, you are a principal.
participation or by indispensable cooperation? You fail under Article 17. If your cooperation is not pursuant to a conspiracy,
TAU you are under Article 18. As to the exact act, there is sometimes no difference.
MU It will be your cooperation and his cooperation. The only important question
TAU is whether there was a conspiracy or none.
How do you commit rape? No question about conspiracy. All of them are MU
conspirators. What type of principal are they? Are B and C principals by Therefore, if there is doubt as to whether; there, is conspiracy or there is no
TAU conspiracy, the doubt is resolved in favor of the lesser degree, of
direct participation or indispensable cooperation?
MU participation, para mahulog ka na accomplice.
Who believe that they are principals by direct participation also, that they took TAU Question: How to cooperate? How can I cooperate without being in
direct participation in the commission of rape? How is it that in the crime of MU conspiracy? How will that happen? How can you cooperate without an
homicide, the one who held the victim and prevented him from running was TAU agreement?
considered as principal by direct participation when he was not the one MU Answer: The concept of cooperation by an accomplice is that a person is an
stabbed the victim? accomplice who, not being in conspiracy with the principal, but knowing
TAU about the criminal intent of the offender, concurs with it and cooperated either
MU in a previous or simultaneous act. Not being in conspiracy but knowing of the
There are cases where the SC said: Well, they prevented the girl from
criminal intent concurs. Meaning, I agree. So I will just cooperate.
struggling or resisting, so they are also principals by direct participation. That
TAU
is taking part directly in the crime of rape. So all of them are principals by
direct participation. MU
Example: You are a taxicab driver. Then one night 2 or 3 passengers hailed
TAU you to take a ride. While driving, you overheard their conversation. You
But there are also some cases where the Sc said that they are also principals MUT listened. Base on their conversation, they were going to commit robbery. You
by indispensable cooperation. Because the issue here is this: How do you AU learned about it. When they reached that place, they asked you to wait. "Wait
commit rape? By having sexual intercourse. They did not have sexual MU for 30 minutes, okay" We are just going to that house and rob somebody in
intercourse with the girl. It was only A, but their help was indispensable to the TAU it." Okay, you agree. So you knew that they are going to rob somebody then
commission of the crime of rape by virtue of the conspiracy. So there are 2 after 30 minutes they returned, then drove them off. So in effect, you are the
MU
sets. driver of the getaway vehicle,

But, this question is moot and academic because whether you are a principal TAU Did they ask you to join them? No. There was no agreement. But knowing
by direct participation or by indispensable cooperation, they are similar. The MU about their intent to rob, you stayed all along, you cooperated. You will get a
act of one is the act of all. It does not make one any better than the other. You TAU bigger payment. What is the liability of the driver? Accomplice.
will say: “I’m not a principal by direct participation; I’m a principal by MU
indispensable cooperation.” Okay, but the penalty is still the same. The act of But suppose the passenger will say, "Pare, we are going to rob a house, you
one is the act of all because of conspiracy. As a matter of fact if you look at will be our driver, wait for us outside. Will you agree or not? "Agree". What's
the information filed by the fiscal- it will say that they are co-principals. Then, that? Principal? There is already a conspiracy. So, in case of doubt, the doubt
if you look at the decisions, the court will say that they are co-principals. is resolved in favor of less cooperation. That is the role of an accomplice.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 79 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
How do you cooperate? By previous or simultaneous act. That is MU Take note that A had not intent to kill X. He only wanted to injure him. He is
simultaneous. Simultaneous act of robbery. TAU principal by direct participation for the crime of physical injury serious or less
MU serious.
TAU
MU
Somebody approaches me: “Sir, do you have a gun?” Yes, I have, why” may I
borrow it” Why? “I’m going to kill somebody. “So I lent him the weapon and TAU Then B said: "Well, in that case, I am the accomplice of A. Because when A
killed the person. What is my role? I am an accomplice. Knowing his criminal MU attacked X, 1 learned of the criminal intent of A, and therefore when 1 came
intent to kill, he borrowed my gun and I cooperated—by a previous or TAU in and entered the fray and stabbed X, I concurred with the criminal intent of
simultaneous act. MU A and therefore I am an accomplice." So, A is the principal for the crime of
TAU slight physical injury B, who stabbed X, is liable as an accomplice. Now, who
Question: Distinguish principal by inducement or indispensable cooperation MU will be liable for the death of X? Zero? The one who stabbed the victim is
from accomplice. Because both types cooperate with the principal. only the accomplice. Something is wrong there. That kind of reasoning is
TAU
wrong.
MU
TAU
MU
TAU How can you concur with A when A had no intention to kill? The intent to kill
MU came from B. You cannot say that A concurred with B because he was the
TAU first to commit the crime, B only entered the scene. So there are 2 kinds. A is
PRINCIPAL ACCOMPLICE liable for physical injury as a principal by direct participation. B is liable for
MU
homicide.
The cooperation of a principal The cooperation of an TAU
by indispensable cooperation is accomplice may be necessary MU
indispensable, without which but no indispensable. TAU
the crime would not have been Meaning, the crime may still MU We will again reverse the facts. The same: A wanted to harm X. B wanted to
committed. be committed. TAU kill X, this time, the first one who came was B. B saw X. He approached and
MU started stabbing X. A arrived, approached X, “I’ll join you". He entered the
The cooperation of the But the cooperation of an scene and started to attack X with his first, even preventing X from running.
TAU
principal by indispensable accomplice is not pursuant to So, X died.
cooperation is pursuant to a a conspiracy. MU
conspiracy. TAU
MU
TAU B is liable for homicide as a principal by direct participation. So A? “Physical
MU injuries only, I only punched him.” No, when you saw B stabbing X you
TAU joined the fray and starting also hitting X, you concurred without any
Example: Without the cooperation of the signature-verifier, I would not conspiracy. You concurred with the criminal intent of B to kill, and you
succeed. But: "may I borrow your gun?" Sure. MU
cooperated with him with the simultaneous act of assaulting the victim. So
TAU
there is only one crime. You are the principal. A is the accomplice. That is
MU what you call quasi-collective. That is the illustration:
TAU
Question: Is my lending the gun indispensable or necessary - do you mean to MU
tell me without my gun you cannot kill him? You can kill him with another
gun or with a knife. You can kill him with a bolo.
TAU Liability: Collective = Conspiracy

Answer: So, my lending the gun is necessary, but not indispensable. That's
MU
Quasi-collective = Accomplice
the distinction given by some. This distinction is correct. TAU
MUT Individual = 2 Crimes, each to his own
AU
MU
Take note, that you are also liable nor the same crime committed by the TAU
principal.
MU
Although the penalty is a little bit lower. That's why we have discussed
collective liability. You are a co-principal in a conspiracy. The act of one is
TAU
the act of all. Collective, MU
TAU
MU

Let us change the Facts: A and B do not know each other. There is no
conspiracy. A wanted to injure X. A will pull X. B, on the other hand wanted
to kill X. So they were acting separately. A saw X, he started to throw
punches at X. Then afterwards, B suddenly entered and stabbed X. X died.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 80 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
TAU
MU But after A and B ask C to bury the cadaver, then C can be considered an
TAU accessory because he neither participated as principal nor accomplice.

Art. 19. Accessories. — Accessories are those who, MU


having knowledge of the commission of the crime, and TAU
without having participated therein, either as principals MU However, the accessory must have knowledge of the commission of the
or accomplices, take part subsequent to its commission TAU offense. Otherwise, if he did not know of the commission of the crime, he is
in any of the following manners: MU not liable.
1. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to TAU
profit by the effects of the crime. MU
2. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or TAU
Question: How do you prove knowledge?
the effects or instruments thereof, in order to prevent its MU
discovery. TAU Answer: That is circumstantial evidence. It can be proven directly or
3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of MU indirectly. But what is important is that he has knowledge of the commission
the principals of the crime, provided the accessory acts TAU of the crime.
with abuse of his public functions or whenever the MU
author of the crime is guilty of treason, parricide, TAU
murder, or an attempt to take the life of the Chief MU Question: what are the acts of an accessory?
Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty of some TAU
other crime. MU Answer: First is by "profiting by the effects of the crime". A good example of
TAU profiting by the effects of the crime is to receive a stolen property as a gift
MU knowing it to be stolen. Like when a person robs the bank for PIM, then he
TAU gives you Pl.OOO.xx as “balato”, you become an accessory. Or, another
example is you know that a certain property is stolen and you know that
MU
property is valuable. But the robber wants to dispose of it as fast as possible
TAU
so he sells it to you at P1.000 even if its real worth is P10,000. So you buy it -
MU so in effect, you profit. Even if you did not receive anything from the stolen
TAU property but you looked for a buyer in behalf of the robber, you are an
Accessories are the last set of those persons criminally liable. To be liable as MU accessory because you assisted the robber for the latter to profit by the effects
an accessory, the felony committed by the principal should be a LESS
TAU of the crime.
GRAVE or GRAVE FELONY. Even if you perform any of these acts under
MU
the definition of Art. 19, if it is a light felony you are not liable because of Art.
16. Only principals and accomplices are liable for a light felony. The premise TAU
is that the felony is not a light felony. You have to correlate this with Art. 16. MU Question: How do we compare paragraph 1 of Article 19 with a special law
TAU known as the “Anti-Fencing Law” (PD 1612)? How do you define the word
MU "fencing"?
TAU
The distinction between principals or accomplices, and accessories is that the Answer: That is Section 2 Paragraph 2
MU
principal or the accomplice participates prior to or at the latest simultaneously
with the commission of the crime; whereas the accessory comes only after the
TAU
crime has been committed. That is why he is known as the accessory after the
fact, MU
Fencing is the act of any person who, with intent to gain for himself or for
TAU
another, shall buy receive, possess, keep, acquire, conceal, sell or dispose of,
MUT or shall buy and sell, or in any other manner deal in any article, item, object,
AU or anything of value which he knows, or would be known to him, to have been
PROBLEM: A saw X and started to stab the latter. When B arrived, he saw MU derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft.
A stabbing X, he joined the fray holding X in order to prevent him from going TAU
away. After X died, A and B dug up a grave in order to prevent the body of Prior to the passage of the Anti-Fencing Law, the liabilities for these acts were
MU
the victim from being discovered. considered as those of accessories.
TAU
Question: Can we consider either A or B as accessories for having concealed MU
the body of the victim under paragraph of Article 19? TAU Question: What is the penalty for the accessory?
Answer: No, because to be an accessory you should not have participated
MU
either as a principal or accomplice. Now if A is the one who killed X, then he
Answer: It is very much lower. But in reality according to the whereas
is already a principal. B there is already an accomplice. Hence, they' are not
clause of the. Marcos Decree, thieves and robbers are encouraged to steal and
accessories. That is the meaning of the phrase "without having participated
rob because there are people who buy. If you discourage buyers by making
therein."
the penalty heavier, the robbers are discouraged. So, PD 1612 was enacted to
discourage buyers who are not considered accessories but as principals.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 81 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU prima facie evidence of guilt and that the burden is shifted to the accused for
TAU the purpose of showing that such act or acts are innocent and are committed
Question: Can I be liable as-an accessory for the crime of robbery or theft, MU without lawful intention.
and be liable for the violation of the anti-fencing law - because there are 2 TAU
separate crimes but relying on the same facts and circumstances, so double
MU
jeopardy may be invoked. What is act of fencing?
TAU The second way of committing, as an accessory is by concealing or destroying
Answer: With intent to gain for yourself or for another. So, profiting or MU the body of the crime. In Latin, corpus delicti. In the crime of homicide, how
assisting the thief or robber to profit, receive, possess, acquire, conceal, sell or TAU do you conceal it? By burying the corpse.
dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or in any other manner deal in any article, MU
item, object, or anything of value which he knows, or should be known to TAU
him, to have been derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft. MU
There is no loophole. You can be arrested. But if you are an accessory, if you Why? The reason is simple: murder or homicide, to be established to have
TAU
do not know that the thing is stolen, you are not liable. The law requires that been committed by-the accused, the prosecution must prove that the victim
MU died. How can you prove the death of the victim if you hide the body? The
you must know that the property is stolen. But in Anti-Fencing, not only what
you know is included, but also, what should be known to you. TAU evidence would, probably be that you have been seen with the victim the last
MU time. But it docs not prove that the victim died.
TAU
MU
For example, you buy property form someone who is not the usual dealer of TAU
that item. If you that expensive property from a department store and it turned With that, what happens? The victim is declared a missing person because
MU
out to be stolen - and you claimed that you did not know that it is stolen... there is no evidence that he is dead. So, the most that can be done is to declare
TAU him civilly dead, but not criminally dead. The prosecution cannot file a
Several years ago, there was a group of minors who "specialized" in removing
tires. They would sell the tires to a dealer of stolen tires. Who are the persons MU murder or homicide case- if the proof of death is absent. You can conceal the
to be charged with fencing? The dealer. But the dealer will say: "t did not TAU body by burying it. Or you can destroy the corpse.
know. I thought those kids' were dealers of Firestone tires." Or somebody is MU
offering a watch valued at PI0,000, but which is sold to you at P3,000. That is TAU
already a sign that it is probably stolen and it should have been known to you. MU
Or you can conceal or destroy the effects of the crime... like the murder
TAU
weapons… throw it away. You are not he killer but you assisted. Or you hide
MU a stolen car. Here, I can be held liable as an accessory and under the anti-
Another important section here is that the penalty is higher than that imposed TAU fencing law. So, one who conceals the effects of the crime under paragraph 2
upon an accessory. MU are also liable under the Anti-Fencing law, because that is also one way of
TAU concealing stolen property under PD 1612.
SECTION 5, PD 1612. Mere possession of any goods, Article, item, or
MU
anything of value which km been the subject of robbery or thievery shall be
prima facie evidence of fencing. TAU
MU
Of course, this presumption could be rebutted - that you did not know or that TAU The third is by harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the
it could not have known. The presumption here is that you are liable for principal of the crime, provided that the accessory acts with abuse of public
fencing in that you have in your possession the stolen property. MU functions or whenever the author of the crime is guilty of treason, parricide,
TAU murder, or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive, or is known to be
Question: Is this provision constitutional considering that the Constitution MU habitually guilty of some other crime, The one concealed is not the body^-the
presumes innocence of the accused? effects of the crime, but the criminal himself. You harbor a criminal.
TAU
MU Suppose, while I am walking in an uninhabited place, I saw A kill B, since
there is no witness, nobody knows who is the killer. So, the wanted criminal-
Dizon-Pamintuan vs. People TAU
is unknown. But I did not report it. I remained silent. In effect, I have
234 SCRA 63 MUT
harbored. I have assisted the criminal from escaping. That is the net effect.
AU
Does the Law have the right to create that presumption? Section 5 of PD 1612
provides that "mere possession of any goods, article, item, object, or anything MU Question: Am I liable as an accessory under Paragraph 3?
of value which has been the subject of robbery or thievery shall be prima facie TAU
evidence of fencing." MU Answer: NO, the act referred to here by the law is an active act, not a passive
act. Because a passive act is an omission not covered under Article 19. You
TAU may be accused of lack of civil spirit, but you are not criminally liable as an
The presumption is reasonable for no other natural and logical inference can accessory.
MU
arise from an - established fact of possession of the crime of robbery or theft.
This presumption does not offend the presumption of innocence of the TAU Question: How do you, become an accessory under paragraph 3?
accused enshrined in our fundamental law. MU Answer: There are 2 types of persons who can be accessory: those by
harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principal of the crime
provided that the accessory acts with abuse of his functions.

In cases of statutory crimes, no constitutional provisions is violated by statute


that proof by the state of some material state of fact or facts shall constitute

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 82 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Meaning, he is in government service. For example, A commits rape or MU Issue: can the trial of an accessory proceed without awaiting the result of the
homicide. Then he tells his policeman-friend, "Pare, 1 killed somebody. TAU separate charge of the principal?
Please help me." "Okay, then I will help you."
MU
Question: is the policeman an accessory for the crime of rape? TAU
Answer: Yes. Well, there is no mention of rape under paragraph 3. It only MU
mentions treason. Parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the Chief TAU Held: YES. The corresponding responsibilities of a principal, accomplice and
Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty for some other crime. If the accessory are distinct from each other. As long as the commission of the
accessory is a public officer, he is am accessory for any crime committed, MU offense can be duly established-in evidence, the determination of the liabilities
provided, that the penalty is light. It is not limited to those enumerated the TAU of accomplices and accessories may proceed independently of that of the
crimes specifically mentioned refers to, if the person who helps you escape is MU principal.
a private individual.
TAU
Question: So how do you interpret this? MU
TAU
In connection with paragraph 3, there is a law where the language is similar to
Answer: There are 2 persons who can commit as an accessory: MU paragraph 3 but broader. That is PD1829 also known as Law Penalizing
TAU Obstruction of Justice
a. A private person; or
MU
b. A public officer.
TAU
MU
So, base on the problem, A commits rape and he approaches his kumpare who TAU SECTION 1, PARAGRAPH c “x x x” harboring or concealing,
is a private individual. Is he an accessory? He is not, because he is not one of MU or facilitating the escape of any person he knows, or has
those enumerated. reasonable ground to believe that-the suspect has committed any
TAU offense under existing penal laws in order to prevent his arrest,
MU prosecution and conviction.
TAU
PROBLEM: Suppose, the principal commits murder knowing about it, I MU
assisted him to escape. So, there are 2 cases filed against me and against the TAU
principal. But he was at large and 1 am arrested. MU For example, A committed rape and asks his friend to help him escape. Is the
friend an accessory under the Penal Code? The answer is NO, because there is
TAU
no mention of rape, Can the friend be liable under PD 1829? YES, because the
MU law says; "xxx any offense under existing penal laws", Similar to Anti-
Question: Can I be tried and convicted without the principal being arrested TAU Fencing Act, you are not an accessory but a principal for obstruction of
and convicted? MU justice.
TAU
Answer: The cases before decided by the SC said no because the guilt of the MU Question: Suppose, the crime is drug pushing, are you an accessory under the
accessory will depend on the guilt of the principal. The law says that TAU RPC?
whenever the principal of the crime is guilty, the accessory can be guilty. MU
Answer: No. but, under PD 1829, you can still be liable.
TAU
MU
Another reason in the SC, suppose that alter the principal is found guilty of TAU
homicide and not murder, what happens to you? You're free. So, it is MU This is the interesting part.
necessary that the principal comes first. But this reasoning has been reversed. Question: you commit a felony... a slight physical injury. I am a policeman
The accessory can be tried before the principal is convicted. But how do you and I concealed you. So, the public officer exceeded his function. Is the
TAU
reconcile that with the law that he must be found policeman liable as an accessory under RPC?
guilty? MU Answer: NO, because it is only a light felony. But is liable under PD 1829?
TAU YES, because it docs "not distinguish. It states "any offense". What is worse is
What it means is that before the accessory can be convicted, the prosecution MUT the penalty for the principal is arresto menor but under PD 1829, prison
must prove that the crime was committed and that the principal who is still at correctional... So, 6 years. Am I saying that is the answer? I do not say that is
large committed it. Hence, the probable of hypothetical guilt of the principal AU the answer, but that seems to be the answer
must first be proved before the accessory can be convicted. The hypothetical MU
guilt is only used as a stepping-stone to convict the accessory. For, to mean TAU
that the principal must first be convicted would result in a miscarriage of Art. 20. Accessories who are exempt from criminal
MU liability. — The penalties prescribed for accessories
justice.
shall not be imposed upon those who are such with
TAU respect to their spouses, ascendants, descendants,
MU legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and
TAU sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same
Bino vs. People
MU degrees, with the single exception of accessories
178 SCR A 626
falling within the provisions of paragraph 1 of the
next preceding article.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 83 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU grave felony deserves a higher penalty. A less grave felony or
TAU light felony deserves a lesser penalty. There must he a
proportion. It is absurd when the penalty for murder and the
MU
What is contemplated by the law is that the principal and the accessory are penalty Jar slight physical injuries are the same. There is
relate? It is natural that relatives protect each other. Hence, the law TAU something wrong. It is inequitable; it is unfair.)
understands that. So, the relative who conceals the body or effects of the MU
crime or conceals the criminal who is a relative is exempted form criminal TAU
liability by reason of public policy. 3. Must be personal - No one shall be punished for the crime of
MU
another.
Note: This is an exempting circumstance. Exception is an accessory under TAU
paragraph 1 who profits or assists the offender to profit by the effects of the MU
crime." In that situation, you have not desired to make the family clean, you
TAU 4. (The criminal liability (personal penalty), once the convict
have also tainted the family's name.
MU dies, is totally, extinguished. You do not say, he has a son, he
will continue the penalty under the law on Succession.)
TAU
TITLE THREE MU
PENALTIES TAU 5. Must be legal. No one should be punished for the crime of
MU another. (Nullum crimen, sine lege. If there is no law, there is
Chapter One no penalty.)
TAU
PENALTIES IN GENERAL MU
TAU 6. Must be certain. No one may escape its effects,( That is a
MU theory. No one may escape its effects, theoretically. That is
Art. 21. Penalties that may be imposed. — No felony
being required by the law. The law should be fair, whether
shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by TAU you are rich or poor. Only, men have, prostituted the law. Bui
law prior to its commission. MU the law itself is supposed to be certain and equal.)
TAU
MU
Whether you like it or not, the study of penalties is part of the RFC, liven in TAU 7. Must be equal for all; and
the definition of the course, it is a branch or division of law which defines
crimes, treats of their nature and provides for their punishment. So, what is the MU
use of defining crime without any penalty? TAU 8. Must be correctional. (That purpose is correctional—to
MU correct you so that you will not repeat it.)
For example, under the Penal Code, if you kill somebody with treachery, you
TAU
commit murder. So, what happens to you? With intent to kill, you stabbed
somebody, then he died. When you attacked him, you did not give him a MU
chance to defend himself—admitted. That the mode of attack was blunt-, TAU Question: What is the purpose of the State in punishing crimes'?
again, admitted. So, you are guilty of murder—still admitted. What about it? MU
There is no penalty, anyway. That is why the law on penalties is .unavoidable.
TAU Answer: To secure justice. The State has an existence of its own to
MU maintain a conscience of its own to assert, and moral principles to be
Question: How do you define penalty? TAU vindicated. Penal justice must therefore be exercised by the State in the
service and satisfaction of a duty, and rests primarily on the moral
MU
Answer: Penalty is the suffering that is inflicted by the State for the violation TAU rightfulness of the punishment inflicted.
or transgression of a law. Penalty signifies pain. It is something that you do
MU
not relish because if penalty is something enjoyable, then everybody would be
encouraged to commit a crime.
TAU Theories Justifying Penalty:
MU
TAU a. Prevention - The State must permit the criminal to prevent or
Question: What are the juridical conditions of penalty under the Classical MUT suppress the danger of the State rising from the criminal acts of
Theory of Criminal Law? Answer: These are not part of the article, but these AU the offender.
b. Self-defense—The State has a right to punish the criminal as a
are the philosophical background behind the penalty. The different juridical MU
measure of self-defense so as to protect a society from the threat
conditions of penalty are the following: and wrong inflicted by the criminal.
TAU
MU c. Reformation- the object of punishment in criminal cases is to
correct and reform the offender.
d.Exemplarity-- The crime must be punished to serve as an example to
1. Must be productive of suffering, without however affecting TAU deter others from committing crimes.
the integrity of the human personality. (Suffering: if you MU e. Justice- The criminal is punished to serve by the State as an act
suffer, your dignity as human being should also not be TAU of retributive justice, a vindication of absolute right and moral
impaired. That's why the constitution prohibits unusual law violated by the criminal.
punishment, because they are degrading.) MU

Social defense and exemplarity justify the penalty of death. When a person
2. Must be commensurate with the offense —-different crimes has proved himself to be a dangerous enemy of society, the latter must protect
must be punished with different penalties. {Commensurate: it from such enemy by taking his life in retribution for his offense and as an
That is one of the characteristics of the Classical theory. A example and warning to

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 84 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
others. MU so it benefits those who were convicted under the old law, those sentenced to
TAU life imprisonment.
Penalties under the RPC have three-fold purpose: MU
a. Retribution or expiation - The penalty is commensurate with the There was a pusher convicted in 1986, life imprisonment. In 1994, he has
TAU already been in jail for 8 years and still has a Song time to go because of life
gravity of the offense,
b. Correction or reformation As shown by the rules which regulate MU imprisonment. 1 le said: **lf I were prosecuted under the new law, 6 years
the execution of the penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty. TAU should have been the maximum, prision correctional. I have been in jail for 8
c. Social defense - As shown by its inflexible severity to recidivists MU years now. What should I do? The OR through its Chairman Sedfery Ordonez
and habitual delinquents. filed a petition for habeas corpus for him, because the law should be given
TAU retroactive effect
Art. 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. — Penal Laws shall MU The SC said: Yes, applying Article 22 of the RFC. They have been in jail for
have a retroactive effect insofar as they favor the persons TAU eight years; release them. They should be ordered released. The habeas corpus
guilty of a felony, who is not a habitual criminal, as this term MU proceeding decided on December 1994. As a matter of fact, the SC ordered in
is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of this Code, although at theTAU that case of Ordonez vs. Vinarao, the Director of Prisons to submit to this
Court a list of all prisoners there who were convicted under the old law.
time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has MU
been pronounced and the convict is serving the same. TAU The SC ordered their release because it was beyond the maximum term under
MU the law. It is a perfect example of retroactivity of a new law.
TAU
MU
Question: Is there an exception?
Question: We will give a penal law retroactive effect if it is favorable to the TAU
accused. Even if the accused is already serving sentence? MU Answer: The law is very clear:
Answer: Yes, it will benefit him in whatever stage he is found, whether TAU
before the trial or during the trial.
MU  You will not benefit if you are classified as a habitual
Question: What is the reason why a favorable statute may be given TAU delinquent under Article 62.
retroactive effect?  It will not be given retroactive effect if the law makes itself
MU inapplicable to pending suits.
Answer: The reason: to be consistent with public policy, if Congress changes
TAU
the law, let us say, by lowering the penalty or eliminating the crime, the crime
MU
has already been eliminated because the act, criminal before is no longer a
crime now, then it could be inconsistent for the State to still insist on the TAU Art. 23. Effect of pardon by the offended party. — A
continued punishment or prosecution of a person. There might have been MU pardon of the offended party does not extinguish
already a supervening case of policy. TAU criminal action except as provided in Article 344 of this
MU Code; but civil liability with regard to the interest of the
TAU injured party is extinguished by his express waiver.
MU
So, to maintain consistency why do we insist that these people be still
TAU
prosecuted when there is already a change in the policy of the State. That is
the reason behind that. MU
TAU
The offended party cannot pardon, because the offense is not against you It is
MU against the People of the Philippines and technically you are only a witness
TAU for the society. So, you cannot " talk" of society. That is the reason behind
That's why even if he is in jail, the question is: 1 low do you have a person MU
that: If you ask: How come, in practice, there are may cases dismissed
released from jail when there is already a final judgment? The remedy is
because of the Affidavit of Desistance, where the witness does not want to
habeas corpus, because the moment the new law repealed the old law or the TAU
testify? That is what is happening in practice. Well, actually there, the fiscal
new Ian imposed a lower penalty and you have already -gone beyond it, the
MU may file a motion - not because of pardon. Because if the fiscal will state in
excess, the penalty, or the confinement automatically becomes illegal.
TAU his motion: We move to dismiss because the accused has already been
MUT pardoned by the offended party. If I will be the judge, I will deny your motion
because you are violating Article 23.
AU
That has been applied recently by the SC in the case of Ordonez vs. Vinarao, MU
a 1994 decision. People, who were convicted before the drug pushing, under TAU
the law- under the aid law, the penalty for drug pushing was life MU Pardon by the offended party is a mere agreement. Usually the fiscal will
imprisonment, liven if you arc caught pushing one stick of marijuana, life state in his motion: With the hostility of the principal witness, I can no longer
imprisonment. You sell one truckload of marijuana, life imprisonment. If you TAU prove this case beyond reasonable, doubt.
are caught selling one or two sticks, life imprisonment MU
TAU
MU
How can I prove this case if no one will testify? The prosecution's witness
But RA 7659 has changed the policy, now it's by gram. For marijuana, it is
turned hostile, who is the offended party. So, the judge will dismiss the case
750 grams or more, possession or pushing, the penalty is reclusion perpetua to
death. From 1 gram to 749 grams, by stages. So, in effect, if you are a small for insufficiency of evidence. Well, in reality in the motion it is not a ground
time pusher the penalty under the new law is lower. Now, this is the new law, Under the Rules on Criminal Procedure, if the prosecution witness is hostile;
the fiscal can move for his arrest and place him in jail until he cooperates.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 85 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
TAU Art. 24. Measures of prevention or safety which are nor
The reason is you are not a witness for yourself; you are a witness for the MU considered penalties. — The following shall not be
People. How come this is happening everyday? Because nobody is TAU considered as penalties:
complaining. If you are the accused will you complain? You are happy
MU 1. The arrest and temporary detention of accused
because there is no more case. If you are the offended party or victim, will
TAU persons, as well as their detention by reason of insanity
you be satisfied? Of course, because the civil liability has been paid. It is too or imbecility, or illness requiring their confinement in
much hassle to go to and fro in court. If you are the defense lawyer, you are MU a hospital.
happy because the case is over. You are given your attorney's fees. The fiscal TAU
2. The commitment of a minor to any of the institutions
is happy because that in one work less. The judge is happy because that is MU
mentioned in Article 80 and for the purposes specified
minus one case. Because everybody is happy, nobody will complain. TAU
therein.
MU
3. Suspension from the employment of public office
TAU
during the trial or in order to institute proceedings.
MU
But actually, they escape Article 23. They cannot cite pardon. What is 4. Fines and other corrective measures which, in the
extinguished is the civil liability. That is within your control—condonation or TAU exercise of their administrative disciplinary powers,
remission of the debt, one of the modes of extinguishing civil obligation. The MU superior officials may impose upon their subordinates.
only instance under the Penal Code, where pardon by the offended party TAU 5. Deprivation of rights and the reparations which the
produces certain effects. MU civil laws may establish in penal form.
TAU
MU
TAU
ARTICLE 344(3), RFC, - The offenses of .seduction, rape, acts of
lasciviousness, shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the MU
offended party or her parents, grandparents, or guardian, nor in any case, if TAU
the offender has been expressly pardoned by the above-named persons, as the MU
case may be. TAU
MU
Question: What are the conditions of penalty under the classical theory in
TAU criminal law?
MU
These are private crimes, which cannot be prosecuted de oficio. If the victim
Answer: To commensurate the offense, rational. One of the characteristics is
refuses to testify, yon have to honor the spirit because of the ruling Unit; If TAU that it should be legal. Penalties should be legal. Meaning, it is a penalty
you are a victim of rape, etc, that is something personal you may prefer to MU provided for by law and imposed by the court.
suffer in silence rather than go through the scandal of n public trial. Pardon TAU
here is a bar to criminal liability. Meaning, it is an obstacle to the case MU Article 24 enumerates certain acts where there appears to be a penalty because
proceeding in court. penalty could mean pecuniary penalty like a fine. Incarceration, your liberty is
TAU
taken from you like imprisonment. And if you look at Article 24, it seems to
MU fit a penalty but the trouble is that there is no judgment of conviction. The
TAU court has never ordered you to pay a fine or has never ordered your
incarceration.
So, it must be made before the institution of the action. So, what happened MU So, it appears to be a penalty in the eyes of the penal code. Why? It is only a
when the case of rape was already filed in court and, in the middle of the trial, TAU measure of prevention or safety. You are not being penalized. It is a measure
the victim will say: I don't want to do this anymore! Can her pardon be given MU of prevention or safety for you. So, if you undergo any of these, you come out,
effect? we cannot say you are an ex-convict because you have never been penalized.
TAU Unlike a person who is sentenced to jail, he served the sentence. When he
goes out from the jail, ex-convict. But if you go to article 24, you are not a
MU convict because it is not a penalty.
TAU
No more, because the criminal action has already been instituted and it is no If the person is insane, he is killing people, what shall we do? Well, he could
MUT
longer within her control. Because when you say pardon is a bar, it means it be ordered arrested and confined at a mental hospital. Put him in the isolation
is an obstacle to the tiling of the criminal case. Once the ease is tiled, pardon AU ward. He is like being in prison. He is placed there like a sentenced criminal.
is useless. MU How can he be liable? He is even exempt from criminal liability for being
TAU insane. What is the confinement for? That is only a measure of prevention or
MU safety. Because if he will be allowed to walk around, he might kill more
people. So, he is not really being penalized. [Article 24 (2)]
What extinguishes criminal liability where the case is instituted is marriage TAU
between the offender and the offended party. That is one of the modes of MU
Article 80 has already been taken over by PD 603. This refers to suspended
extinguishing criminal inability trader Art.89 (7). By marriage of the offended
TAU sentence of minors. He asks for suspended sentence. He is committed to a
woman, as provided in Article 344 of this Code. Notice, under Article 89,
MU rehabilitation center. So, it is as if he is imprisoned. No, that is not the
what are the modes of extinguishing criminal liability? There is no mention of
measure of prevention or safety. How can he be penalized when practically
pardon. What is mentioned there is marriage between the offender and the
there is a suspension of the sentence? So, it is not considered as penalty.
offended party, The only pardon mentioned there is absolute pardon by the
President under Art.89(4) and not pardon by the offended party.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 86 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Article 24 (3) MU Answer: Deprivation of rights and separation, winch ihe civil law may
TAU establish in penal form? It means that in a civil case you arc deprived of a
Actually suspension form employment or public office is a type of penalty MU right by the court, whose the right deprived similar to that of someone who is
under the RPC for certain crimes. Once you are found guilty, you are TAU under civil interdiction Similar to civil interdiction, but not civil interdiction.
suspended from holding public office. That is the penalty but the suspension
MU
referred here is not a penalty because you have not been convicted.
TAU
MU So, civil interdiction is not a civil law issue because of the word "civil" is
TAU there. Civil interdiction is criminal penalty.
Like for Example How come that under the Anti Graft Act, if you are a public MU
officer facing a crime, under the law, the Sandiganbayan will order you TAU
suspended for 90 days even a policeman facing a criminal case'' He will be MU
suspended. Arc thev already adjudged as guilty? Are they being penalized? Example: Under Art. 34 of the RPC, one of the effects of civil interdiction if
TAU
No. They are still presumed innocent. What is that suspension? that is a you are found guilty, you will be placed under civil interdiction) is you arc
MU deprived of your parental authority over your children. Now, suppose it is a
measure of prevention or safety. So that you will not use your position to
influence witnesses for or against you. So that is not a penalty, but only a TAU civil case where a father or a mother maltreats or abuses his or her own child.
measure. So you cannot say that you are already being convicted. And if you MU So. a case is filed in court against the parent and the court says For maltreating
are acquitted, the government will pay you. Everything will be paid to you TAU or abusing your own child the court will deprive yon of your parental
during the period of your suspension while the case is going on, MU authority and transfer it to the grandfather of the child.
TAU
MU
TAU The loss of parental authority is similar to being sentenced to a civil
Article 24,(4)
MU interdiction. You were not sentenced to civil interdiction, but sentenced to
Fine is a penalty under the Penal Code. Also other corrective measures are TAU that penalty in the civil case, it is not considered as a criminal penalty but a
considered penalties under the Penal Code. But under the Civil Service Act, MU civil penalty analogous to civil interdiction. That is what a par.5 of Art 24
the CSC can also impose a fine in administrative cases involving those of the TAU means. It does not refer to the penalty of civil interdiction but to a penalty
government service. And the head of office, the superior office of the MU imposed by the court in a civil case which is analogous to civil interdiction.
government authorized to hand down penalties like lines, suspension, etc.
TAU
MU
So, that is not a criminal fine. That is only an administrative line. You are not
considered a convicted person by being found liable under the Civil Service TAU
act. MU CHAPTER TWO
TAU CLASSIFICATION OF PENALTIES
MU
TAU Art. 25. Penalties which may be imposed. — The penalties which may be
imposed according to this Code, and their different classes, are those
MU included in the following:
Article 24,(5) TAU
MU SCALE                                         PRINCIPAL PENALTIES
Capital punishment:           Death.
Deprivation of rights which the law may establish in penal form. Penalty TAU  
could be deprivation of civil rights -the right to vote, etc. Now, if you are not MU Afflictive penalties:             Reclusion perpetua,
careful, you will think of other things. If you ask somebody: Give an example                                           Reclusion temporal,
of deprivation of rights under the penal code'' He might be tempted to say; TAU Perpetual or temporary
Actually the example, the penalty you can give there is the penalty of civil MU absolute disqualification,
interdiction. Perpetual or temporary special
TAU disqualification,
MUT                                           Prision mayor.
AU  
Correctional penalties:      Prision correccional,
Civil interdiction is a measure of prevention or safety which is not a penalty. MU                                           Arresto mayor,
You are wrong civil interdiction is a penalty under the RPC. You look at the TAU                                        Suspension,
next article, Article 25. You look at the accessory penalties. MU                                 Destierro.
Light penalties:                   Arresto menor,
                                          Public censure.
TAU  
MU Penalties common
Civil interdiction is included. Civil interdiction is not a civil law penalty! It is
TAU to the three preceding
a criminal penalty. You will not be under civil interdiction unless you are classes:                                   Fine,
found guilty of a crime. MU
and Bond to keep the peace.
 
ACCESSORY PENALTIES
Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification,
Question: What is meant by Art.24(5)? Perpetual or temporary special disqualification,
Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for the

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 87 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
profession or calling. MU Question: How can a penalty be a principal and at the same time accessory?
Civil interdiction, TAU How can it be expressly imposed and at the same time deemed imposed?
Indemnification, MU
Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and proceeds of the offense, Answer: What it means to say is, for some crimes, disqualification or
Payment of costs. TAU
suspension is the principal penalty because that is the penalty prescribed by
MU
the law. But for other crimes it is not the principal penalty but only accessory.
TAU
All the penalties known under the Penal Code are found in Art. 25. Art. 25 So, it depends on the crime.
classifies penalties into two main classes:
MU
1. Principal penalties; and TAU
2. Accessory penalties. MU
TAU Question: Are there other disqualifications of penalties under the Penal Code
Question: Define principal penalty or define accessory penalty. aside from principal and accessory?
MU
Answer: Do not say that the principal penalty is for the principal by direct TAU Answer: You can give other classifications, although not found in the law
participation, that accessory penalty is the penalty for the accessory and I MU expressly. Another classification is whether indivisible or divisible.
wonder what happened to the accomplice penalty. The words "accessory" here TAU
and "principal" have nothing to do with persons criminally liable If has MU
nothing to do with principals by direct participation or accessories under Art. TAU
19 of the RPC. The definition of the principal penalty is: Question: What do you mean by indivisible? By divisible?
MU
TAU
Answer: Penalty is indivisible if it has no fixed duration. A divisible penalty
MU
is penalty which has a fixed duration and is divisible into 3 parts known as
A principal penalty is the penalty imposed by the court expressly in a TAU minimum period, medium period and maximum period
judgment of conviction. An accessory penalty is a penalty which is deemed MU
imposed in the principal if not mentioned in the decision. Another definition is TAU
accessory penalty is a penalty which is deemed included in the imposition of MU
the principal penalties. A perfect example of an indivisible penalty is the death penalty (capital
TAU
punishment). You are hereby sentenced to death. The court will not .say: You
MU
are hereby sentenced to death for 10 years. So, that is a good example.
TAU
Perpetual disqualification is considered indivisible.
The accessory follows the principal. I will say: "You are hereby sentenced to MU
14 years of reclusion temporal." What type of penalty is this? Principal? "You TAU
are hereby sentenced to death." The death penalty is the principal. MU
TAU Now, divisible, practically the majority arresto menor ~ I day to 30 days. So
MU not less than 1. not more than 30. Divisible into 3 parts: I to 10 days; 11 to 20
days; 21 to 30 days. So, that is another classification, indivisible and divisible.
Question: The court said: "You are hereby sentenced to 20years of reclusion TAU
temporal (only and never mentioned anything). During the 20 years, am I MU
entitled to vote? Am I entitled to hold public office? Can I exercise parental TAU
authority over my children? MU Another classification based on the nature of the penalty is... you know
TAU penalties have many classes. There is deprivation of rights, there is fine or
Answer: I cannot. Why? Because if you are sentenced to 20 years of reclusion MU payment of costs, there is imprisonment. So, penalty does not necessarily
temporal, you are also suffering from suspension, disqualification, and civil mean that you will go to jail. The penalty of fine, there is no imprisonment
interdiction. And you cannot say: We, the court never said that. The court here Bui you can also forfeit your life like death So, penalties could be
TAU
should have said: You are hereby sentenced to 20 wars of reclusion temporal classified into many pans.
MU
plus civil interdiction, etc. there is no mention. There is no need because it is
deemed imposed. No need to mention it. It is deemed included. TAU
MUT
AU Classification of penalties according to subject matter:
MU
The definition of accessory is deemed imposed even if not TAU 1. corporal (death);
mentioned MU 2. deprivation of freedom (reclusion perpetua and temporal,
prison mayor and
3. correctional, arresto mayor and menor);
Question: What penalties are principal and at the same time accessory? TAU 4. restriction of freedom (destierro)
MU 5. deprivation of rights (perpetual or temporary disqualification,
Answer: TAU suspension,
civil interdiction pecuniary (line, hand to keep the peace)
MU
1. Suspension
2. Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification; Classification of penalties according to gravity:
3. Perpetual or temporary special disqualification 1. Capital;
2. Afflictive;
3. Correctional; and
4. Light

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 88 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU Fine not exceeding P200 pesos. So, if the line is exactly P200, light. But in
Question: What are the afflictive penalties? TAU Art 26, if a fine is exactly P200, it is correctional.
Answer: You go to Art. 25, the afflictive penalties
MU
 Reclusion perpetua
 Rectusion temporal TAU
 Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification MU
Question: How do we reconcile this?
 Perpetual 01 temporary special disqualification TAU
 Prison mayor MU Answer: There is no problem if the line is P1999 pesos or lower. It is light
Question: What is a less grave felony under Art. 9? TAU under Art. 9, it is light under Art. 26.
Answer: One which carries correctional penalties. MU
TAU
Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with penalties which in
MU
their maximum period are correctional, in accordance with the above- But if you add one peso, there comes the problem, because it is light under
mentioned article (Art 25) TAU
Art. 9, but it is no longer light under Art. 26.
MU
TAU
Question: What are correctional penalties? MU
TAU Question: is there a conflict between the two articles, or there is none? if
Answer: Prison correccional, arresto mayor, suspension, destierro.
MU there is a conflict, reconcilable conflict, which of the two will we follow ?
TAU
Answer: Art 9 is a classification of felonies. Art. 26 is a classification of
MU penalties I low can there be a conflict? There is no conflict because the two
So, if that’s the penalty, it is correctional. TAU articles talk of different things
MU
TAU
Question: Light? MU
TAU PROBLEM: Suppose after trial, the court sentenced him of a maximum fine
of P200. Is the penalty light or not? In this case, it is not a light penalty but
Answer: Arresto menor and public censure. MU
correctional
TAU
MU
TAU
Question: What is a fine? Where does it fall?
MU Question: But is the felony light?
Answer: It means that fine could be afflictive; it could be correctional; it TAU
Answer: Yes, the felony is light although the penalty is correctional. So, you
could be light So, it is common. MU
know which is applicable depending upon the issue asked.
TAU
MU
Art. 26. When afflictive, correctional, or light penalty. —
TAU
A fine, whether imposed as a single of as an alternative
MU Question: Is there a legal significance of the difference?
penalty, shall be considered an afflictive penalty, if it
TAU
exceeds 6,000 pesos; a correctional penalty, if it does not Answer: I will now show the significance of the difference. A is accused of
MU
exceed 6,000 pesos but is not less than 200 pesos; and a slight physical injuries which Carries the penalty of arresto menor or a fine
light penalty if it less than 200 pesos. not exceeding P200. Under the law on prescription of crime, what is the
TAU
prescriptive period for the crime? Under the law, Art 90, what is the
MU
prescriptive period for the light felony? Art. 90, last paragraph.
TAU
MUT
AU
That is how you classify fine. You look at the law, what kind of penalty is MU “Light offenses prescribe in two months”
that? Fine of P20,000.00 - afflictive, if it is ranging from P200 P6.000 it is TAU
considered correctional penalty which is less than P200. Fine P50 - it must be
a light penalty. MU
PROBLEM: The court upon conviction, sentenced him to pay a fine of P50
Question: What is a light felony'" Go back to Art. 9, what is the definition of TAU
with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. Here he does not want to
a light felony? MU go to jail, he also does not want to pay the fine He wants to evade the penalty.
TAU
Answer: Light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of
MU
which a penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos or both is
provided. Question: What is the prescriptive period for him n-> evade penalty?

Answer: If the fine is P199, so the penalty is light Art. 92, light penalties
prescribe in 1 year, so, you have to hide for I year

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 89 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
TAU
Suppose after trial, the court sentenced him to pay not PI99 but P200. The MU
court, add P1 for maximum, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of TAU
insolvency. He does not want to pay the fine; he does not also want to serve
MU
the subsidiary imprisonment.
TAU
MU
TAU
Question: Is the prescriptive period for the crime only 1 year? MU
TAU
Answer: No Why? Because the penalty is no longer light. What is the MU
penalty? Correctional under Art, 92, correctional penalties prescribe in 10
TAU
years (with the exception of the penalty of arresto mayor, which prescribes in
5 years). There is a big difference. Correctional penalties prescribe in 10 MU
years. That is the effect of that P1, You can see the effect in the prescriptive TAU
period. MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
Art. 27. Reclusion perpetua. — Any person sentenced
MU
to any of the perpetual penalties shall be pardoned
TAU
after undergoing the penalty for thirty years, unless The first important amendments introduced by the Heinous Crimes Law, RA
MU
such person by reason of his conduct or some other 7659, is he amendment of the first paragraph of Art 27 which (radicalized the
TAU
serious cause shall be considered by the Chief penalty of reclusion perpetua. The law says: The penalty of reclusion perpetua
MU shall be from 20 years and one day to 40 years.
Executive as unworthy of pardon.
TAU
Reclusion temporal. — The penalty of reclusion
temporal shall be from twelve years and one day to MU
This is now the new law. Before the amendment, if the person is sentenced to
twenty years. TAU
Chapter Three reclusion perpetua, he shall be introduced after 30 years unless the President
Prision mayor and temporary disqualification. — The MU does not consider him worthy of pardon. Therefore, there is really no duration.
duration of the penalties of prisionOF mayor and TAU The President may or may not pardon him after 30 years. But now. the law
DURATION AND EFFECT PENALTIES
temporary disqualification shall be from six years and MU says: "20 years and 1 day to 40 years". Meaning, continuation na ng reclusion
one day to twelve years, except when the penalty of TAU temporal because reclusion temporal is 12 years and 1 day to 20 years. And
disqualification is imposed as an accessory penalty, in MU therefore because of the amendment, the question is asked:
which caseSection
its duration shall be that of
One – Duration of Penalties the principal TAU
penalty. MU
Prision correccional, suspension, and destierro. — The TAU Question: What kind of penalty is reclusion perpetua? Is it divisible or an
duration of the penalties of prision correccional, MU indivisible penalty?
suspension and destierro shall be from six months and
one day to six years, except when suspension is TAU Answer: There is no question what it is prior to the amendment. Prior to
imposed as an accessory penalty, in which case, its MU amendment, the rule on reclusion perpetua was that it was an indivisible
duration shall be that of the principal penalty. TAU penalty. It had no fixed duration. What the law, provided was that you shall be
Arresto mayor. — The duration of the penalty of MUT pardoned alter 30 years unless the President does not consider you worthy of
pardon. So you may be pardoned after 30 years, 31, 35, etc, -because there is
arresto mayor shall be from one month and one day to AU
no duration.
six months. MU
Arresto menor. — The duration of the penalty of TAU
arresto menor shall be from one day to thirty days. MU
Bond to keep the peace. — The bond to keep the peace But now, with that 20 years and 1 day, is it now a divisible penalty with a
shall be required to cover such period of time as the TAU fixed duration of 20 years and 1day but not more than 40 years?
court may determine. MU
TAU PEOPLE vs. LUCAS
MU
253 SCRA 537

The amendment of RA 7659 has converted the penalty of reclusion perpetua


into a divisible penalty with a fixed minimum and fixed maximum 20 years

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 90 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
and I day to 40 years, Therefore, it is a divisible penalty divisible into 3 parts MU
minimum period, medium and Maximum 20 years and 1 day to 40 years. TAU
MU RECLUSION PERPETUA LIFE IMPRISONMENT
TAU
Imprisonment ranging from 20 Whereas, life imprisonment has
MU
However, there was a Motion for Reconsideration filed before the First years and 1 day to 40 years no definite duration. You cannot
Division if you claim now that because of the amendment reclusion perpetua TAU within which the president may know if you may be pardoned
is converted into a division penalty, then what happens to this article? Many MU pardon me. after 20 or 25 years. It is really
got confused with it. But they decided to resolve the issue en blanc. So, the SC TAU for life
had to review the original ruling in the First Division and Armed at a certain MU
decision decided after 8 months on January 5, 1995. (People vs. Lucas, TAU Carries accessory penalties Does not carry accessory penalty
240SCRA 66). The ponente was still Justice Davide Jr. MU under the penal code
TAU Involves heinous crimes The penalty for crimes not under
MU penalize under the RPC. the RPC but under the special
Do not confuse the Lucas decision found in 232 SCRA with the Lucas TAU laws.
decision found in 24081 SCRA. The one in 232 SCRA was the original MU
decision. The one in the 240 SCRA was the resolution of the Motion for TAU
Reconsideration where the SC changed its stand. In the second one, the SC MU
ruled that despite the fact that stated now in the law, that reclusion perpetua is TAU The perfect example of that life imprisonment is that of illegal recruitment
from 20 years and I day to 40 years however, the amendment has not made it under the Code. You look at the Labor Code - the penalty is life
MU imprisonment. It is not reclusion perpetua. The SC has been very emphatic on
a divisible penalty, it is still an indivisible penalty
TAU the difference. There are many things that are mentioned in the new cases
MU
TAU
The Dangerous Drugs Act, although a special law, borrowed the penalty of
Reclusion perpetua, despite the amendments, remains to be MU reciusion perpetua from the Revised Penal Code.
TAU
an INDIVISIBLE penalty
MU
Because the SC connected it with Art 63 {Rules for (the application of TAU PEOPLE vs. DEJELLOS
indivisible penalties) of the RPC, Art. 76(legal period of duration of divisible MU 205 SCRA 546
penalties). Art, 41 (Reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal), and Art. 61 TAU
(Rules on graduating penalties).The SC noted that all these articles are related MU The trial court imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.
which were not touched by the amendments. Therefore, if you will say the TAU "You are hereby sentence to reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.
Evidently, he considered the latter as the English translation of the former.
amendment of Art. 27 had converted reclusion perpetua into a divisible MU
That is not the case. The two arc different. Perpetua is riot the same as life
penalty, it will cause confusion and render nugatory the articles of the Penal imprisonment. Every judge should take note of (his distinction. And the SC
TAU
Code to avoid that, the SC said it is still an indivisible penalty speaks "Henceforth, no trial judge should mislead one for the oilier.
MU
TAU
MU PEOPLE vs. SAM I LLANO
So with that, because of the ease of Lucas, the original decision, the SC TAU
sentenced the accused to a specific term of 34 years, 6 months, which MU The Court is cognizant of the practice of the Iowa court equating the penalty
obviously was wrong' The SC admitted. When you sentence a person with of reclusion perpetua with life imprisonment. Such an erroneous practice must
perpetua, the judge says: "You are hereby sentenced to reclusion perpetua" Do TAU be curtailed. It is an off-repeated rule that a judgment tor conviction of a
not say any number of years, months or days. It means to say you may be felony the court must specify the appropriate name of the penalty inasmuch as
MU under die specific felony in the RPC, (he principal penalty for a felony has Ms
pardoned after 20 years and 1 day or after 20 years and 2 days. Meaning, you
TAU own specific duration and corresponding accessory penalties. The proper
wait for your pardon. If no pardon is given, after 40 years you are a free man.
MUT penalty winch should have been imposed is reclusion perpetua. There is no
Do not state any specific number of years or months.
penalty of life imprisonment in the scheme of penalties under the RPC.
AU
MU
TAU
Take note that it is a common error by all courts throughout the country in MU
equating the penalty of reclusion perpetua with the penalty of life
PEOPLE vs. ADRI
imprisonment. TAU
MU 266 SCRA 131
TAU
Question: Distinguish reclusion perpetua from life imprisonment? MU

The Court takes this opportunity to catch the attention of the trial judges in the
use of the proper term in imposing penalties. The term 'reclusion perpetua" is
not synonymous with life imprisonment, which is a penalty imposed by
special laws This Court has, through

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 91 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Administrative Circular No. 68-92, reminded judges to strictly follow the MU Art. 29. Period of preventive imprisonment deducted from term of
correct application of the penalties of reclusion perpetua and life TAU imprisonment. — Offenders who have undergone preventive
imprisonment for offenses punishable under the Penal Code and special laws, MU imprisonment shall be credited in the service of their sentence consisting
respectively, future lapses on the part of the trial judges on this matter will TAU of deprivation of liberty, with the full time during which they have
undergone preventive imprisonment, if the detention prisoner agrees
merit proper administrative sanctions.
MU voluntarily in writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed
TAU upon convicted prisoners, except in the following cases:
1. When they are recidivists or have been convicted previously twice or
MU more times of any crime; and
TAU 2. When upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence they
MU have failed to surrender voluntarily.
If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the same disciplinary
PEOPLE vs. LUCERO TAU
rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, he shall be credited in the
MU service of his sentence with four-fifths of the time during which he has
TAU undergone preventive imprisonment. (As amended by Republic Act 6127,
MU June 17, 1970).
Facts: Here the judge said a different term He sentenced somebody in an TAU Whenever an accused has undergone preventive imprisonment for a
period equal to or more than the possible maximum imprisonment of the
illegal recruitment case, "You are hereby sentenced to imprisonment for life".
MU offense charged to which he may be sentenced and his case is not yet
The penalty under the law is life imprisonment. He said "imprisonment for terminated, he shall be released immediately without prejudice to the
TAU
life". continuation of the trial thereof or the proceeding on appeal, if the same
MU is under review. In case the maximum penalty to which the accused may
TAU be sentenced is destierro, he shall be released after thirty (30) days of
MU preventive imprisonment. (As amended by E.O. No. 214, July 10, 1988).
Held: The penalty meted out as imprisonment for life the trial court has no TAU
business putting as penalty what it seems its equivalent of the mandated MU
penalty. Imprisonment for life is not the same as life imprisonment. For one
TAU Question: Define preventive imprisonment?
thing the proper penalty is life imprisonment. And certainly, the imprisonment Answer: Preventive suspension is the imprisonment being undergone by a
MU
is that he will stay in prison all the rest of his natural life. The proper penalty person who has been accused of a crime but not yet found guilty, lie has to be
is life imprisonment TAU in jail because he is facing a criminal case, and there was a warrant for his
MU arrest. Why is he in jail? Because of 2 possible reasons: Either the offense is
TAU non-bailable or it may be bailable but he cannot put up the required bail bond
MU So he has to be (here while the case is on going What do you call that
These judges don't know their law. They do not understand that the penalty of TAU prisoner',' A detention prisoner, as distinguished from those convicted
prisoners by final judgment
life imprisonment means a different thing.
MU
TAU
MU If for example, they are detention prisoners, they have undergone
imprisonment already, and later on they are convicted by a certain prison
TAU
term. The period of preventive imprisonment that he has undergone will
MU
already be computed or 4/5, depending on whether the prisoner was bound by
TAU same rules for convicted prisoners. So credited although there are some
MU instances where there is no credit at all.
TAU
MU
Art. 28. Computation of penalties. — If the offender shall
There is no problem if the prisoner will be convicted. At least, the service of
be in prison, the term of the duration of the temporary TAU sentence is counted. Sometimes there are even instances when upon
penalties shall be computed from the day on which the MU conviction you have already served the sentence because the sentence
judgment of conviction shall have become final. TAU imposed by the court is equal or even lower. So by the time he was convicted,
If the offender be not in prison, the term of the durationMUT he has served already. That is possible.
of the penalty consisting of deprivation of liberty shall AU But what is painful is if you have undergone preventive imprisonment and
be computed from the day that the offender is placed at MU after a while you are acquitted All the while, you are innocent And the
the disposal of the judicial authorities for the TAU question is what will happen to mat? What is the recourse of the prisoner?
Before, the answer there was, "Sorry, charge it to experience". But now, we
enforcement of the penalty. The duration of the other MU
have an answer to that because there is a new law, RA 7309. An Act Creating
penalties shall be computed only from the day on which a Board of Claims under the Department of Justice for Victims of Unjust
the defendant commences to serve his sentence. TAU Imprisonment or Detention, Victims of Violent Crime and other purposes
MU
TAU So, for example, you are imprisoned you’re acquitted. It turns out that you
never have committed any crime. You are completely innocent. You file a
MU claim with the Department of Justice because they will give something in
return. For victims of unjust imprisonment or detention the compensation
shall be based on the number of months of imprisonment or detention and a
fraction thereof shall be considered as one month. But in no case shall
compensation exceed P1,000 00 per month That is the maximum So, if you

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 92 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
are imprisoned for 10 months, at least the DOJ will say, "O, here's your MU according to their respective nature
P10,000.00 that is the maximum" TAU
MU  
TAU
MU
TAU
BASBACIO vs. OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
MU
TAU
238 SCRA 5
MU
TAU Art. 30. Effects of the penalties of perpetual or temporary
MU absolute disqualification. — The penalties of perpetual or
Facts: The accused was found guilty. He was undergoing imprisonment, TAU temporary absolute disqualification for public office shall
Then, he appealed On appeal, his conviction was reversed. He was acquitted MU produce the following effects:
on the ground of reasonable doubt. Upon his release, he filed for TAU 1. The deprivation of the public offices and employments
compensation. The DOJ said; "You are not unjustly accused, convicted and
MU which the offender may have held even if conferred by
imprisoned". He said, "when the court acquitted me, automatically it means
that I was unjustly accused, convicted and imprisoned". So, based on this
TAU popular election.
argument, every person who is acquitted will automatically be paid MU 2. The deprivation of the right to vote in any election for
TAU any popular office or to be elected to such office.
MU 3. The disqualification for the offices or public
TAU employments and for the exercise of any of the rights
Held: Sec. 3-A of the law requires that the claimant was unjustly accused, MU mentioned.
convicted and imprisoned. The fact that the previous convection is reversed, In case of temporary disqualification, such disqualification
TAU
and the accused is acquitted is not in itself proof that the previous conviction as is comprised in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this article shall
MU
is unjust. Not every person who is acquitted automatically proves that die
TAU last during the term of the sentence.
conviction is unjust.
MU 4. The loss of all rights to retirement pay or other pension
TAU for any office formerly held.
MU
To say that the accused has been unjustly convicted has to so with the matter TAU
of his conviction rather than his innocence it is not an issue whether you are
MU Art. 31. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary
innocent. No, that is not the issue. The issue here is: How were you
convicted'.' Was the judge unfair to you? Were your rights violated? That's
TAU special disqualification. — The penalties of perpetual or
what unjust means If an accused he on appeal acquitted because he did not MU temporal special disqualification for public office,
commit the crime but does not necessarily mean that be is entitled to TAU profession or calling shall produce the following effects:
compensation for having been a victim of unjust conviction. MU 1. The deprivation of the office, employment, profession or
TAU calling affected;
MU 2. The disqualification for holding similar offices or
TAU employments either perpetually or during the term of the
If the conviction is due to an error in the appreciation of evidence, the sentence according to the extent of such disqualification.
MU
conviction while erroneous is not unjust. That is why it is not correct to say
that under the law the liability of compensation depends entirely on the
innocence of the accused. TAU
MU
Art. 32. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary
TAU
special disqualification for the exercise of the right of
MUT
How do you say that you are unjustly convicted? Meaning, the conviction is AU suffrage. — The perpetual or temporary special
unjust. It is tantamount to say that the judge committed a crime of rendering MU disqualification for the exercise of the right of suffrage
an unjust judgment under the penal code, which is one of the hardest crimes to shall deprive the offender perpetually or during the term
TAU
prove. The judgment could be wrong, but not necessarily unjust How do you of the sentence, according to the nature of said penalty, of
MU
prove that the judge knowingly rendered an unjust judgment? the right to vote in any popular election for any public
office or to be elected to such office. Moreover, the
TAU
offender shall not be permitted to hold any public office
MU
during the period of his disqualification.
In this case, the SC interpreted the scope of the State's liability under RA 7309 TAU
which provides compensation for persons who are unjustly accused convicted MU
and imprisoned but on appeal, acquitted from liabilities.

Art. 33. Effects of the penalties of suspension from any


public office, profession or calling, or the right of suffrage.
Section Two. — Effects of the penalties — The suspension from public office, profession or calling,

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 93 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
and the exercise of the right of suffrage shall disqualify theMU
offender from holding such office or exercising such TAU
For example, a father loses parental authority over his children, although the
profession or calling or right of suffrage during the term ofMU
TAU mother is already gone. If he is a guardian over anybody or over person or of
the sentence. property, the guardianship is automatically removed, they cannot manage the
The person suspended from holding public office shall not MU community of property, conjugal or absolute. So, the wife, for example, has
hold another having similar functions during the period ofTAU the sole power of administration. He cannot even manage his own property.
his suspension. MU Somebody must manage it. And he cannot convey any property inter vivos.
TAU Inter vivos means to take effect during your lifetime. So, you cannot sell your
MU property. The sale is defective. You cannot donate. You cannot enter into a
Art. 34. Civil interdiction. — Civil interdiction shall TAU contract because you cannot convey your property inter vivos.
deprive the offender during the time of his sentence of the MU
rights of parental authority, or guardianship, either as to TAU
the person or property of any ward, of marital authority, MU
of the right to manage his property and of the right to Suppose, a convict during his civil interdiction prepared a last will and
TAU testament where he said, “after my death, this property goes to A.” That
dispose of such property by any act or any conveyance MU property goes to H. Is there a valid will and a valid disposition considering
inter vivos.
TAU (the fact that he is under civil interdiction'' Will the civil interdiction
MU invalidate the disposition? No. Because the disposition is not inter vivos but
TAU mortis causa. So any convict under civil interdiction validly execute a last will
Art. 35. Effects of bond to keep the peace. — It shall be the MU and testament? Yes. because that is not covered by Article 34.
duty of any person sentenced to give bond to keep the TAU
peace, to present two sufficient sureties who shall MU
Art. 36. Pardon; its effect. — A pardon shall not work the
undertake that such person will not commit the offense TAU
restoration of the right to hold public office, or the right of
sought to be prevented, and that in case such offense be MU
suffrage, unless such rights be expressly restored by the
committed they will pay the amount determined by the TAU
terms of the pardon.
court in the judgment, or otherwise to deposit such MU A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from the
amount in the office of the clerk of the court to guarantee TAU
payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon him by the
said undertaking. MU sentence.
The court shall determine, according to its discretion, the TAU
period of duration of the bond. MU
Should the person sentenced fail to give the bond as TAU Question: How do you distinguish Article 36 from Article 23 which reads.
required he shall be detained for a period which shall in no "Effects of pardon by the offended party. A pardon by the offended party does
MU
case exceed six months, is he shall have been prosecuted not extinguish criminal action except as provided in Article 344 of this Code;
TAU but civil liability with regard to the interest of the injured party is extinguished
for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not exceed thirty
MU by his express waiver. "
days, if for a light felony.
TAU
MU Answer: Article 23 talks of pardon by the offended party, or pardon by the
Article 30-35 of the RPC tells us the effects of various types of penalties TAU victim; whereas. Article 36 talks of pardon by the President. What
particular!) those where you are deprived of your rights. extinguishes criminal liability is Article 36, pardon by the President in relation
MU
to Article 89 on the modes of extinguishing criminal liability. Although
Question: What are the penalties which can deprive rights? Article 36 is very clear, pardon by the President docs not extinguish civil
Answer: 1. Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification; TAU
aspect
2. Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualifies; MU
TAU
3. Suspension;
MUT
4. Civil interdiction. There is a restriction on your
AU So, the basic distinction is: Pardon by the offended party extinguishes the
MU CIVIL liability but NOT the criminal liability, while the pardon by the
TAU President extinguishes the CRIMINAL but not the civil liability.
capacity to act under the civil law.
MU

TAU PROBLEM: Suppose, a person is sentenced to prison, let's say, he is


Question: What are the effects of civil interdiction? MU sentenced to 20 years imprisonment, which automatically carries with it
TAU certain accessory penalties like suspension, disqualification to vote or be
Answer: Article 34. That's why civil interdiction is not a civil law issue. It is a
criminal law issue It is a penalty under the Penal Code although accessory. MU voted for, civil interdiction - it is included.
When a person is sentenced to a certain principal penalty, practically, he is
under civil interdiction. What are the effects or state the effects of civil
interdiction. How can you answer that if you do not know Article 34.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 94 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Suppose after 5 years in jail, the President pardons him and he is now released MU Question: What happens if a convict is sentenced to make reparation to the
So the criminal liability is extinguished. From 20 years, after 5 years, TAU offended party offended by him, to pay the fine and to pay the costs And the
pardoned. MU convict does not have the money or assets to satisfy all. His assets are just
TAU sufficient to make one or two. What is the order of payment?
MU
Answer: The order of payment is reparation, first. If there is still money left,
Question: What happens now to civil interdiction, the disqualification? Are TAU the balance for indemnification. The third priority is fine. And, the last is of
those penalties are deemed removed by the pardon? Does the pardon of the MU course the cost Order: reparation; indemnification; fine and costs
principal carry with it pardon of the accessory penalties? TAU
MU
Answer: If we stick to the general rule, the accessory follows the principal, TAU
pardon of the principal automatically carries with it the pardon of accessory MU So, this is one instance where the government will insist that it be
penalties. But not in criminal law because the law says; "A pardon shall not paid first i his time the government decides to be generous They are giving
TAU
work the restoration of the right to hold public office, the right of suffrage priority to the Civil liability rather than to the pecuniary penalties.
MU
unless such rights be expressly restored by the pardon.”
TAU Art. 39. Subsidiary penalty. — If the convict has no property with
MU which to meet the fine mentioned in the paragraph 3 of the nest
TAU preceding article, he shall be subject to a subsidiary personal liability
Therefore, if the pardon by the President is in general terms, the principal MU at the rate of one day for each eight pesos, subject to the following
penalty is pardoned but the accessory penalties remain. So you cannot run for rules:
TAU 1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision correccional or arresto
public office; you cannot vote, you cannot manage your property because you
are still under civil interdiction until 20 years shall have lapsed. MU and fine, he shall remain under confinement until his fine referred to
TAU in the preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his subsidiary
imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the term of the sentence,
MU and in no case shall it continue for more than one year, and no
Question: Normally, how should the pardon be worded?
TAU fraction or part of a day shall be counted against the prisoner.
MU 2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine, the subsidiary
Answer: The pardon should be worded like this'. "You are hereby pardoned imprisonment shall not exceed six months, if the culprit shall have
and restored to your full civil and legal rights." So with that pardon, it is TAU been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not exceed
meant that the principal and the accessory penalties are pardoned. But if it is MU fifteen days, if for a light felony.
worded: "You are hereby pardoned" The accessory penalties should remain. TAU 3. When the principal imposed is higher than prision correccional, no
That is the rule on Article 36. subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed upon the culprit.
MU
4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be executed by
TAU confinement in a penal institution, but such penalty is of fixed
MU duration, the convict, during the period of time established in the
Art. 37. Cost; What are included. — Costs shall include fees and preceding rules, shall continue to suffer the same deprivations as those
indemnities in the course of the judicial proceedings, whether they be TAU
of which the principal penalty consists.
fixed or unalterable amounts previously determined by law or regulationsMU 5. The subsidiary personal liability which the convict may have
in force, or amounts not subject to schedule. TAU suffered by reason of his insolvency shall not relieve him, from the fine
MU in case his financial circumstances should improve. (As amended by
Art. 38. Pecuniary liabilities; Order of payment. — In case the property of RA 5465, April 21, 1969).
the offender should not be sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary TAU
liabilities, the same shall be met in the following order: MU
1. The reparation of the damage caused. TAU
2. Indemnification of consequential damages.
3. The fine. MU
4. The cost of the proceedings.
TAU  Subsidiary penalty applies where a person is sentenced to pay a
MU fine and he cannot pay the fine.
TAU
Question: What are the pecuniary liabilities of an accused under the law? MUT Question: What will happen?
What are the civil liabilities payable in terms of money? AU
MU Answer: The law says: If you cannot pay the fine, you will instead undergo
Answer: There are 4.... TAU what is known as subsidiary penalty in this case, subsidiary imprisonment.
MU You will go to jail without the fine.
Reparation }
civil in nature
TAU
Indemnification } MU Question: For how many days?
civil in nature TAU
MU Answer: The ratio is one day for every P100. So if your fine P80.00, the
Fine } substitute is 10 days in
payable to the government
jail. That is the subsidiary penalty.
Cost }
payable to the government

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 95 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Question: What happens if the convict cannot pay the reparation, MU continue for more than one year, and no fraction or part of
indemnification and the cost? Is there subsidiary penalty? TAU a day shall be counted against the prisoner.
MU
Answer: The answer is NO, Article 39 is very specific, there is no subsidiary TAU
penalty for nonpayment of the fine. There is no mention of reparation,
MU
indemnification or costs.
TAU If it is prison correctional or arresto and fine imprisonment plus fine. Prision
MU correctional or arresto mayor plus fine. The computation is very simple. "You
TAU are herebysentenced to one year prision correccional, and to a line of P80.00
with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. Your principal penalty is
For example, the fine is P20.00. So, OK 00 one day. Another P8.00 one day. It MU
1 year and fine of P80.00. Ifyou cannot pay the fine, 1 day is equal to P8.00.
is already two P16.00. What about the balance of P400.? So 2½ days of TAU
So, 1 year + 10 days. After one year, you cannot be released You still have to
subsidiary imprisonment? Not only 2. The fraction of a day is not counted. MU
stay in jail for 10 days. The 10 days is what you calledsubsidiary
That is very clear in paragraph 1. the last clause - no fraction or part of a day
TAU imprisonment.
shall be counted against the prison.
MU
TAU
MU
We will go to an illustration is far as that one. Remember, we "should apply,
Suppose the convict is sentenced to pay the fine, can pay the fine but says: I TAU
when the penalty is like this, prison correccional + fine; or arresto mayor +
would rather go to jail than pay the fine MU fine.
TAU
MU
Question: Can he do that? TAU
MU PROBLEM: Suppose a person is sentenced to 6 months or arresto mayor and
to pay a fine ofP800 with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.
Answer: If you look at the law. The law says: “Is a convict has no property TAU
Suppose, the convict cannot pay the fine of P800 how long will the subsidiary
with which to make the fine.” Has no property – therefore, if there is property, MU
imprisonment last?
Article 39 does not apply because the government can compel you to pay by TAU
garnishing your bank account or by levying your property. He will be forced MU
to pay.
TAU
MU Under paragraph 1,100 days —around 3 months and 10 days. The principal
TAU penalty is 6 months. What is 1/3 of that'' 1/3 is 2 months. That is 60 days.
MU According to paragraph 1, " in no case shall the subsidiary penalty exceed 1/3
Question: So, what is the implication?
of the principal penalty". The principal penalty is 6 months, 1/3 of that is 60
TAU
Answer: The implication is Art. 39 apply only to insolvent people. Someone MU days. This is already 100 days automatically reduced to 60 days,
who is so poor or indigent.
TAU
MU
TAU That is the first limitation. In no case shall the subsidiary penalty exceed 1/3
Question: Is this not a violation of the constitutional provision that "No MU of the principal penalty
person shall he imprisoned for non-payment of debt?'" TAU
PROBLEM: The accused is sentenced to 6 years of prison correccional and
MU
Answer: No, it is not. According to the SC in the case of United States vs. pay a fine of 3,200.00 that is his penalty He cannot pay the fine,
Cara, — what is meant by the constitution is contractual debt. No person shall TAU
be imprisoned for non-payment of debt arising from contract, like a loan. But
MU
a pecuniary of fine is not arising from contract. It is an obligation arising from
TAU Question: How long will subsidiary penalty?
law or from an act or omission punishable by law. It is not covered by the
constitutional prohibition MUT
AU Answer: let's count first. P800 = 1 day. That's 400 days. Let's find out. What
is 1/3 of the principal penalty? 1/3 is 2 years. Does this exceed 2 years?
MU
Therefore, it can be. It does not exceed 2. However, in no case should it last
TAU
longer than 1 year. So it will be automatically reduced to one year. That is the
That is how you compute it. For every P8 00, one day, but subject to the MU
maximum. 7 hat is the second limitation: in no case shall the penalty exceed
following rules.
1/3 of the principal penalty, and in no case shall it go beyond 1/3 of the entire
TAU penalty.
MU
TAU
1. If the principal penalty imposed be prison correccional or MU
arresto and fine, he shall remain under the confinement
until his fine referred to in the preceding paragraph is
satisfied; hut his subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed 2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine, the
one-third of the term of the sentence, and in no case shall it subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed six months, if the

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 96 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
culprit shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave MU 4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be executed by
felony and shall not exceed fifteen days, if for light. TAU confinement in a penal institution, but such penalty is of
MU
fixed duration, the convict during the period of time
TAU
MU
established m the preceding rules, shall continue to suffer
Paragraph 2 applies when the penalty imposed by the court is only a FINE. TAU the same deprivation as those of which the principal penalty
MU consists.
TAU
MU
So, there is no imprisonment unlike in par 1 where the principal penalty is
TAU When the principal penalty is not to be executed by confinement. Meaning the
imprisonment. Here we have tine only. The same rule: if you cannot pay the
fine, P800/day. But the maximum subsidiary imprisonment is only 6 months if
MU principal penalties does not consist of imprisonment, but of a fixed duration,
you are prosecuted tor grave or less grave felony. TAU the subsidiary penalty should be of the same nature as the principal penalty.
MU But it is a divisible penalty.
TAU
MU
So, even if the tine is P100, 000.00 "You are hereby sentenced to pay a fine of TAU
P100,000.00", you cannot pay, even though how much, it is always 6 months. Example: Destierro it has the same duration as prison correccional. You
MU cannot be imprisoned but you are exiled. It is divisible because it has a fixed
TAU duration. So, it is the penalty. You are herein sentenced to 4 years of destierro
MU and to pay a fine of P80.00. Suppose,you do not pay the fine of P80.00.
Or if you are only prosecuted for a light felony, the maximum is only 15 days. TAU
You are hereby found guilty, pay a fine of P200.00. There is no more MU
imprisonment, only the fine. You cannot pay P200.00. 200/8 = 25 days. You TAU
subtract 10. It must go down to only 15 days. Because if the penalty is only MU Question: What will happen to you? You have to undergo subsidiary penalty:
fine, then you are prosecuted for a light felony, in no case should the 1 day for every P8.00. So, ten days of subsidiary, destierro also.
TAU
subsidiary penalty exceed 15 days.
MU Answer: You do not say "subsidiary imprisonment'" because the principal
TAU penalty is not imprisonment. If the principal penalty is destierro. die
MU subsidiary pcnaity should also be
Do not confuse paragraph 1 and 2. In paragraph 2, the penalty imposed by the TAU
courtis only fine. In paragraph 1, the penalty imposed by the court is prison MU destierro.
correccional, or arresto + fine. TAU
MU
TAU Another Example You arc sentenced to a penalty of suspension. Suspension
BAR Question: After he was found guilty and sentenced by the court to 6 MU is under Art 25. There is also 6 months to 6 years. Divisible, but no
years and 1 day and to pay a fine of P80.00. flow long is the subsidiary TAU imprisonment. So, four years of suspension; fine of P80.00. If you cannot pay
penalty7 10 days And 10 days does not exceed 1/3 of the principal penalty. MU the fine of P80.00, you have to undergo 10 days of subsidiary suspension.
Wrong. That is not par. 1. That is par. 3 If the penalty is 6 years and 1 day, TAU
that's already higher than prison correccional. That is already prison mayor MU
The subsidiary penalty should be of the same nature as the principal penalty.
TAU Do not always say " subsidiary imprisonment" But you follow the rule in
Answer: MU paragraph 4. In no case subsidiary destierro exceeds 1/3 of the principal
TAU penalty.
3. There is no more subsidiary penalty. There is no MUT
subsidiary penalty if the principal penalty is higher than AU
prison correccional. So prison mayor, reclusion temporal, MU Question: Suppose the principal penalty is not to be executed in confinement,
TAU
perpetua, death There is no more subsidiary penalty for non- but it has no fixed duration. Will paragraph 4 apply?
MU
payment of the fine.
Answer: Of course, not
TAU
MU
That is Rule # 3. There is no more subsidiary penalty if the principal penalty TAU
MU Question: Give an example of a penalty not to be executed by confinement
is higher than prison correctional
but it has no fixed duration.

Answer: Public censure. It is the only example you can think of, it is only a
light penalty where the judge will give you severe censure it will be a blot on
your record

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 97 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
TAU
For Example public censure + fine of P20.00. You cannot pay. So, you MU Question: Under the law, in what instances will there be no subsidiary
cannot say: two days of subsidiary penalty of 2 days of public censure. You TAU penalty'' When is subsidiary penalty not be served? In what instances will
will keep on returning to the judge to be sermonized at. there be no subsidiary penalty for an accused person?
MU
TAU Answer:
5. The subsidiary personal liability winch the convict may
MU
have suffered by reason of his insolvency shall not relieve TAU
 Then is no subsidiary penalty for non-payment of fine. In the same
him from the fine in case his financial circumstances should MU vein, there is no
improve. subsidiary penalty for non-payment of reparation, indemnification
TAU and costs
MU  There is no subsidiary penalty if the principal penalty is higher
TAU than prison correccional.
MU  There is no subsidiary penalty if the principal penalty is not to be
Suppose, I am asked to pay a fine of so much. I'm insolvent, as poor as a rat. executed by confinement if it has no fixed duration, like public
So, I undergo subsidiary penalty fine of P4.000.00, I have nothing to pay. I’m TAU censure.
imprisoned. Then I'm released after serving my sentence plus the subsidiary MU  There is no subsidiary penalty if the court did not mention it
imprisonment. Afterward', I win in the lotto. So, i have much money now. The TAU expressly in the judgment of conviction, because the rule is that it
must be mentioned, otherwise the convict cannot be compelled
government will say "alright, pay your fine." You say "No more. I have MU
to serve the subsidiary penalty.
already paid it through my subsidiary imprisonment! What paid? You pay TAU
again! MU
TAU Question: How do you define accessory penalty?
MU
Answer: It is penalty deemed imposed with the principal penalty. So, the
Question: Why? TAU
penalty is deemed imposed with the principal even if the judge did not
MU mention it.
Answer: Because service of the subsidiary penalty will not relieve you from TAU
the payment of the fine, if your financial condition will improve in the future. MU
TAU
MU ARTICLE 73, RPC. Presumption in regard to the imposition
of accessory penalty. Whenever the courts shall impose a
The government has only 10 years to collect the fine. Only 10 years. It is an TAU
penalty which, by provision of law, carried with it other
obligation arising from law and the prescriptive period is 10 years. Although, MU
penalties, according to the provisions of Articles 40, 41, 42,
the law is silent. If your financial condition improves after 10 years, no more. TAU
43, 44, 45 of this Code, it must be understood that the
But in the first 10 years, you can be compelled to pay and you cannot use the MU
accessory penalties are also imposed upon the convict.
subsidiary imprisonment as a reason for not paying. TAU
MU
TAU
So, whenever a principal penalty is imposed, the accessory penalty is deemed
Question: is the subsidiary imprisonment an accessory penalty ' Is it an MU
imposed even if not mentioned in the judgment of conviction.
accessory penalty.'' TAU
MU
Answer: If you look at Art. 25 of the Penal Code, it en all the possible
penalties. I here is no mention of subsidiary penalty. CONCLUSION: it is not TAU Question: But how will I know what are the accessory penalties? Suppose, I
an accessory, penalty. MU am sentenced to 12 years of prision mayor. I know there are accessory
TAU penalties. But what are they? What are accessory penalties? Suppose, I am
MUT sentenced to 15 years reclusion temporal, what are the accessory penalties?
AU Suppose, I am sentenced to 6 months of prison correccional. What are those
Question: If it is not an accessory penalty, what is the implication?
deemed imposed? How do I look for the accessory penalties?
MU
Answer: It is not deemed imposed with the principal penalty. Meaning, it TAU
Answer: Arts. 40 to 44. These provisions will tell you that if this is the
must be expressly mentioned in the decision. And therefore, what happens if MU
principal penalty, these are the accessory penalties attached to it.
you arc ordered to pay a fine and you cannot pay the fine, but there is nothing
in the decision which mentions it. Article 25 says that you cannot undergo TAU
subsidiary penalty, because it is not an accessory penalty
MU
TAU
MU
Question: Slow should the decision be worded?

Answer: You are hereby sentenced to pay a fine of P 100,000.00 with


subsidiary imprisonment in ease of insolvency.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 98 of 141


The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU Question: What is the most famous accessory penalty?
Art. 40. Death; Its accessory penalties. – The death Answer: Civil interdiction.
TAU
penalty, when it is not executed by reason of
MU
commutation or pardon shall carry with it that of Question: What are the principal penalties which carry wish them the
TAU accessory penalty of civil interdiction. In other words, civil interdiction is the
perpetual absolute disqualification and that of civil
MU accessory penalty to what principal penalties?
interdiction during thirty years following the date
sentence, unless such accessory penalties have been TAU Answer: You can answer that only when you go to Articles 40-44. So, the
MU
expressly remitted in the pardon. principal penalties which carry with them the accessory penalty of civil
TAU interdiction are:
MU  Death
 Reclusion perpetua
TAU  Reclusion temporal
MU
Article 41. Reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal;
TAU Question: Does death penalty carry with it civil interdiction?
Their accessory penalties. - The penalties of reclusion MU
perpetua and reclusion temporal shall carry with them TAU Answer: Yes. The law is very clear. So, you are sentenced to die. And then it
was commuted -when the SC decides on lowering it; or if the President
that of civil interdiction for life or during the period of MU decides to commute it to reclusion perpetua. That happened in 1987 when the
the sentence as the case may be, and that of perpetual TAU New Constitution took effect doing away with the death penalty -- what
happened to these people who are sentenced to death? There is a constitutional
absolute disqualification which the offender shall MU commutation. So, automatically, they will be under civil interdiction.
suffer even though pardoned as to the principal TAU
penalty, unless the same shall have been expressly MU PROBLEM: Suppose, you are sentenced to death, and you are scheduled to
TAU
remitted in the pardon. die between now and next month, there is no commutation. Neither the
MU President nor the SC has reduced the penalty. So, you are still going to be
TAU executed.
MU
Question: Is there civil interdict.
TAU
MU Answer: Technically, NONE. Unless it will be commuted. Technically, you
TAU are not under civil interdiction. So, technically, you can donate your property,
you can manage it, you can exercise parental authority. There is no civil
MU
interdiction. I doubt how will you do it because you are already inside the jail
Art. 42. Prision mayor; Its accessory penalties. — The TAU But under the law, you have no accessory penalty
penalty of prision mayor, shall carry with it that of MU
temporary absolute disqualification and that of perpetual TAU When the President says: "You are hereby sentenced to reclusion perpetua"
special disqualification from the right of suffrage which MU from that moment, you are under civil interdiction.
the offender shall suffer although pardoned as to the TAU Question: For how long'?
principal penalty, unless the same shall have been MU Answer: The law says for the next 10 years.
expressly remitted in the pardon. TAU Question: Suppose, you are sentenced to reclusion temporal flow long is the
MU civil interdiction?
TAU Answer: Under Art. 41, it is of the same duration as the principal penalty. So,
when it says 20 years of reclusion temporal, civil interdiction will also be 20
MU
Art. 43. Prision correccional; Its accessory penalties. — years.
The penalty of prision correccional shall carry with it
TAU
that of suspension from public office, from the right to
MU
follow a profession or calling, and that of perpetual
TAU
special disqualification from the right of suffrage, if the
MUT Question: Suppose you are sentenced to perpetua. You arc not sentenced to
duration of said imprisonment shall exceed eighteen
AU death, flow long will the civil interdiction last?
months. The offender shall suffer the disqualification
MU
provided in the article although pardoned as to the Answer: Under Article 41, it says there, that if will last lot the rest of your life
principal penalty, unless the same shall have been TAU forever' Civil interdiction for life. Or, during the period of the sentence refers
expressly remitted in the pardon. MU toArt. 45.orConfiscation
temporal and forfeiture
perpetua; civil interdiction for life of the proceeds or
instruments of the crime. — Every penalty imposed for
TAU Under
the Article 40, if youofarea sentenced
commission felony toshalldeath,carry
and it was
withcommuted
it the to
perpetua, the civil interdiction is only good for 30 years Hut if you are
MU forfeiture
sentenced of the
to reclusion proceeds
perpeiua, the civil of the crime
interdiction is for theand
rest ofthe
your
Art. 44. Arresto; Its accessory penalties. — The penalty TAU instruments
life. There must beor tools with
something wrongwhich
with theitlaw.
wasCONCLUSION:
committed. It is better
of arresto shall carry with it that of suspension of the MU to be sentenced to death commuted to perpetua because the civil interdiction is
right too hold office and the right of suffrage during only
Suchfor 30proceeds
years, but if sentenced to perpetua, civil
and instruments orinterdiction is for thebe
tools shall rest
of your life. This is an awkward provision in the Revised Penal Code.
the term of the sentence. confiscated and forfeited in favor of the Government,
unless they be property of a third person not liable for
the offense, but those articles which are not subject of
lawful commerce shall be destroyed.
Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 99 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
When you are found guilty, the instrument or tools used in the commission of
the crime will be confiscated or forfeited in favor of the State. This is also TAU
applied in special laws like illegal possession of firearms or drug pushing. The MU
shabu will not be returned to the pusher. In a homicide or murder case, the TAU
weapon recovered and used as evidence, the gun, knife, bolo, will be
confiscated. In illegal gambling, the cards, dice, chips, they are ail confiscated MU
b\ the order of the court. But, of course, you cannot apply that to certain TAU
crimes. Like, for example, in rape, you cannot confiscate the instrument used MU
in the commission of the crime
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
Now, Article 47 was amended by the Heinous Crimes Law. In what instances
TAU will the death penalty be NOT imposed? There are three (3) instances here.
MU Take note that the law says: The death penalty shall be imposed in all cases in
TAU which it must be imposed under existing laws. The personal belief of the
judge is irrelevant. He must follow the law.
MU The following are the instances when death penalty will not be imposed:
TAU 1. When the guilty person is below 18 years of age at the time of the
MU commission of the crime ( there is an automatic lowering of the
penalty by 1 degree);
TAU
2. When the convict is more than 70 years of age;
MU 3. When upon appeal or automatic review of the case by the Supreme
TAU Court the required majority vote is not obtained for the imposition
MU of the death penalty.
Chapter Four TAU Question: When is the constitutional proscription against the imposition of
Art. 47. In whatApplication
cases the deathof Penalties
penalty shall not be MU the death penalty dated? Give the legal basis of your answer.
imposed. — The death penalty shall be imposed in all TAU
Answer: The Heinous Crime Law took effect after 15 days following its
cases in which it mustSection be imposedOne under existing laws, MU
publication in at least 2 newspapers of general circulation. It was published
Rulesinfor
except thethe Application
following cases:of Penalties to the Persons on December 16, 1994. So, with that the effectivity is December 31, 1994.
Criminally Liable and
1. When the guilty person for the Graduation
be more of the Same.
than seventy years TAU
of age. MU Question: When is death penalty commuted under the same Code?
2. When
Art. 46. upon
Penaltyappeal
to beorimposed
revision upon
of theprincipals
case by thein TAU Answer: This…Article 47.
Supreme
general. — The penalty prescribed by law are
court, all the members thereof for not
the MUT
unanimous
commission inof their votingshall
a felony as tobethe propriety
imposed uponof the AU
imposition
principals inofthe
thecommission
death penalty. Forfelony.
of such the imposition of MU Art. 48. Penalty for complex crimes. — When a single
said penalty or for the confirmation of a judgment of TAU act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies,
the inferiorthecourt
Whenever imposing the
law prescribes death for
a penalty sentence,
a felonytheis MU or when an offense is a necessary means for committing
Supreme Courtitshall
general terms, shall render its decision
be understood per curiam,
as applicable to the other, the penalty for the most serious crime shall
which shall be signed
the consummated felony.by all justices of said court, TAU be imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum
unless some member or members thereof shall have MU period.
been disqualified from taking part in the consideration TAU
of the case, in which even the unanimous vote and MU
signature of only the remaining justices shall be
required. First of all, we will deal with the concept of plurality of crimes. It means to
say that the person performed a series of criminal acts - one after the other.
You commit 2 or more crimes. One after the other.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 100 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
There are supposed to be two types of plurality of crimes. The 1 st case is MU Answer: Complex crime of homicide with attempted murder. It is a complex
material or real plurality, as distinguished from formal or ideal plurality of TAU crime because the mere fact of firing at A is a felony, although attempted. On
crimes. the other hand, he committed homicide because he killed B. The crime is
MU
complex under Article 48 because the crime of homicide and attempted
1. Material or plurality means that the person performs 2 or more criminal TAU murder came from a single act, one grave and the other is less grave.
acts after the other and he is liable for every criminal act that he commits MU
because every crime is motivated by a separate criminal intent from the TAU Now, take note that under the law, in order for the complex crime to exist, a
other. single act must constitute grave or less grave felonies or 2 less grave felonies
MU or 2 grave felonies. So, under Article 48, two grave felonies can be
A perfect example is when someone runs amok. He started shooting TAU complexed with each other. Two less grave felonies can be complexed with
people, even those he doesn't know. He killed so many. He killed the MU each other and grave and less grave can be complexed with each other.
persons one after the other. If he killed 30 people, he will be guilty of
TAU
30 counts of homicide. The criminal intent to kill victim #1 is different Question: How about light felonies?
from the criminal intent to kill victim #2. There are 30 criminal acts. MU
There should also be 30 separate information. Although from the TAU Answer: There is no mention. Therefore, a light felony can be complexed
viewpoint of criminal procedure, in order to expedite the proceedings, MU wit a grave or less grave felony. A light felony cannot be complexed with
they can be consolidated. If he is found guilty, there will 30 convictions another light felony. There is no such thing as a complex crime of multiple
and 30 penalties. TAU slight physical injuries. Light felonies are not covered under Article 48.
MU
2. Formal or real plurality means that a person commits 2 or more TAU Question: What happens if a single act produces a grave or less grave and a
criminal acts, there will be 2 or more victims or offended parties, but in light felony?
the eyes of the law, only one crime was committed. MU
TAU Answer: There are two possibilities:
Question: When will that happen? MU 1. The light felony will be absorbed by the grave or less grave.
Answer: They are:
TAU
1. When you commit a complex crime, as defined in Article 48; Example: A policeman was engaged in the discharged of his
2. When the offender commits a special complex or composite MU duties. I approached him and hit him in the face with my fist. It
crime; or TAU caused him slight physical injuries that he sustained when I hit
3. When the accused is found to have committed a continuous MU him? It is absorbed by the element of attacking or employing
crime or delito continuado. force. You cannot say that the crime is direct assault with slight
TAU physical injuries.
Question: What is a Complex crime? MU
Answer: There is a complex crime when a single act constitutes 2 or more TAU 2. There are as many light felonies s there are victims. They are
grave or less grave felonies, or when the offense is a necessary means of treated as different crimes. You cannot complex them. They are
MU
committing the other. to be prosecuted severally.
TAU
So, there are 2 types of complex crimes: MU Example: I throw a stone at A, it hit him; but the same stone hit B.
TAU You cannot say that the crime of slight physical injury committed
against A absorbed the injury of B. He cannot be prosecuted for
1. When a single act constitutes 2 or more grave or less grave MU
double slight physical injuries because Article 48 does not apply to
felonies, which is also called Compound Crime or Delito
TAU light felonies. Conclusion: There are two separate felonies of light
Compuesto;
MU physical injuries.
2. When an offense is committed as a necessary means to commit the TAU
other which is called complex crime proper or delito complejo. MU
TAU PEOPLE vs. BUAN
Compound Crime or Delito Compuesto
A person throws a hand grenade to the ground an in so doing he killed 10 MU
22 SCRA 183
people and almost killing 5 bystanders. Are there 10 crimes of multiple
murder with multiple frustrated murder? NO, there is only one complex crime TAU Facts: A driver while driving his vehicle recklessly bumped another vehicle
of multiple murder with multiple frustrated murder. There is only one act of causing the death of A serious injury to B and slight physical injury to C. So,
throwing the hand grenade, although as a result of that act, several grave or MU a single act of bumping produced the death of A, serious injury to B and slight
less grave felonies result. TAU physical injury to C. The fiscal, applying Article 48, filed two informations.
MUT He filed one information for homicide and serious physical injuries through
Example: When you aim your gun towards other persons. You fired it. The reckless imprudence against the accused. However, earlier he files one
bullet killed 2 people. There is only one act. Did you commit 2 crimes of
AU information for slight physical injuries. He files an information under the old
homicides? NO. You commit the crime of double homicide. MU Civil Code for slight physical injuries through reckless imprudence, insofar as
TAU the light felony is concerned.
Another example. Aberratio Ictus. The accused, with intent to kill A and MU
aiming his gun towards A fired it but because of poor aim, he did not hit A but The accused, upon arraignment, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to pay a
instead hit and killed B. fine. In the meantime, the preliminary investigation of the case continued
TAU with respect to the other two. After that, the fiscal filed a second information
Question: Is the accused liable for the death of B who was not even intended MU in the RTC for homicide and serious physical injuries through reckless
the victim? imprudence.
TAU
Answer: YES because of aberratio ictus. MU The accused moved to quash the second information, pleading double
jeopardy. But, according to the prosecution, there is no double jeopardy
Question: If you are a fiscal, with what crime will you prosecute the because that crime is not the same as this crime. The crime is slight physical
offender? injuries committed against A and B. These crimes cannot be complexed.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 101 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Held: There is double jeopardy. He is being charged for the same offense. MU I will falsify the check by counterfeiting the signature of the
There should be only one information for homicide serious and slight physical TAU lawyer and encash the check. So, the falsification was the
injuries. That should only be one. So, you cannot separate the three. crime committed as a necessary means to defraud the bank -
MU
estafa.
The error of the prosecution is in believing that when, for example, with one TAU
negligent act, you hit 2 people - killing one and causing slight physical MU  Forcible Abduction with Rape
injuries to another, the impression is that there are 2 crimes. Homicide and TAU When the offender, with lewd designs abducted a woman and
slight physical injuries. But actually, there is only one crime. That is the drove her somewhere and through force and intimidation, had
crime of committing an imprudent act. The crime is reckless imprudence. MU carnal knowledge with her. The forcible abduction preceded
How about the homicide? How about the physical injuries? Those are only TAU the rape. The SC said that the crime is forcible abduction
effects of the imprudent act, which is determinative of the penalty and civil MU with rape.
liability.
TAU
 Malversation through Falsification of Public Document
Article 48 applies when a single act results to two or more grave or less grave MU
felonies. But here, you cannot consider the homicide, the injury, as separate. TAU  Kidnapping with Murder
Article 48 does not apply to culpable felonies. MU You kidnap somebody and demand ransom. When there is
no ransom paid, you kill the hostage. It is very common.
But, there is only a single act, which produces one felony. Why? Homicide is TAU
a felony. A serious physical injury is a felony. The felony is not the homicide MU
or physical injuries. It is the reckless imprudence. When you commit an TAU Question: What is the crime committed?
imprudent act, the felony is the imprudent act. The imprudence and reckless Answer: The crime committed is the crime of Kidnapping with Murder. The
imprudence are the felonies. Homicide, serious or slight physical injuries, is MU kidnapping was used as means to effect the killing.
only to determine what is the penalty. The felony is not the homicide or the TAU
physical injuries. The felony is the imprudent act because according to MU But this example is doubtful because of the amendment of Article
Article 3, a felony is an act or omission punishable by law. The homicide and 267. Because of this amendment, it is doubtful whether the crime is called
TAU
the physical injury will only determine the penalty. The error, said the SC, is kidnapping with murder under Article 48, or it is called Special Complex
because of the title given by fiscal to the information - Homicide through MU Crime of Kidnapping with Murder, or the crime of Kidnapping Qualified with
Reckless Imprudence. It creates the impression that the homicide is the crime. TAU murder.
But actually, that is not the crime but only the effect of the felony. MU
TAU But take note, one offense is committed as a necessary means to
commit the other. The law does not say one offense is committed as an
MU indispensable means to commit another. So, the first offense is necessary to
TAU commit the second but the first is not indispensable to commit the second.
VERANO vs. CA MU When you say "indispensable", it means that without it, the second will not be
115 SCRA 82 committed.
TAU
This reiterates the ruling in the Buan case. What is the felony? It is the
MU Question: What happens if the first offense is indispensable to commit the
imprudent act. TAU second? Is there a complex crime?
Answer: There is none. The second crime is the crime because the second
MU
crime committed is the real crime.
LONTOK vs. GORGONIO TAU Question: How about the first crime?
89SCRA632 MU Answer: If it is indispensable, then it is only an element of the second crime.
TAU The first offense will be the element of the second; it is absorbed. Without it,
Facts: The felony is the homicide, the physical injuries. The imprudent act is MU you cannot commit the second.
only the manner of committing the felony because, according to Article 3, a
felony is committed either by dolo or culpa. The culpa is not the felony, but TAU A good example of this is the so-called Absorption Doctrine or
only the manner. MU Doctrine of Absorption in the crime of rebellion.

If you follow this case then, if the felony is the injury, you cannot complex. TAU
There must be two; otherwise, there is double jeopardy, because one crime is PEOPLE vs. HERNANDEZ
different from the other.
MU
TAU
Issue: When rebellion is committed and in the course of rebellion, the rebels
REODICA vs. CA MUT
killed people, they injured people, they burned and destroyed property, can
292SCRA887 AU they be guilty of the complex crime of Rebellion with murder or physical
MU injuries with homicide?
A reiteration of the Lontok Case. TAU
Held: NO. The common crime is absorbed because you cannot convict a
MU person of rebellion without killing. When you commit rebellion, necessarily
Complex crime proper or delito complejo people will die. So, the killing and the destruction are not only accessory but
There are two acts. It is not a single act. You commit the felonies one after TAU also indispensable. They are absorbed in the felony of Rebellion. That is why
the other. But the first felony is not the ultimate object. It is only the stepping MU there is no such thing as complex crime of Rebellion with Homicide or
stone to commit another offense. You commit this not because that is your TAU Murder because it does not fall under Article 48.
intention. It is only the first step to commit another. One is the means to
commit the other.
MU The law also does not say that one offense is a direct means to
commit the second. So, it is not indispensable, not to conceal, not a direct
means - necessary but not direct.
Question: What are the good examples of these?
Answer:
 Estafa through Falsification of Commercial Documents Question: What do you mean by that?

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 102 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU The second type of ideal is the so-called special complex crime. So, there are
Answer: In the case of People Vs Abidosa, where the accused decided to kill TAU two types of complex crime, the ordinary and the special complex crime.
the victim. What he did was to forcibly enter the house of the victim. And
MU
once inside, he killed the victim Ordinary complex crime is governed by Article 48. When two or more crimes
TAU are complexes under Article 48, that is what is called the ordinary complex
Question: Is the crime murder? Or trespass to dwelling? Because he had to MU crime. Special complex crime is a crime under the RPC declared as complex
enter the house first by forcing himself in and once inside, he killed the TAU without applying the Article 48.
person.
MU Example: The special complex crime of Robbery with Homicide under
Answer: Actually, trespass to dwelling was not the primary intent. The TAU Article 294 of the RPC. When, by reason or on the occasion of robbery, the
primary intent was to kill. The trespass was only incidental. It was the direct MU crime of homicide shall have been committed. I robbed somebody, after
means effected to kill the victim. So, the crime there is murder aggravated taking his money, I killed him. If you apply Article 48, there seems to be
TAU
by unlawful entry. The forcible entry is not trespass to dwelling, but only something wrong. You cannot say that there is a single act. It is very clear
the aggravating circumstance. MU that there are two acts. Taking his property and killing him are 2 acts. You
TAU cannot even say that one is necessary to commit the other.
Question: What is the penalty for complex crime? MU
Question: Can you kill without robbing?
Answer: The penalty of the complex crime is to be based on the most serious TAU
crime, the same to be imposed in its maximum period. There is only one MU Answer: YES, you can kill without robbing. And you can rob without
penalty because if there was only one crime, there should only one penalty. TAU killing. But just the same you cannot do anything because Article 294 says so.
Robbery with Homicide is a special complex crime.
For example, person commits the complex crime of homicide and attempted MU
homicide. Of course, the penalty for the homicide is higher that the attempted TAU Another example of special complex crime is Article 335: Rape with
homicide. MU Homicide. You raped a girl and after raping her, you killed her. That is rape
with homicide - a special complex crime.
TAU
Question: What is the penalty for homicide?
MU Continuous Crime
Answer: The penalty is reclusion temporal, but it should be imposed in its TAU The third type of formal or ideal plurality is the concept of continuous crime
maximum period. MU or the so-called DELITO CONTINUADO. It is supposed to be a crime,
TAU which consists of a series of acts but all coming or emanating from one
Question: How about the penalty for attempted homicide? criminal resolution. There is only one criminal resolution, and it is followed
MU by a series of acts.
Answer: No more. TAU
MU
Question: How about estafa through falsification of public document?
TAU PEOPLE vs. DE LEON
Answer: Actually, it depends. There are instances when the penalty for MU
estafa is higher than falsification, depending on the amount involved in the TAU Facts: The suspect stole two roosters. So, there are two acts of taking. But it
estafa. But there are also instances where the penalty for falsification is turned out that there are also two owners.
higher. MU
TAU Issue: How many crimes of theft?
So, it is a matter of looking at the two penalties. If the penalty for the crime of MU
estafa is higher, then it will be the one to be imposed in its maximum period. Held: There is only one crime of theft. One crime of theft involving two
On the other hand, when the penalty for the falsification is higher, then it
TAU
roosters because there is a single intent to steal. He does not divide his mind
should be the one to be applied in its maximum. MU into stealing from the two owners. He even does not know that there are two
TAU owners of the cocks.
Question: Is Article 48 beneficial to the accused? MU
Example: I am the class treasurer. Then, we call a party and each of us
Answer: YES. It is intended to benefit the accused. In the first place, contributed P100.00 totaling P5, 000. Then I will run with the money.
instead that he should be charged 3 times, there is only one crime charged. TAU
Instead of putting a bond 3 times, there will only be one. The penalty is still MU Question: How many crimes of estafa did I commit?
for his advantage. TAU
Answer: There is only one crime. There is only one intent to defraud. I do
Example: A single act produces death of 3 people - multiple homicide. Well, MUT not divide my mind 50 times.
there should only be one crime. The same provision, the higher the offense, AU
they are just the same but three homicides. The penalty for homicide is MU
reclusion temporal. We will maximize it: 20 years - one penalty only. PEOPLE vs. MALLARE
TAU 168SCRA422
Assuming, there is no Article 48. You killed three people; there will naturally MU
be reclusion temporal. And even if they will give you the minimum of 12 Facts: Consuelo Mallare offered to mortgage to Remedio Capaoan two lots
years and 1 day, it will still turn out to be higher than the penalty in the TAU allegedly owned by Leonora Balderas for the sum of P3, 000. According to
maximum. Mallare, these two lots were owned by Balderas and that Mallare is authorized
MU
to mortgage. Capaoan has only P1, 500. So, the latter referred Mallare to his
Also, Article 48 applies only to felonies. You cannot complex the felony with TAU mother-in-law, Julia Saclolo, to put up the remaining P1, 500. So, two
the crime punishable by a special law. So, there is no such thing as a complex MU mortgage contracts were made, one was in favor of Capaoan and the other was
crime, under the crime in the RPC and a crime under a special law. in favor of Saclolo. It turned out that the person who signed the contract was
not the real Balderas. Two cases of falsification of public document were
filed against Mallare. In one case, the victim was Capaoan, while the other
Special Complex Crimes was Saclolo. Mallare pleaded guilty to one charge. Later, he moved to quash
the second charge pleading double jeopardy.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 103 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU a series of acts. One offense is not necessary to commit the other. So, you do
Issue: How many offenses are there? TAU not say that we will maximize the penalty. Article 48 does not apply. They
Held: There is double jeopardy. A comparison of the two cases will tell us have the same concept in the eyes of the law, albeit there is complex crime
MU
that they refer to a series of acts amounting to what is now as continuing and a special complex crime. Delito continuado is not governed by Article
offense. A single crime consisting of a series of acts but all arising from a TAU 48.
criminal resolution. It is a continuous unlawful act or series of acts set is a MU
single impulse. Although there are series of acts, there is only one crime TAU Question: Differentiate delito continuado from a continuing crime?
committed. The crime of Mallare, although a series of acts, was set on both Answer: There is no difference, it is the same. Delito continuado is in
by a single intent or impulse to defraud Capaoan of the total of P3, 000. MU Spanish. It means a series of acts emanating from one criminal resolution.
TAU However, there is another continuing crime under Criminal Procedure. That
Actually, the original victim was Capaoan. There is only one deceit that is MU "when the ingredients of the crime took place in two or more places - and the
committed by Mallare on the two victims. Because by mere betrayal of faith, crime may be filed in the place where the crime was committed, or where any
TAU
the second victim, Saclolo had been dragged into the swindle by reason of one of its essential ingredients took place."
Capaoan having only P1, 500 at the time. That there were two victims, MU
however, will not convert the crime into separate offenses, as the determining TAU For example, kidnapping. You are kidnapped in Davao and then brought to
factor is the unity or the multiplicity of the criminal intent of the transactions. MU Cotabato.
So, that is the basis.
TAU Question: Where should the case be filed?
MU Answer: Either of the two places. That is also called continuing crime. The
TAU place where the crime started, or where it continued.
SANTIAGO vs. GARCHITORENA
228SCRA214 MU
TAU The issue there is where the case is to be prosecuted. The issue in delito
Facts: Miriam Defensor-Santiago was charged criminally for the violation of MU continuado is how many crimes are committed. So, it is a different kind of
the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Acts, allegedly by favoring aliens to TAU continuing crime. That is why in order to avoid the confusion, in Criminal
benefit the Alien Legalization Program. However, the prosecution sought to Procedure the term is rather called TRANSITORY CRIME, where the
MU elements occur in two or more different places. And in order to confuse it
change the charges by filing 32 amended information since 32 aliens were
benefited. When the case reached the Supreme Court, it directed the TAU with Criminal Procedure, the issue here is there is only one criminal impulse
prosecution to consolidate the 32 informations into one information, charging MU resulting in two or more acts.
only one crime. The Court said that the concept of delito continuado, TAU
although a product of the Spanish Penal Code, has been applied to crimes So, to properly answer the proceeding Question: Initially, you should say that
penalized under a special law. MU they are the same. One is in Spanish, and the other is in English. However,
TAU you should, if what is meant by continuing crime is a transitory crime under
Issue: Is delito continuado applicable to special laws? the rule in Criminal Procedure, then this is the difference. In delito
MU
continuado, the issue is to determine how many crimes are committed, and
TAU whether there are two or more penalties; whereas in transitory crime, the
Held: YES. Under Article 10 of the Penal Code, the code is supplementary
to special laws, unless the latter provide the contrary. Therefore, although that MU issue here is to determine in what court should the person be prosecuted.
principle developed from the old Penal Code, it may be applied in a TAU Because continuing crime could mean a crime committed where the essential
supplementary capacity to crimes punished by special laws. Delito MU ingredients took place in more than one place; or as delito continuado.
continuado is also recognized in American jurisprudence. The question of
whether a series of criminal acts over a period of time raises a single offense TAU
ARTICLE 49. Penalty to be imposed upon the
or separate offense has also troubled American courts, as shown by several MU
theories. The American court, following the Single Larceny Doctrine, looks TAU principals when the crime committed is different from that
at the different criminal acts as one continuing act involving the same intended. In cases in which the felony committed is
transaction or as done in the same occasion. An American court held that a MU different from that which the offender intended to commit,
contrary rule would violate the conditional guaranty against putting a man in TAU
jeopardy twice of the same offense.
the following rules shall be observed:
MU
Another court observed that the doctrine of a Single Larceny rules that since a 1. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed
separate charge could be filed for each act, the accused may be sentenced for
TAU
be higher than that corresponding to the offense which the
the penalty for rest of his life. MU
accused intended to commit, the penalty corresponding to
TAU
The Supreme Court said that the 32 amended informations aver the offenses MUT the latter shall be imposed in its maximum period.
were committed on the same period of time that is, on or about October 17,
1988. The strong probability even exists that the approval of the application AU 2. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed
for the legalization of the stay of the 32 aliens was done by a single stroke of MU
the pen as when the approval was embodied in the same document. One TAU
be lowered than that corresponding to the one which the
document, covering the 32 aliens, carried only one signature. accused intended to commit, the penalty for the former
MU shall be imposed in its maximum period.
However, for example, I am the cashier of a corporation. Today, I ran away
with the money. One week from now, I will spend again the money. And TAU
after one week, nothing is left. That is not continuado. The intent to defraud MU
The rule established by the next preceding
today is different from the intent to defraud next week. What results is a real paragraph shall not be applicable if the acts committed by
TAU
plurality. There are as many crimes as there are as many left. the guilty person shall also constitute an attempt or
MU frustration of another crime, if the law prescribes a higher
Question: Are delito continuado and complex crime the same?
penalty for either of the latter offenses, in which case the
Answer: NO. They cannot be the same. Delito continuado is not governed penalty provided for the attempted or the frustrated crime
by Article 48. In complex crime, there is a single act, which produces two or shall be imposed in its maximum period.
more grave or less grave felonies. In delito continuado, the offender performs

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 104 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
TAU
MU This is the exact opposite of Article 49, where the impossible
penalty is based on the lower penalty, which should be maximized. Under
TAU
Question: What is the penalty for the felony committed if it is different from Article 48, it should be based on the higher penalty to be maximized.
MU
the felony intended?
Answer: According to Article 49, if the penalty for felony committed is TAU
higher than the felony intended, then the penalty should be based on the MU Question: Which will prevail between the two?
felony intended but it has to be in its maximum period. On the other hand, if TAU
the penalty for the felony committed turns out to be lower than the penalty for Answer: Obviously, Article 48 will prevail because it is a complex crime.
the felony intended, then the penalty should be based on the felony MU
committed, the same to be imposed in its maximum period. TAU
Article 49 does NOT apply to abberatio ictus because it will conflict with
MU Article 48.
However, since the law speaks of felony committed and felony
TAU
intended, then obviously it refers to Article 4(1), because that is the only
provision in the Revised Penal Code which uses those phrases "felony MU
committed" and "felony intended". Under Article 4(1), a person incurs TAU
criminal liability if he commits a felony although the wrongful act done is MU
different from that which he intended. In other words, the question refers to
that provision. And there are three situations contemplated here: TAU Error in Personae
MU
1. praeter intentionem - result exceeded the intention TAU The accused, with intent to murder A, waits for him in the dark.
2. aberratio ictus - mistake of blow The felony intended murder of A. So, he approached the intended victim
3. error in personae - mistake of identity MU from behind without giving the latter a chance to defend himself and stabbed
TAU him to death. But it turned out it is not A, but a stranger B.
MU
Question: Is he liable for the death of B?
TAU
Praeter intentionem MU Answer: YES. The crime he committed is murder. So, the intended felony
The accused intended only to commit a crime of slight physical TAU is murder of A, but the actual felony committed is murder of B.
injuries punishable by arresto menor, but the victim died. So, the felony MU
committed is homicide punishable by reclusion temporal. Now, we say the penalty for the crime intended is higher. Both are
TAU murder. Whether it is a murder of A or a murder of B, it is still murder. You
Question: For What crime should he be prosecuted? If we apply Article 49, MU do not say the penalty for the murder is higher than the penalty for that
he should be prosecuted for homicide because the penalty is higher. But once TAU murder. So, there is no effect. You cannot say that the murder of a carries a
he is found guilty, the penalty should be arresto menor, only to be imposed in MU higher penalty than the murder of B, they are still the same.
its maximum period. This is a crazy answer. Why will a person be sentenced
to homicide and penalized for slight physical injuries? So, it will arrive at an
TAU
absurd conclusion by applying Article 49. MU Article 49 does NOT apply to error in personae
Answer: The correct answer is: he should be prosecuted for homicide and if TAU
found guilty, we should impose the penalty for homicide, which is reclusion MU
temporal. However, we will give him the mitigating circumstance that he did Question: Where will you use Article 49?
not intended to commit so grave a wrong as that committed. TAU
MU Answer: I intend to kill my father. So, I shot father but when I looked
closely, it turned out that it is not my father but someone who looks like my
TAU father. So, the crime intended is parricide. The crime committed is homicide.
Article49 does NOT apply to praeter intentionem, otherwise, an absurdity
will result. MU

TAU Question: What is the penalty for parricide, the crime intended?
Answer: Reclusion temporal
MU
Aberratio Ictus TAU
MUT Question: What crime did I commit?
The accused, with intent to kill A, fired his gun towards A but AU
because of his poor aim; he did not hit A, but instead killed B. Answer: I am liable for the crime of homicide because I killed a stranger.
MU But the penalty of reclusion temporal should be maximized.
TAU
Question: Is he liable for killing B, although the latter is not intended victim? MU
That illustrates Article 49, paragraph 2. If the penalty prescribed
Answer: YES for the felony committed is lower than the corresponding to the one, which the
TAU accused intended to commit, the penalty for the former shall be imposed in its
MU maximum period.
Question: What is the proper penalty? TAU
Suppose we reverse the previous problem. I attacked a stranger
Answer: Obviously that is a complex crime because a single act produced 2
MU and killed him. But when I looked at him, it was not a stranger but my father.
felonies consummated homicide and attempted homicide. Since, it's a So, the felony intended is homicide, but the felony committed is parricide.
complex crime under Article 48; the correct penalty is NOT based on the
lower offense. It should be based on the higher offense, to be imposed in its
maximum period. You do not base the penalty on the attempted homicide but Question: For what crime will I be prosecuted?
on the consummated homicide, which should be maximized.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 105 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Answer: For parricide because I killed my father. But I did not really intend MU
to kill him but I intended to kill somebody. So, if you are found guilty of TAU
parricide, the court will not impose reclusion perpetua to death, but only
MU
reclusion reclusion temporal in its maximum period because Article 49
paragraph 1 says: If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be TAU
higher than that corresponding to the offense which the accused intended to MU ARTICLE 56. Penalty to be imposed upon
commit, the penalty corresponding at the latter shall be imposed in its TAU accomplices in an attempted crime. The penalty next lower
maximum period. in degree than that prescribed by law for an attempt to
MU
TAU commit a felony shall be imposed upon the accomplices in
MU an attempt to commit the felony.
ARTICLE 50. Penalty to be imposed upon TAU
principals of a frustrated crime. The penalty next lower in
MU
degree than that prescribed by law for the consummated
TAU
felony shall be imposed upon the principal in a frustrated
MU
felony.
TAU ARTICLE 57. Penalty to be imposed upon
MU accessories of an attempted crime. The penalty lower by
TAU two degrees than that prescribed by law for the attempted
MU felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the attempt
ARTICLE 51. Penalty to be imposed upon TAU to commit a felony.
principals of attempted crimes. A penalty lower by two MU
degrees than that prescribed by law for the consummated TAU
shall be imposed upon the principals in an attempt to MU
commit felony. TAU ARTICLE 71. Graduated scales. In the case in
MU which the law prescribed a penalty lower or higher by one
TAU or more degrees than another given penalty, the rules
MU prescribed in Article 61 shall be observed in graduating
ARTICLE 52. Penalty to be imposed upon TAU such penalty.
accomplices in consummated crime. The penalty next lower MU
in degree than that prescribed by law for the TAU The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from
consummated shall be imposed upon the accomplices in MU the graduated scale in which is comprised the given
the commission of a consummated felony. TAU penalty.
MU
TAU The courts in applying such lower or higher
MU penalty shall observe the following graduated scales.
ARTICLE 53. Penalties to be imposed upon TAU
accessories to the commission of a consummated felony. MU SCALE NO. 1
The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by TAU
law for the consummated felony shall be imposed upon the MU 1. Death
accessories to the commission of consummated felony. 2. Reclusion perpetua
TAU 3. Reclusion temporal
MU 4. Prision mayor
TAU 5. Prision correccional
MUT 6. Arresto Mayor
ARTICLE 54. Penalty imposed upon accomplices 7. Destierro
AU
in a frustrated crime. The penalty next lower in degree 8. Arresto Menor
MU
than prescribed by law for the frustrated felony shall be 9. Public Censure
imposed upon the accomplices in the commission of a TAU 10. Fine
MU
frustrated felony.
TAU SCALE NO. 2
MU
TAU 1. Perpetual absolute disqualification
ARTICLE 55. Penalty to be imposed upon MU 2. Temporal absolute disqualification
accessories of a frustrated crime. The penalty lower by two 3. Suspension from public office, the right to
degrees than that prescribed by law for the frustrated vote and be voted for, the right to follow a professional
felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the calling
commission of a frustrated felony. 4. Public Censure

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 106 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU Question: What is the penalty for an accomplice in an attempted homicide?
5. Fine TAU Answer: It should be 3 degrees lower from the principal in a consummated
MU homicide or arresto mayor. The same thing for the accessory or a frustrated
homicide.
TAU
MU Question: What is the penalty for the accessory in an attempted homicide?
ARITICLE 60. Exception to the rules established in Articles TAU Answer: Four degrees lower from the principal in a consummated homicide.
50-57. The provisions contained in Articles 50-57, MU So, that is within the range of destierro.
inclusive of this Code shall not be applicable to cases in TAU
which the law expressly prescribes the penalty provided MU This is, therefore, the manner of determining the penalty for
for a frustrated or attempted felony, or to be imposed TAU attempted, frustrated felony and accomplices and accessory.
upon accomplices or accessories. MU But Article 60 says the penalty for the accomplice or for the
TAU accessory, or the frustrated or attempted felony (under Articles 50-57) should
MU not apply where the Penal Code provides a separate exception. Because there
CONSUMATED FRUSTRAT ATTEMPTED TAU are instances when the penalty for the accomplice and the party for the
ED principal is the same.
MU
Principal 0 1 2
Accomplice 1 2 3 TAU
Accessories 2 3 4 MU
TAU
MU
Question: What is the penalty for the crime of homicide? TAU
Answer: According to Article 249, the penalty for homicide is reclusion MU ARTICLE 268. RPC. Slight Illegal Detention - The penalty
temporal. of reclusion temporal shall be imposed upon any private
TAU
individual who shall commit the crimes described in
MU Article 267 without the attendance of any of the
Question: Reclusion temporal is the penalty for homicide against whom, the TAU
principal, the accomplice or the accessory? circumstances enumerated therein. The same penalty
MU shall be incurred by anyone who shall furnish the place for
Answer: According to Article 46, when the Penal Code prescribes a penalty,
it is understood as referring to the penalty for the principal. TAU the perpetration of the crime. xxx
MU
TAU SITUATION. If I detain somebody, I am the principal. But I use your house
Question: What kind of homicide - consummated, frustrated or attempted?
Answer: Again, under Article 46, it is understood that the penalty prescribed MU and you allowed it, you are an accomplice. Under article 268, the penalty for
by the law is the one applicable to the consummated. So, reclusion temporal TAU you and the penalty for are the same. It should not be one degree lower for
is the penalty or the principal if the homicide consummated. you. So, this is an exception. There is no distinction between an accomplice
MU and a principal. The principal and accomplice fall under the same liability.
TAU That is the application of Article 60.
Question: What is the penalty for accomplice and the accessories in a MU
consummated homicide? TAU
ARTICLE 346. RPC. Liability of ascendants, guardians,
Answer: That is where Articles 50 to 57 will come in the above graph is a MU
summary of the entire Articles to 50 to 57. Your starting point is Zero. teachers, or other persons entrusted with the custody of the
(Article 46) TAU offended party. The ascendants, guardians, curators,
MU teachers and any person who, by abuse of authority or
Question: If reclusion temporal is the penalty for the principal in a TAU
confidential relationship, shall cooperate as accomplice in
consummated homicide, what is the penalty for the principal if the homicide is the perpetration of the crime embraced in Chapter
frustrated? MU Second, Third and Fourth of this Title, shall be punished
Answer: It is supposed to be 1 degree lower from the principal in a TAU as principals. Xxxx
consummated homicide. MUT
AU
Question: What is 1 degree lower from reclusion temporal? MU The Crime here is against chastity, which may either, be rape, acts
Answer: Article 71 will now apply One degree lower is the penalty of prision TAU of lasciviousness, seduction corruption of minors, and abduction.
mayor. That is also the penalty for the accomplice in a consummated
MU
homicide. PROBLEM: A woman is raped. The accomplices of the rapist are parents or
guardians. According to Article 346, the penalty for the rapist and the penalty
TAU for the accomplices are the same.
Question: Suppose the homicide is only attempted, what is the penalty for MU
the principal? TAU
Answer: Two degrees lower than the principal in the consummated
homicide. So, the penalty should be within the range of prision correccional. MU
The same answer for the penalty for the accomplice in a frustrated homicide, ARTICLE 121. RPC. Flight to enemy's country.
and the penalty for the accessory in a consummated homicide. So all three are
2 degrees lower. The penalty of arresto mayor shall be inflicted upon any
person who owing allegiance to the Government, attempts

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 107 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
to flee or o to an enemy country when prohibited by TAU COMPUTATIONS
competent authority. MU
Reclusion temporal - duration is 2 years, 1 day to 20
TAU years
MU
PROBLEM: So, if you go to the enemy country when you are not supposed
TAU But reclusion temporal has three periods - minimum,
to go there because there is was, when you come back, you can be prosecuted.
MU medium, maximum. To know the duration, you have
Question: Suppose you are attempting yet (meaning you have not yet left), TAU to know Article 76.
but you were already caught, what is the penalty? MU
Answer: Still the same, as if you have already gone there because the mere
attempt to flee is the same s consummated. So, this is another example when TAU
the penalty for the attempt or the consummation is the same. MU Reclusion temporal - 12y 1d to 20y
TAU Minimum 12y 1d
MU to 14y 8m
TAU Medium 12y 8m 1d to 17y
ARITCLE 76. Legal period of duration of divisible MU 4m
penalties. The legal period of duration of divisible TAU Maximum 17y 4m
penalties shall be considered as divided into three parts, MU 1d to 20y
forming three periods, the minimum, the medium, and the TAU
maximum in the manner shown in the following table: MU
TAU
MU Formula
TAU
TABLE SHOWING THE DURATION OF DIVISIBLE MU a. Determine the duration of the entire felony
PENALTIES TAU Maximum 20y
AND THE TIME INCLUDED IN EACH OF THEIR MU Minimum 12y disregard the 1d
PERIODS TAU Subtract 20y - 12y = 8y. This is the
MU duration of the entire penalty.
TAU
PENALTIES ENTIRE DURATION MINIMUM MU b. Since there are three parts, divide 8y by 3. It is difficult
Reclusion temporal From 12 years and 1 day to From 12 years and 1 TAU to divide, so first, convert some years to months. Hence,
20 years day to 14 years and
MU
8y-2y = 6y, 24m(2y)
8 months
Prision mayor From 6 years and 1 day to From 6 years and 1 TAU
Then divide 6y24m by 3
absolute 12 years day to 8 years MU
disqualification TAU
and special  Duration of each period = 2y8m of reclusion
temporary MU
temporal
disqualification TAU
Prision From 6 months and 1 day From 6 months and MU
correccional to 6 years 1 day to 2 years and c. Start with 12y and add 1d (but in the computation, do not
suspension and 4 months add 1d), then add 2y and 8m
destierro
TAU
Arresto mayor From 1 month and 1 day to From 1 to 2 months MU
6 months TAU
Arresto menor From 1 to 30 days From 1 to 10 days Therefore
MUT
MEDIUM MAXIMUM 12y 1d
AU 2y 8m
From 14 years, 8 From 17 years, 4 months
months and 1 day to and 1 day to 20 years MU 14y & 8m
17 years and 4 TAU
months MU
From 8 years and 1 Form 10 years and 1 day to  So the minimum period is 12 y 1d to 14y 8m
day to 10 years 12 years
From 2 years, 4 From 4 years, 2 months TAU
months and 1 day to and 1 day to 6 years MU d. 14y 8m
4 years and 2 TAU
months 2y 8m
MU 16y & 16m or 17y 4m
From 2 months and From 4 months and 1 day
1 day to 4 months to 6 months
From 11 to 20 days From 21 to 30 days  So the medium necessarily starts at 14y 8m 1d to
17 y 4m

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 108 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
e. 17y 4m MU + 1y 10m
2y 8m TAU 4y 24m or 6y
19y 12m or 20y MU
TAU
 So, the maximum starts at 17y4m1d to 20y MU Thus
TAU Minimum 6m1d to 2y4m
MU Medium 2y4m1d to 4y2m
TAU Maximum 4y2m1d to 6y
MU
Prision Mayor - duration is 6y 1d to 12y TAU
MU
Minimum 6y1d to TAU
8y MU Arresto mayor - Duration is 1 month, 1day
Medium 8y1d to 10y TAU to 6months
Maximum 10y1d to MU
12y TAU Minimum 1m to
MU 2m
TAU Medium 2m1d to 4m
If we follow the formula, the computation shall be: MU Maximum 4m1d to
TAU 6m
a. 12y-6y = 6y MU
b. 6y/3y = 2y (duration of each period) TAU Formula 6m-1m = 5m or 3m60d
c. thus: 6y1d to 8y (minimum) MU
8y1d to 10y (medium) So, 3m60d/3 = 1m20d (duration per period of arresto mayor)
TAU
10y1d to 12y (maximum)
MU
TAU Compute 1m
MU 1m20d
TAU 2m20d minimum 1m1d to
2m 20d
Prision correccional - duration is 6 months, 1day to MU 1m20d
TAU
6 years 3m40d or 4m 10d medium 2m21d
MU
to 4m10d
Minimum 6m1d to 2y4m TAU
1m 20d
Medium 2y4m1d to 4y2m MU
5m 30d maximum
Maximum 4y2m1d to 6y TAU
4m 1d to 6m
MU
a. 6y - 6m (but you cannot subtract without converting first TAU
the 6y into months) MU
Therefore, if we apply the formula, it will not be with what is provided ender
6y = 5y12m TAU Article 76
- 6m MU
5y 6m (duration of entire of prision TAU Question: What is the correct answer?
correccional) MUT Answer: Follow the law. The solution derived from the formula is
AU mathematically correct but legally wrong. Whereas in Article 76, it is legally
correct although mathematically wrong.
b. Convert 5y6m in such a manner s to make it divisible by 3 MU
TAU In Article 70, you can read there the scales. What is important is
5y 6m 3y 30m MU Scale 1. In the scale of penalties, how are the penalties arranged starting from
3y 30m by 10m (duration f each period) down the last penalty?
TAU
All right, we have said earlier that penalties are either divisible or
c. Compute MU indivisible; one with a fixed duration and one without fix duration.
TAU
6m MU Now, for penalties which are divisible (penalty which consists of
three periods, known as minimum, medium and maximum), you have at least
by 10m to know the duration of each period. Article 76 is our guide because it tells us
by 16m or 2y 4m the duration of each period of the penalty. But that will entail really of
+ 1y 10m memorizing the table down to the last month and day, and you cannot commit
3y 14m or 4y 2m any error there because an error of one day will give an error on your answer.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 109 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Now, you might as well remember the mathematical formula to MU
arrive at the same answer even without reading Article 76. Actually, the basic TAU
knowledge of mathematics for the minimum period will answer even without
MU
memorizing Article 76.
TAU
For example, the duration of reclusion temporal 2 years and 1 day MU
to 20 years. Now, the formula to subtract the minimum from the maximum TAU
disregarding the 1 day difference 20 years - 12 years = 8years.
MU
That is the entire duration of the penalty of reclusion temporal. TAU
Next is to determine the duration of its period. Since there are three periods, MU
then we have to divide 8 years into three parts. Now, of course, dividing 8
years into three parts would be rather difficult. The best thing to do is to
TAU ARTICLE 61. Rules for graduating penalties. For the
convert the years into months. So that will be quite easier. So, let's reduce MU purpose of graduating the penalties which, according to
this 6 years because it is easier to divide 6 years by 3. Now, let's convert the 2 TAU the provisions of Articles 50 to 57, inclusive, of this Code
years into months 24months 6 years and 24 months, that is already divisible MU are to be imposed upon persons guilty as principles of any
by 3.
TAU frustrated or attempted felony, or as accomplices or
That would be the duration or each period of reclusion temporal. MU accessories, the following rules shall be observed:
So let's start with the minimum. Of course, you already know the minimum TAU
of 12years and 1day. Then you add the 1day in our formula, we disregard it. 1. When the penalty prescribed for the felony is
It is now 12 years +2 years and 8 months = 14years and 4 months MU
TAU single and indivisible, the penalty next lower in degrees
The medium period starts from 14 years, 8 months and 1 day + 2 MU shall be that immediately following that indivisible penalty
years and 8 months = 16 years, 16 months and 1 day. So we have transpose
TAU in the respective graduated scale prescribed in Article 71
12 months there to make that 17 years. You subtract 12 months. It becomes 4 of this Code.
months. It shall be 17 years and 4 months. MU
TAU
Now, the maximum starts from 17 years, 4 months and 1 day, then MU 2. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is
you add again the same 2 years and 8 months. 17 years, 4 months and 1 day + composed of two indivisible penalties, or of one or more
2 years and 8 months = 19 years, 12 months or exactly 20 years. TAU
divisible penalties to be imposed to their full extent, the
MU
Now, you find out if your answer corresponds to the duration of TAU penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately
the penalty. Minimum of the minimum is 12 years and 1 day. The maximum following the lesser of the penalties prescribed in the
MU
of the maximum is 20 years. That is supposed to be the duration of the entire respective graduated scale.
penalty. If you look at the table in Article 76. The answer is the same. TAU
MU
The only penalty where our formula will not work is the penalty of TAU 3. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is
arresto mayor. It will not tally. Let's try to demonstrate. Well, of course, composed of one or two indivisible penalties and the
arresto mayor has duration of 1 month and 1 day to 6 months. If you will look MU maximum period of another divisible penalty, the penalty
at Article 76, the official partitioning of arresto mayor, it says there the TAU next lower in degree shall be composed of the medium and
minimum starts 1 month and 1 day to 2 months, the medium is 2 months and 1 MU
day to 4 months and the maximum is 4 months and 1 day to 6 months. We minimum periods of the proper divisible penalty and the
will apply our formula and try to find out whether our answer will be the
TAU maximum periods of the proper divisible penalty and the
same. MU maximum period of that immediately following in said
TAU respective graduated scale.
6 months maximum - 1 month minimum = 5 months. So, arresto MU
mayor has duration of 5 months divided by 3. To make it easier, we will
reduce this to 3 months and the 2 months to days. So 60 days, 3 months and 4. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is
60 days divided by 3. 1 month and 20 days. That is supposed to be the TAU composed of several periods, corresponding to different
duration. So, we will start. MU divisible penalties, the penalty next lower in degree shall
TAU be composed of the period immediately following the
The starting point is 1 month and 1 day. 1 month + 1 month and
20 days = 2 months and 20 days. The medium is supposed to start from 2 MUT minimum prescribed and of the two next following, which
months and 21 days + month and 20 days = 3 months and 40 days. Transpose AU shall be taken from the penalty prescribed, if possible;
30 days equals 4 months. 40 days - 30 days = 10 days. The medium is MU otherwise from the penalty immediately following in the
supposed to end at 4 months and 10 days. The maximum is supposed to
commence from 4 months and 11 days + 1 month and 20 days. 5 months and TAU above mentioned respective graduated scale.
30 days or exactly 6months. MU When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime in
some manner not especially provided for in the four
Now, you compare that with what Article 76. They do not tally. TAU preceding rules, the courts, proceeding by analogy, shall
This is what Article 76 says. This is what the formula says. Now, conclusion
the formula in the Penal Code is mathematically wrong, or inaccurate. But at
MU impose corresponding penalties upon those guilty as
any rate, that is the answer. TAU principals of the frustrated felony or attempt to commit
MU the same, and upon accomplices and accessories.
Sometimes it is easy because you just follow Article 71. What
follows temporal? Prision Mayor. What follows Prision Mayor? Prision
Correccional. But sometimes, it might be difficult to determine the graduation
if the penalty is something different. So, Article 61 is the continuation of
Article 50-57.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 110 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU penalty for a crime is prision mayor maximum to reclusion temporal medium.
1. When the penalty prescribed for the felony is single and indivisible, the TAU How many periods? Three. The problem is that 2/3 belongs to reclusion
penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately following that temporal, while 1/3 belongs to prision mayor. So, two parts belong to
MU
indivisible penalty in the respective graduated scale prescribed in reclusion temporal, 1 part belongs to prision mayor.
Article 71 for this Code. TAU
MU What is one degree lower than that? The law says the penalty
Suppose the penalty for the crime is death, which is mandatory. Single, TAU lower in degree shall be composed of the period immediately following the
it is indivisible. One degree lower is perpetua; another degree lower is minimum prescribed and of the two next following. What follows prision
temporal. The same thing with reclusion perpetua. This is just easy. MU mayor? Prision correccional. What follows now is the minimum period,
TAU which follows the maximum. So, medium plus the next two. That is the
MU penalty for the accomplice. Follow the same pattern for the penalty for an
2. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is compound of two accessory.
TAU
indivisible penalties, or of one or more divisible penalties to be imposed
to their full extent, the penalty next lower in degree shall be that MU
immediately following the lesser of the penalties prescribed in the TAU 5. When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime in same manner not
respective graduated scale. MU especially provided for in the four preceding rules, the courts, proceeding by
analogy, shall impose corresponding penalties upon those guilty as principals
There is only one example. Reclusion perpetua to death. In the light of TAU of the frustrated felony or of attempt to commit the same and upon
People vs. Roxas, perpetua is still indivisible penalty. That is the penalty for MU accomplices and accessories.
murder. That is the penalty for homicide, parricide. That is the penalty for TAU
robbery with homicide. When the penalty for a crime is not among those mentioned in #'s
MU 1 to 4 example the penalty for the crime is reclusion temporal medium to
Now, supposed I am only an accomplice where the penalty is 1 degree TAU maximum, that is the range of 14 years, 8 months and 1 day to 20 years, and
lower. What is 1 degree lower? According to Article 61(2), the penalty, MU there are only two periods. What is one degree lower? By analogy, that of 1
which follows the lesser of the two. Now, which is the lesser of the two? degree lower is prision mayor maximum to reclusion temporal minimum.
TAU
Perpetua. What follows perpetua? Reclusion temporal. So, the penalty for an What is two degree lower? Prision mayor minimum to prision medium.
accomplice is reclusion temporal. MU What is 3 degree lower? Prision correccional medium to prision correccional
TAU maximum. So, by analogy, that is how you graduated penalties according to
Question: What is the penalty for the accessories? MU article 61.
Answer: What follows reclusion temporal? Prision mayor. That's Rule #2 or
when the penalty is composed of one or more divisible penalties. The penalty TAU ILLUSTRATION. Suppose the penalty prescribed of a crime is reclusion
is composed of 2 divisibles for example when the penalty of the crime is MU temporal maximum and there are many crimes in the Penal Code with that
prision mayor to reclusion temporal. It is the entire range of 6 years and 1 day TAU kind of penalty. You apply only one, reclusion temporal maximum. So, the
to 20 years. That's the entire duration. Two divisibles combined. penalty is presently ranging from 17 years, 4 months and 1 day to 20 years.
MU
Now, what is the penalty for the accomplice? One degree lower. TAU What is the degree lower? By analogy, reclusion temporal
What is one degree lower? The penalty which follows the lesser of the two MU medium is already 1 degree lower. Not only period, it is 1 degree lower by
Prision Mayor. So the penalty which follows prision mayor is one degree TAU itself. Reclusion temporal minimum is considered degree lower. So, two
lower. So, it's prision correccional followed by arresto mayor. degrees already, by analogy.
MU
TAU And of course what do you call that penalty? Reclusion temporal
3. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of one or MU maximum. That is divisible penalty because it has fixed duration. And being
two indivisible penalties and the maximum period of another divisible divisible, it has its own minimum, medium, maximum for the purpose of
penalty, the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the
TAU mitigating and aggravating circumstances.
medium and maximum periods of the proper divisible penalty and the MU
maximum period of the proper divisible penalty and the maximum TAU
period of that immediately following in said respective graduated scale. MU
ARTICLE 62. Effect of the attendance of mitigating or
There is only one example that you can give there - reclusion aggravating circumstances and of habitual delinquency.
temporal maximum to death, because death is indivisible. Reclusion perpetua TAU
is indivisible followed by reclusion temporal maximum, which is supposed to MU
Mitigating or aggravating circumstances and habitual
be divisible. delinquency shall be taken into account for the purpose of
TAU
diminishing or increasing the penalty in conformity with
So, that is the rule. The trouble is you cannot use it because under MUT the following rules:
the Penal Code, there is only one crime, which carries that penalty - murder. AU
But the trouble is the Heinous Crime Law changed the penalty of murder to MU
reclusion perpetua to death. So, there is no crime in the Penal Code now 1. Aggravating circumstances, which in
which carries this kind of penalty. TAU themselves constitute a crime especially punishable by law
MU or which are included by the law in defining a crime and
4. When the penalty provided for the crime is composed of several periods, TAU
prescribing the penalty therefore shall not be taken into
corresponding to different divisible penalties, the penalty next lower in degree account for the purpose of increasing the penalty.
shall be composed of the period immediately following the minimum
MU
prescribed and of the two next following which shall be taken from the TAU 2. The same rule shall not be taken into
penalty prescribed, if possible; otherwise from the penalty immediately MU
following in the above mentioned respective graduated scale. account for any aggravating circumstance inherent in the
crime to such a degree that it must of necessity accompany
Reclusion temporal, how many periods? Three maximum, the commission thereof.
medium, minimum. What follows? Prision Mayor, maximum, medium,
minimum. When the penalty prescribed of a crime is composed of several
periods, corresponding to different divisible penalties, for example, the

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 111 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances TAU When the aggravating circumstance constitutes the crime
which arise from the moral attributes of the offender, or MU itself.
from his private relations with the offended party, or from TAU
Example: Arson. What constitutes the crime of Arson? When you destroy
any other personal cause, shall not only serve to aggravate MU another person's property by fire. Now, under Article 14, one of the
or mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices and aggravating circumstance is when the crime is committed by means of fire.
TAU
accessories as to whom such circumstances are attendant. So, the use of fire under Article 14 will no longer be considered as
MU aggravating in arson because it is the use of fire, which is the very crime of
TAU arson itself.
4. The circumstances which consist in the
MU
material execution of the act, or in the means employed to
When it is included in the definition of the crime.
accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the TAU
liability of those persons only who had knowledge of them MU Example: The crime of robbery committed in the house, under Article 299.
at the time of the execution of the act or their cooperation TAU That is with the use of force upon things. When you enter the house to rob it,
therein. MU the fact that the crime is committed in the dwelling of the offended party is no
TAU longer aggravating because dwelling or the crime committed in the house is
already included in the definition of the crime. In the crime of qualified theft,
5. Habitual delinquency shall have the MU that the crime is committed with abuse of confidence by the offender is no
following effects: TAU
longer aggravating because abuse of confidence is already an element of the
MU crime of qualified theft.
a) Upon a third conviction the culprit TAU
shall be sentenced to the penalty provided by the law for MU When it is inherent in the crime.
the last crime of which he be found guilty and to the TAU
additional penalty of prision correccional in its medium MU Question: When is a circumstance inherent in a crime?
Answer: When it must necessarily accompany the commission of the crime.
and maximum periods. TAU
MU Question: What are those?
b) Upon a forth conviction, the culprit TAU Answer: Examples are evident premeditation is not aggravating in robbery
shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for the last MU because when the robbers commit the crime, they have really planned it. So,
it is already inherent. So, also in treason.
crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional TAU
penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium MU
Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from
periods; and TAU the moral attributes of the offender, or from his private
MU relations with the offended party, or from any other personal
c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction, TAU
cause, shall not only serve to aggravate or mitigate the
the culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for MU
liability of the principals, accomplices and accessories as to
the last crime of which he is found guilty and to the TAU
whom such circumstances are attendant.
additional penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period MU
to reclusion temporal in its minimum period. TAU
MU Example: A and B commit the crime together. A acted with evident
TAU premeditation B did not. Under the rules on evident premeditation, it only
Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the MU affects A and not B. Or, A and B commit a crime together. B acted with
total of the two penalties to be imposed upon the offender, passion or obfuscation. A did not. B will be the only one credited with the
mitigating circumstances, not A. Or, those which arise from the public
in conformity herewith shall in no case exceed 30 years. TAU relations of the parties. A conspired with B to rob the father of A. So, A
MU conspired with a stranger to rob his own father. Now, relationship is a
For the purpose of this article, a person shall be TAU mitigating circumstance to A, but it will not favor B because B is not related
deemed to be habitual delinquent, is within a period often MUT to the victim.
years from the date of his release or last conviction of the AU Or those which are personal to the offender. For Example: I will
crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robo, conspire with a 17-year old minor to commit a crime. Minority will favor him
MU
hurto, estafa or falsification, he is found guilty of any said but will not favor me because I am not a minor. Or, I will conspire with A to
TAU commit a crime. I am a recidivist. He is a first offender. Recidivism will
crimes a third time or oftener.
MU affect me but does not affect him.

TAU So when it comes to these circumstances, they will only affect the
Aggravating circumstances have the effect of increasing the person concerned. Does this not violate the rule on conspiracy, that the act of
MU one is the act of all? It does not. When the law says it in conspiracy it simply
penalty. They have to be taken into account the purpose of increasing the
penalty. However, Article 62 says in the following cases the aggravating TAU means that we are all liable but the law does not say that in conspiracy your
circumstance is not taken into account anymore. Meaning, the aggravating MU mitigating is also my mitigating or my aggravating is also your aggravating.
circumstances will not affect the penalty anymore and there are three, based
on this Article.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 112 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU Answer: NO. Because the cut-off point is not the date of the commission of
the offense for the 3rd or 4th time, but the date of the conviction for the offense.
The circumstances which consist in the material execution TAU It is evident that the law says he is found guilty of any of the said offense a 3rd
of the act, or in the means employed to accomplish it, shall MU time. So, it is the cut-off period, the date of the conviction and not the date of
serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of those persons TAU the commission of the offense.
only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution MU
TAU Suppose I am found guilty of robbery as a principal - 1st offense.
of the act or their cooperation therein. On the 2nd offense as an accomplice, and the 3 rd offense of robbery as an
MU accessory. So, definitely the crimes I committed are all mentioned there. But
Question: How about circumstances, which refer to the manner which the TAU for the three times that I have been found guilty of these crimes, I was in
crime, are committed or the ways and means employed to commit the crime? MU different capacities. Now, I am convicted for the 3rd time as an accessory.
Answer: It will affect the person who employed the ways and means and the
accused that have knowledge of it. TAU
MU Question: Am I habitual delinquent?
Example: I will hire a killer to murder X, paying the former P100, 000. I TAU Answer: YES. What is important is that I am found guilty to these crimes
will leave to him the manner of killing X. He used treachery to kill the victim. without regard to the manner of the participation, whether principal,
Now, will treachery affect me because I m the one ordered him to kill but I MU accomplice or accessory.
have no idea of how he will do it. Now, under Rule #4, treachery will affect TAU
the killer, but it will not affect me because I have no knowledge. MU Suppose I was found guilty for the 1 st time of consummated
TAU robbery, then 2nd time frustrated theft, 3rd time attempted estafa.
But suppose I will say you kill that guy but tell me exactly how you
will do it. I will have to approve your method. So, I have the knowledge of MU
the manner the crime is to be committed. Under #4, this affects my liability. TAU Question: Am I habitual delinquent?
Even it did not employ treachery; I will still be affected because I have the MU Answer: YES. The law does not care about the stages of the execution.
knowledge as to the ways and means employed. What matters is the crime, regardless of whether it is attempted, frustrated or
TAU
consummated.
MU
Question: How #3 different from #4? TAU Now, under paragraph 5 or Article 62, where to culprit who is
Answer: In paragraph 3, the circumstance affect only the person concerned habitual delinquent commits less serious physical injuries, he will be
regardless of the fact whether he has knowledge or not. But if the
MU
penalized for such crime. But this time, the court will have to impose upon
circumstance affects the ways and means employed the knowledge although TAU him an additional penalty. He shall be sentenced to an additional penalty,
he did employ that manner will sufficiently affect him. MU ranging from prision correccional medium to maximum and upon his 4 th
TAU conviction, prision mayor minimum to medium.
MU
Habitual Delinquency TAU You commit the same crime and you are convicted for the 5th or 6th
MU time. For every commission, the penalty should now range from prision
This is the third instance of criminal repetition. The first two were mayor maximum to reclusion temporal minimum, a possible 10 years and 8
recidivism and reiteration or individuality. A person is habitual delinquent if TAU months. So you will notice that the additional penalty given is higher by
within a period of ten years from the date of his release or last conviction of MU 1,000 or 2,000 times than the principal penalty.
the crime of serious or less serious physical injuries, robo, hurto, estafa, or TAU
falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time oftener.
MU
Question: Is habitual delinquency a crime in itself?
TAU Answer: NO. Even if it carries a penalty. It is a sort of extraordinary
Elements: MU aggravating circumstance which, if present in the commission of the felony,
1. there must be a third conviction; TAU will call for the imposition of an additional penalty which is separate and
rd th th
2. the crime committed by the offender for the 3 , 4 , or 5 times should distinct of the principal penalty for the present crime committed.
be among those mentioned in Article 62, like serious physical injuries, MU
less serious physical injuries, theft, robbery, estafa an falsification; Question: Can a person be a habitual delinquent and at the same time a
3. there must be a time gap of not more than ten years between convictions. TAU recidivist?
MU YES. For example, my first conviction is robbery; the 2 nd conviction is theft.
Actually, upon the second conviction, I am already a recidivist. My 3 rd
Questions: When will you compute? What is the starting point in computing TAU conviction is estafa. You will notice that the three offenses are all covered by
the period? MUT Article 62. So, I am a habitual delinquent but I am also a recidivist because
Answer: The law says either from the date of final conviction or last release, AU all crimes are embraced in the same title of the Penal Code. They are all
because if you count it only from the last conviction, it will be more than ten crimes against property. So, I am both a recidivist and at the same time a
MU
years, but it still within ten years from release. habitual delinquent.
TAU
MU Question: How will that affect the penalty?
Question: What is the cut-off point of the period? Is it the conviction or is it Answer: Simple. Since you are a recidivist, the penalty for present crime
the commission of the offense for the 2nd time? will have to be imposed in the maximum period. And because of habitual
TAU
delinquency, additional penalty under Article 62. So, there is no conflict
For example, it is now my 3rd time to commit theft or robbery or MU between the 2 sets of offenses. But the person can definitely also be a habitual
estafa or falsification or serious physical injuries. It is my 3 rd time within 10 TAU delinquent without being a recidivist if no 2 crime out of the 3 are embraced
years, so today is exactly the 10 th year, but definitely, I will be found guilty MU in the same title of the Penal Code
not today. It will take time. So, if you will look at the date when I will be
convicted, it will definitely be beyond 10 years. For example, 1st conviction is serious physical injuries, 2nd
conviction is estafa, and 3rd conviction is falsification. You will notice that
not one of the three is embraced under the same title in the Penal Code. A
Question: Is habitual delinquency applicable? physical injury is against person. Estafa is against property. Falsification is

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 113 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
against public interest. So, I am not a recidivist but definitely I am a habitual MU
delinquent.
3. When the commission of the act is attended by
TAU
some mitigating circumstance and there is no aggravating
MU
circumstance, the lesser penalty shall be applied.
TAU
Question: Distinguish habitual delinquency form recidivism. MU
Answer: When both mitigating and aggravating
TAU circumstances attended the commission of the act, the
MU court shall reasonably allow them to offset one another in
TAU consideration of their number and importance, for the
MU purpose of applying the penalty in accordance with the
TAU preceding rules, according to the result of such
PEOPLE vs. KAPINITAN
MU compensation.
Issue: May the court admit evidence to prove habitual delinquency if the
TAU
same was not alleged in the information and the evidence is previously MU
objected to by the defense? TAU
MU Question: What happens if a person is sentenced of a heinous crime, which
Held: In a previous ruling, that of People vs. Partinada, the Court ruled that carries a penalty of death only? So, the penalty is single and indivisible, only
if recidivism is not alleged in the information, and it was vigorously objected TAU one penalty. There are many crimes now heinous, which prescribe the penalty
to by the defense, the prosecution should not be allowed to prove it because it MU of only death, mandatory.
must be alleged in the information. TAU Answer: It should be imposed by the court regardless of any mitigating or
aggravating circumstance. So, there is no more effect of mitigating.
Recidivism and habitual delinquency are almost the same. They MU
belong to the same family. There is no reason why the ruling in Partinada TAU Any ordinary mitigating circumstance can no longer lower it, even
will not apply. Hence, the trial court was correct in excluding the MU if you plea guilty. Even if you surrender, the court will impose the death
prosecutions evidence with respect to the aggravating circumstance of penalty. Of course, you cannot also increase it because it is the highest. The
TAU
recidivism and habitual delinquency, because these were not alleged in the same situation applies if the penalty of the crime is perpetua because it is still
information and the presentation was objected to vigorously by the defense MU considered as indivisible. It shall be imposed by the court regardless of any
counsel. TAU mitigating or aggravating circumstance.
MU
While it is true that to prove recidivism, it is necessary to prove the Question: What happens if the crime carries reclusion perpetua to death?
charge in the information and to attach thereto certified copies of the TAU What is now the effect of mitigating or aggravating?
sentences rendered against the accused, such aggravating circumstance may MU Answer: It depends. If there is an aggravating circumstance, you impose the
still be given credit thereto by the trial court if the accused does not object to TAU higher penalty, like death. If there is a mitigating circumstance, and no
the presentation of evidence. aggravating circumstance, you impose lower of the two - perpetua. If there
MU
are two mitigating and no aggravating, you still impose perpetua.
It is written that this pronouncement applies specifically to TAU
recidivism. But we do not see any reason why this cannot be applied by MU So, in other words, either the higher or the lower, upstairs or
analogy to habitual delinquency, which is also a form of plurality of crimes. TAU downstairs. But it shall not go lower. The only way of lowering this to the
MU penalty much lower in degree is by privilege mitigating circumstance.
Ordinary mitigating has no more effect.
TAU
MU
ARTICLE 63. Rules for the application of RECIDIVISM HABITUAL DELIQUENCY
TAU
indivisible penalties. In all cases in which the law Recidivism is broader. Any two But to be a habitual delinquent,
MU offenses, all that are necessary is for the crimes are more specific.
prescribed a single indivisible penalty, it shall be applied
the two offenses committed before and These are all limited to those
by the courts regardless of any mitigating or aggravating TAU now are embraced in the same title of mentioned in Article 62.
circumstance that may have attended the commission of MU the Penal Code.
deed. The second conviction is sufficient to There must at least a third
TAU make a person a recidivist. conviction.
MUT There is no time limitation between The time gap between the
In all cases in which the law prescribed a penalty the prior conviction and the present previous conviction and
AU
composed of two indivisible penalties, the following rules conviction. It could be twenty years present should not be more
MU
shall be observed in the application thereof: ago. than 10 years.
TAU This simply maximizes the principal This cause for the imposition
1. When the commission of the deed there is present MU penalty for the new crime. of a separate and distinct
additional penalty.
only one aggravating circumstance, the greater penalty
TAU
shall be applied. This is the reason cited by the SC in the second lucas decision,
MU
because in the original decision, the SC ruled that perpetua is already divisible
2. When there are neither mitigating nor TAU penalty. But upon reconsideration by the SC en banc, it ruled despite RA
MU 7659, which says that perpetua has duration of 20 years and 1 day to 40 years,
aggravating circumstances and there is no aggravating it remains an indivisible penalty. Then the SC cited, as one of its reasons,
circumstance, the lesser penalty shall be applied. Article 63, when the penalty for the crime is composed of two indivisible and
there is only one example, perpetua to death. Now, if you will say that
perpetua is divisible, then Article 63 becomes obsolete.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 114 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are
TAU present, the court shall reasonably offset those of one class
MU against the other according to their relative weight.
ARTICLE 64. Rules for the application of penalties, which TAU
contain three periods. In all cases in which the penalties MU For example, Vhenigna Vangkbiyud was convicted of homicide. The
trial court appreciated the following modifying circumstance:
prescribed by the law contain three periods, whether it be TAU
a single divisible penalty or composed of three different MU  The aggravating circumstance of nocturnity
penalties, each one of which forms a period in accordance TAU  The mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation
 The mitigating circumstance of no intent to commit so grave
with the provision of Article 76 and 77, the court shall MU
a wrong
observe for the application of the penalty the following TAU  Illiteracy
rules, according to whether there are or are not mitigating MU  Voluntary surrender
or aggravating circumstance: TAU
MU The imposable penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal, the
range of which is 12 years and 1 day to 20 years. Taking into account the
1. When there are neither aggravating nor TAU attendant mitigating and aggravating circumstances and applying the
mitigating circumstances, they shall impose the penalty MU Indeterminate Sentence Law, determine the proper penalty to be imposed
prescribed by law in its medium period. TAU upon the accused.
2. When only a mitigating circumstance is MU You can fix the maximum. There is 1 aggravating. But the
present in the commission of the act, they shall impose the TAU mitigating are many - 4. What is the penalty? If we apply paragraph 4, 1
penalty in its minimum period. MU mitigating offset the aggravating. So there is a balance. And there is still 3
3. When both mitigating and aggravating TAU mitigating left. The penalty should be lowered by one degree because
according to paragraph 5, when there are two or more mitigating
circumstance is present in the commission of the act, they MU circumstance, the court shall impose the penalty next lower that prescribed by
shall impose the penalty in its maximum period. TAU law. But this will not apply because the law says two or more mitigating and
4. When both mitigating and aggravating MU no aggravating is present. So, when there is one aggravating, paragraph 5 will
circumstances are present, the court shall reasonably TAU not apply.
offset those of one class against the other according to their MU In other words, the correct penalty there is paragraph 2 - the
relative weight. TAU penalty should be in the minimum period. The condition laid down in
5. When there are two or more mitigating MU paragraph 5 for the lowering of the penalty by 1 degree if there are 2 or more
circumstances and no aggravating circumstances are TAU mitigating circumstances without any aggravating is not present. The law is
very clear.
present, the court shall impose the penalty next lower to MU
that prescribed by law, in the period that it may deem TAU So, for example, when the crime, punishable by reclusion
applicable, according to the number and nature of such temporal, was committed there was voluntary surrender, passion or
MU obfuscation, no aggravating circumstance is present, paragraph 5 should be
circumstances.
TAU applied. The penalty should be lowered to prision mayor, 1 degree lower.
6. Whatever may be the number and nature of However, since the problem states that there is an aggravating circumstance of
MU
the aggravating circumstances, the courts shall not impose nocturnity, paragraph 5 can no longer apply. In other words, the penalty
TAU
a greater penalty than that prescribed by law, in its should still remain within the range of reclusion temporal.
MU
maximum period.
TAU Now, suppose it is the other way around. There are 2 or more
aggravating without any mitigating. Should the penalty be increased by 1
When the limits of each period, the court shall MU degree? No, because of paragraph 5. No matter how many aggravating
determine the extent of the penalty according to the circumstances are present, you cannot increase the penalty by 1 degree higher.
TAU The complete definition of aggravating circumstance is, if present in the
number and nature of the aggravating and mitigating
circumstances and the greater and lesser extent of the civil MU
commission of the crime, will call for the imposition of the maximum penalty
TAU without exceeding the penalty prescribed by law.
produced by the crime.
MUT Question: What happens of the penalty should be within the medium period
AU of prision mayor - 6 years and 1 day to 10 years?
Example: The crime is punishable by prision mayor minimum, medium,
Answer: According to paragraph 6, the court should sentence the accused to
maximum period. No mitigating, no aggravating. According to article 63, the MU
a specific penalty stating the exact number of years, months and day within
penalty should be somewhere within the medium period. That would be TAU
that range. Therefore, I can sentence him to 6 years and 1 day. That is the
ranging from 8 years and 1 day to 10 years. If there is a mitigating, the MU
least I can sentence him to 10 years, or any combination within. So,
penalty should be fixed somewhere in the minimum period. On the other
practically there are 700 possibilities.
hand, if there is an aggravating, it should fixed within the maximum period of
prision mayor. TAU
The SC has once said that the court should be careful in fixing
MU penalties because any error may have varied consequences, like in a case
Just like that. It all depends on any mitigating or aggravating. Now, if TAU
where the prison term imposed upon the accused has been increased
you know them try to offset them with each other. And after offsetting, try to
erroneously, to unduly prolong the confinement of the accused even for just
find out if there is a balance in favor of either mitigating or aggravating. If MU
one day is unjust in every sense of the word.
there is no balance, then you apply Rule #1. It should be within the medium.
Take note that in divisible penalty, there should be a minimum,
medium and minimum for the purpose of applying Article 64.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 115 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Question: Can we apply Article 64 to the crime of drug pushing? MU
Answer: Now, technically the provisions of Article 64 does not apply to TAU
majority of such conditions be present. The courts shall
special laws except when that special law adopts the nomenclature of the impose the penalty in the period which may be deemed
MU
penalties in the Penal Code. When the special law starts to use perpetua proper, in view of the number and nature of the conditions
temporal, then the provision of the RPC will now apply. On the other hand, TAU of exemption present or lacking.
when the special law says the penalty is 1 year and 10 months, obviously, this MU
will not apply. TAU
In other words, there is no perpetua or prision mayor or 1 degree MU
lower in special laws. Because the rule on aggravating or mitigating is only TAU When you commit a crime and there is an incomplete justifying or
peculiar to crimes under the Penal Code with their own distinct names for MU incomplete exempting circumstance, the penalty should be lowered by 1 or 2
penalties. When the special law adopts the penalties in the Penal Code, the degrees.
TAU
provisions of the RPC.
MU
That is very clear in the case of People vs. Simon because before TAU Question: So, what is Article 69?
the Heinous Crime Law, the penalty for drug pushing was life imprisonment MU Answer: It is a privilege mitigating circumstance where the penalty is
to death, but under the Heinous Crime Law, the penalty is reclusion perpetua lowered by at least one degree. But this is just a repetition of Article 13,
to death. So, it adopted now the rules in the Penal Code and there is a TAU paragraph 1. Under Article 13 on mitigating circumstance, the first mitigating
distinction between reclusion perpetua and life imprisonment. That is why the MU circumstance is incomplete justifying, incomplete exempting and it is also a
provisions of the RPC on the penalties will now apply to the Dangerous Drugs TAU mitigating circumstance with one difference. In Article 13, incomplete
Act. justifying exempting is only an additional circumstance, whereas in Article
MU
69, it is a privileged mitigating circumstance.
TAU
Question: How about the illegal possession of firearms? MU A perfect example is self-defense, where not all requisites to
The simple illegal possession under PD 1866, the penalty is justify the act are present. So, incomplete self-defense. You are charged with
TAU
reclusion temporal in the maximum period to reclusion perpetua. Now, can homicide. Your claim is self-defense. You were able to prove some requisite,
we apply Article 64 there? What is the maximum, medium, minimum period? MU but there is lacking - less than three. Applying Article 69, the penalty for you,
Answer: The only solution there is this perpetua is indivisible. That should TAU you should be convicted for homicide but the penalty should be lowered by 1
be the maximum penalty, the maximum period. MU or 2 degrees. Assuming only 1 degree, so from reclusion temporal, you will
be penalized to prision mayor.
Now, reclusion temporal maximum is actually a divisible penalty. TAU
It has a range of 17 years, 4 months and 1 day to 20 years. The medium and MU If we apply Article 13 to you, the penalty should be within the
the minimum must necessarily come from that penalty. How do you do it? TAU range of reclusion temporal minimum and such incomplete self-defense can
By splitting the upper part and the lower part. be offsetted by an aggravating circumstance. If we apply Article 69, you
MU
penalty will go down to prision mayor or even as far down to prision
20 years minus 17 years and 4 months. We will have to make this TAU correccional and incapable of offsetting by an aggravating.
19 years and 12 months minus 17 years and 4 months. The difference is two MU
years and 8 months. Divide it into two: 1year and 4 months. Therefore, the TAU
minimum years should range from 17 years, 4 months and 1 day to 18 years Question: Which will prevail: Article 69 or Article 13(1)?
and 8 months. MU
Answer: No one will prevail. Sometimes, Article 69 applies; sometimes
TAU Article 13(1) applies.
And then to continue, it is 18 years, 8 months and one day to 20 MU
years. That is the medium. The lower part is the minimum: the upper half is
the medium. Perpetua: which you cannot split is the maximum. That is the
TAU
Question: When will Article 13(1) apply, or when will Article 69 apply?
solution. MU When will incomplete justifying or incomplete exempting be treated as
TAU privileged, when will it be treated as ordinary mitigating?
MU Answer: The clue is in Article 69. We apply Article 69 when the majority of
PEOPLE vs. MISAL the requisites are present. Majority. So in self-defense, two out of three. So,
incomplete self-defense becomes a privileged mitigating circumstance.
244 SCRA 166 TAU
MU
The formula adopted by the Supreme Court to apply Article 64 is: TAU
The penalty for the single illegal possession of firearms is reclusion temporal MUT
maximum to reclusion perpetua. The maximum period perpetua; the medium ARTICLE 68. Penalty to be imposed upon a person under
is the upper half of reclusion temporal maximum. The minimum is the lower AU eighteen years of age. When the offender is a minor under
part of the reclusion temporal maximum. MU
eighteen years and his case is one coming under the
TAU
provision of the paragraph next to the last of Article 80 of
MU this Code, the following rules shall be observed:
TAU
Upon a person under fifteen but over nine years of
ARTICLE 69. Penalty to be imposed when the crime MU
age, who is not exempted from liability by reason of the
committed is not wholly excusable. A penalty lower by one TAU
court having declared that he acted with discernment, a
or two degrees than that prescribed by law shall be MU
discretionary penalty shall be imposed, but always lower
imposed if the deed is not wholly excusable by reason of
by two degrees at lest than that prescribed by law for the
the lack of some of the conditions required to justify the
crime which he committed.
same or to exempt from criminal liability in the several
cases mentioned in Article 11 and 12, provided that the

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 116 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
Upon a person over fifteen and under eighteen years TAU
of age the penalty next lower than that prescribed by law MU
shall be imposed, but always in the proper period. TAU
MU
TAU
MU
Suppose, the judge will say I will not give you to degrees lower
because you are incorrigible. TAU
MU
Question: Is the judge correct? TAU
Answer: The judge is wrong. The fact that the minor is incorrigible is not a
MU
ground to deny him of the benefit of Article 68. Being incorrigible is only a
ground to nullify the suspension of the sentence. TAU
MU
If he is incorrigible in the rehabilitation center, it is not a ground to TAU
deny him of the benefit of Article 68.
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU

TAU
MU
TAU
MUT
AU
MU
TAU
MU

TAU
MU
TAU
MU

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 117 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU disqualification, but your right has been suspended. Is it possible for me to
TAU serve simultaneously? Yes.
ARTICLE 70. Successive service of sentence. MU But there are penalties, which you cannot serve simultaneously
When the culprit has to serve two or more penalties, he TAU because their nature will not allow it. For example, for one penalty, you are
shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the MU sentenced to 2 years of prision correccional. For another penalty, you are
sentenced for 2 years of destierro. How can you be outside the jail and at the
penalties will so permit otherwise, the following rules shall
TAU same time within the jail? So, it is not allowed.
be observed:
MU
Or, if all of them are of the same nature, all imprisonment.
TAU Alright…for this crime 6 years of prision correccional, this one 4 years,
In the imposition of the penalties, the order of their
MU another one 1 year, then the 6 months of arresto mayor, 40 days of arresto
respective severity shall be followed so that they may be menor. They are all the same however, you cannot say that tomorrow, I will
executed successively or as nearly as may be possible, TAU serve the prision correccional, the other day I served arresto menor, etc… you
should a pardon have been granted, as to the penalty or MU cannot do that.
penalties first imposed, or should they have been served TAU
MU Meaning, after you are in jail for one day, you re only for one day
out. for one penalty. So, these are the instances where the penalties would not be
TAU
served simultaneously. So, what will happen? You serve them successively,
For the purpose of applying the provisions of the MU one after the other.
next preceding paragraph the respective severity of the TAU
penalties shall be determined in accordance with the MU Question: How will I serve them?
following scale: TAU Answer: You serve them in order of severity.
MU
1. Death, TAU
2. Reclusion Perpetua, MU
3. Reclusion Temporal, TAU Severity
4. Prision Mayor, MU
For example, "Miss Vhenigna Vangkhiyud, you are sentenced to
5. Prision Correccional, TAU death. Another crime, you are sentenced to 20 years of reclusion temporal.
6. Arresto Mayor, MU Still another crime, you are sentenced to 5 days of arresto menor.
7. Arresto Menor, TAU
8. Destierro, MU
Question: Which should be served first?
9. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification, TAU Answer: You first serve the death penalty.
10. Temporal Absolute Disqualification, MU
11. Suspension from public office, the right to TAU
vote and be voted for, the right to follow a profession Question: Now, what happen to the reclusion temporal, to the arresto menor?
MU Answer: Never mind you are already dead! It is not the other way around.
or calling, and TAU You start from the most severe going down. So, that is the order of service.
12. Public Censure. MU
However, this is subject to the three-fold rule. According to the
TAU
Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next MU rule, the maximum stay in jail for a person should not exceed the most severe
multiplied by 3.
preceding, the maximum duration of the convict's sentence TAU
shall not be more than three-fold the length of time MU For example, for one offense, you are sentence to 1 year of prision
corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed correccional. Another offense, 6 months of arresto mayor, another offense 5
upon him. Ho other penalty to which he may be liable TAU months. And then for another offense, you are sentenced to 8 months.
Another crime 8 months, another crime 5 months, and still another crime 5
shall be inflicted after the sum total of those imposed MU months.
equals the same maximum period. TAU
Now, if we are to let him serve the sentence one after the other,
MUT what is the total? Four years and two months. So, that is you penalty if you
Such maximum period shall in no case exceed AU
will serve them one by one. But if you look at the most serious, you multiply
forty years. In applying the provision of this rule the that by 3, so shorter by 1 year and 2 months. Under the three-fold rule, after
MU
duration of perpetual penalties (pena perpetua) shall be serving three years, you should be released.
TAU
computed at thirty years.
MU Question: What happens to the 1 year and 2 months?
Answer: It is as if served already. This is for the benefit of the convict.
TAU Therefore, the three-fold rule does not apply when the application of the rule
If allowed, they should be served simultaneously. If not possible will not benefit the convict.
MU
or there nature will not allow it, then serve them successively. Meaning, one
after the other. TAU
MU For example, a penalty of one year for a crime, another crime is 6
months; another crime is 2 months, 3 months and 1 month. Adding these all
Question: What penalties can be served simultaneously? up totals two years. So, if you will apply the three-fold rule, six years. If
Answer: Those, which are possible to be served simultaneously. For served one after the other, only two years. So, instead of shortening, you are
example, in one crime, I was sentenced to 6 years of prision correccional. On prolonging. That is an instance of misapplication of the three-fold rule.
other crimes, I was sentenced to 15 years of temporary disqualification, or 20
years of absolute disqualification. There is no imprisonment in

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 118 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Not, suppose a person was found guilty of five counts of murder. MU Question: What happens to the penalty for the lower offense?
He was sentenced to 25 years of reclusion perpetua for every murder. The TAU Answer: No more. It is absorbed. You only serve the highest penalty for the
total is 125 years. So, if we will apply the three-fold rule, it would be shorter complex crime. So the 3 systems are all recognized in the RPC.
MU
than 50 years. Now suppose he will survive. Will he be released, applying
the three-fold rule? No, because of the second to the last paragraph states, TAU
such maximum period shall in no case exceed 40 years. Meaning, after 40 MU
ARTICLE 48, RPC. Penalty for complex crimes.
years, he should be released. What happens to the remaining years? Never TAU
mind it. When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less
MU grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for
TAU committing the other, the penalty for the most serious crime
Under the RPC, there is no such thing as imprisonment for life. MU
Because this article is automatic. Even if I will sentence you for 100 times of
shall be imposed, the same to be applied to its maximum
TAU period.
reclusion perpetua, after 40 years you should be released because of this
provision. So, technically, under the RPC, there is no such thing as perpetual MU
imprisonment, except the perpetual disqualification, which, according to TAU Let us compare the order of penalty with the graduation of penalty.
Article 41, will be for the rest of your life. MU
TAU
ARTICLE 41, RPC. Reclusion perpetua and MU
reclusion temporal, their accessory penalties. The penalties TAU
of reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal shall carry MU
with them that of civil interdiction for life or during the TAU
period of the sentence as the case may be, and that of MU
perpetual absolute disqualification which the offender shall TAU ARTICLE 71, RPC. Graduated Scales. In case in which
suffer even though pardoned as to the principal penalty, MU the law prescribed a penalty lower or higher by one or
unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in TAU more degrees than another given penalty, the rules
pardon. MU prescribed in Article 61 shall be observed in graduating
TAU such penalty.
MU
That is why every country has its own system of penalties. Our TAU The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from
System is different form other Asian countries. There are 3 systems of MU the graduated scale in which is comprised the given
penalties, which are recognized. One system is called "MATERIAL
ACCUMULATION SYSTEM." Meaning, if you commit 2 or more crimes TAU
penalty. The courts, in applying such lower or higher
and you are sentenced to 2 or more penalties, you have to serve all of them, MU penalty, shall observe the following graduated scales:
even if it goes beyond the rest of your life. Literally, you will die in jail of old TAU
age. If you will not die after serving them all, you will be released. If you
will die earlier, it's ok. But that is practically saying there is no hope for you. MU
TAU Scale No. 1
MU
Another system is called "JUDICIAL ACCUMULATION 1. Death
TAU
SYSTEM”. When you reach a certain point, you should be released already.
MU 2. Reclusion Perpetua
TAU 3. Reclusion Temporal
The third system is the "ABSORPTION SYSTEM". You only MU 4. Prision Mayor
serve the highest penalty. The minor penalties are deemed absorbed by the 5. Prision Correccional
service of the highest penalty.
TAU 6. Arresto Mayor
Question: Which of the 3 is recognized by the RPC? MU 7. Destierro
Answer: All of the 3 re recognized. TAU 8. arresto Menor
9. Public Censure
1. The accumulation system is evident in the first part of Article MUT
70. That when the nature of penalties will not allow a AU
10. Fine
continuous service, he should serve them in the order of MU
severity. He should serve them simultaneously under the
TAU Scale No. 2
material accumulation system.
MU
2. The judicial accumulation system is manifested in the 2 nd part
1. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification
of the Article 70 - the three-fold rule. That the maximum TAU 2. Temporal Absolute Disqualification
system should not exceed the most severe multiplied by 3
MU 3. Suspension from Public Office, The Right to
and in no case should a person be confined for more than 40 Vote and to be Voted for, The right to follow a
years. TAU
MU Profession or Calling
3. The "absorption system" is manifested in Article 48 - the 4. Public Censure
penalty for the complex crimes. The penalty for the complex 5. Fine
crimes is based on the higher offense to be imposed in the
maximum period.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 119 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
In Article 70, the sentence of penalties from Mayor down is MU Question: Are fines divisible into periods? Minimum, medium or maximum?
Arresto Menor and Destierro. If you will look at article 71, there are TAU Answer: NO. Fines are not divisible into periods.
differences. It's in the reverse.
MU
Question: Can they be graduated into degrees? 1 degree lower, 1 degree
TAU higher? How do they graduate fine by degrees?
Question: What penalty follows arresto mayor? MU Answer: It is found in Article 75.
Answer: The correct answer is under Article 70, it is arresto menor followed TAU
by destierro; whereas in Article 71, it is destierro followed by arresto menor.
MU
TAU ARTICLE 75. RPC: Increasing or reducing the penalty of
Question: Is there a conflict between these two articles? MU fine by one or more degrees. Whenever it may be necessary
Answer: There is no conflict because these 2 are talking of 2 different topics.
TAU to increase or reduce the penalty of fine by one or more
In Article 71, the issue is graduation of penalties; whereas in MU degrees, it shall be increased or reduced, respectively, for
Article 70, the issue is successive service of sentence. TAU each degree, by one-fourth of the maximum amount
MU prescribed by law, without however, changing the
Example: A, B, and C are charged criminally. A as principal, B as
accomplice, and C as accessory. Suppose, all of them are found guilty. The TAU
minimum.
penalty for A is arresto mayor. What is the penalty for B as an accomplice MU
and C as an accessory? TAU The same rules shall be shall be observed with
regard of fines that do not consist of a fixed amount, but re
What article do we have to apply there? Article 70? Or Article MU
71? So, the issue in the above problem is not that whether you are sentenced TAU
made proportional.
to two or more penalties, but the issue is what is one degree or two degrees. MU
So, the article to apply there is Article 71, because the issue is graduation -
TAU
what is one degree or two degrees lower. So, based on that, the answer is: B
as an accomplice should be sentenced to the penalty of destierro; whereas C, MU
as an accessory, should be sentenced to arresto menor. TAU ARTICLE 77. When the penalty is a complex one
MU composed of three distinct penalties. In cases in which the
I you will apply Article 70, it is reversed. It is now the accomplice
who will be sentenced to arresto menor and the accessory will be for destierro. TAU law prescribes a penalty composed of three distinct
So, since that is the problem, the issue there again is the graduation of penalty MU penalties, each one shall form period, the lightest of them
and not the successive sentence. TAU shall be the minimum the next the medium and the most
Next, A is charged criminally for three separate offenses, and he
MU severe the maximum period.
was found guilty in all of the crimes. For one crime, the court sentenced him TAU
for 6 months or arresto mayor. For the second crime, the court sentenced him MU Whenever the penalty prescribed does not have
for 6 years of destierro, and for the third crime, he was sentenced to 5 day of TAU one of the forms specially provided for in this Code, the
arresto menor.
Question: How will A serve these penalties? That is not graduation, but that MU periods shall be distributed applying by analogy the
is the succession of sentences. TAU prescribed rules.
Answer: So, he has to serve first the penalty of 6 months of arresto mayor. MU
After that, he has to serve 5 days of Arresto Menor. After that, he will now
serve the penalty of destierro.
TAU
MU
So, we will not apply Article 71 because what is asked is service of TAU Question: What is a complex penalty?
sentence. So, this answer depends on what the question is. Answer: a complex penalty is a penalty prescribed by law for a complex
MU crime, which is based on the higher offense to be imposed on its maximum
Question: Now, why is that in Article 71, destierro is higher than arresto period. This definition sounds correct, but it is wrong. A complex penalty
menor? TAU has nothing to do with complex crime. According to article 77, a complex
Answer: It is because destierro is a correccional penalty, while arresto menor MU penalty is a penalty composed of three distinct penalties each one shall form a
is a light penalty. Obviously, a correccional penalty ranks higher than a light TAU period.
penalty. Very simple.
MUT The best example is the penalty for the crime committed by a
Question: Why is it that Article 70, it is the reverse? Arresto Menor, which AU resident alien, under Article 114, last paragraph. Treason may be committed
is a light penalty comes first before destierro which is correccional penalty. MU by a Filipino citizen or a resident alien.
Why?
Answer: Destierro is a correccional penalty and does not involve the TAU
imprisonment, but only banishment. Our common sense will tell us that the MU Question: Suppose, a person who committed treason is an alien, but residing
penalty, which consists in the deprivation of freedom, is more severe than a in the Philippines. Under Article 114, last paragraph, what is the penalty for
penalty, which is not confinement. that crime?
TAU Answer: The penalty for a resident alien who commits treason is reclusion
MU temporal to death. So, there are 3, but in one penalty. In effect there are 3
ARTICLE 66. Imposition of fines. In imposing TAU penalties.
fines, the courts may fix any amount within the limits MU
established by the law; fixing the amount in each case
Question: Is that divisible?
attention shall be given, not only to the mitigating and Answer: Yes, under Article 77, that is divisible penalty.
aggravating circumstances, but more particularly to the
wealth or means of the culprit.
Question: What is the maximum period? The minimum?

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 120 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Answer: According to Article 77, the lightest of them shall be the minimum. MU therewith, the relations of the convicts among themselves and other persons,
The next, the medium, and the most severe is the maximum. With that, you TAU the relief which they may receive and their diet.
can apply the effect of mitigating or aggravating circumstances under Article
MU
64. If there is no mitigating, the penalty should be reclusion perpetua. If there The regulations shall make provisions for the separation of the
is aggravating, the alien will be sentenced to death. And if there is mitigating TAU sexes in different institutions, or at least into different department and also for
and no aggravating, the penalty should be in the range of reclusion temporal. MU the correction and the reform of the convicts.
TAU
Question: What do you mean by degree, and what do you mean by a period? MU
What do you mean by a degree under the law on penalty and what do you TAU
mean by a period? When is a period considered a degree and when is a degree MU
considered a period? ARTICLE 79. Suspension of the execution and service of
TAU
Answer: A degree is a given penalty. It is the penalty prescribed by law for
the penalties in case of insanity. When a convict shall
the offense. Like for example, reclusion temporal. That is one degree. MU
Prision mayor, that is another degree. Prision correccional, another degree. TAU become insane or an imbecile after final sentence has been
MU pronounced, the execution of the said sentence shall be
TAU suspended only with regard to the personal penalty, the
Question: What is a period?
Answer: A period is 1/3 portion of the divisible penalty. For example, MU
provisions of the second paragraph of circumstance no. 1
reclusion temporal, there are 3 parts: or Article 12 being observed in the corresponding cases.
TAU
 Reclusion temporal maximum
MU
 Reclusion temporal medium If at any time the convict shall recover his reason,
 Reclusion temporal minimum TAU
his sentence shall be executed, unless the penalty shall
MU
prescribed in accordance with the provisions of this Code.
Whenever the penalty prescribed does not have TAU
one of the forms specially provided for in this Code, the MU The respective provisions of this Section shall be
periods shall be distributed applying by analogy the TAU observed if the insanity or imbecility occurs while the
prescribed rules. MU convict is serving the sentence.
TAU
So, reclusion temporal is a degree, reclusion temporal maximum is MU
a period. Reclusion temporal medium is another period.
TAU
Question: When is a period treated a degree? And when is degree treated as MU We have to wait that the judgement will become final. In case of
a period? For example, a Crime punishable by reclusion temporal in its TAU an appeal, you cannot force the accused to serve his sentence.
maximum period. MU
Answer: For that crime, reclusion temporal maximum is not a period, but a Question: When will the execution of the penalty be suspended? What is the
degree. That is why, in determining what is one degree lower under Article TAU ground for suspending a penalty?
61, the medium is one degree lower. That is not a degree. That is why, it will MU Answer: According to Article 79, in the course of serving the penalty or the
have its own period. This is when a period becomes a degree. TAU portion of the penalty, the accused becomes insane. We do not penalize in a
MU penal institution the person who becomes insane. He should be brought to the
mental hospital for the recovery of his insanity. And once he recovers, he has
Question: When is degree treated as a period? TAU to continue serving penalty.
Answer: Death is normally is one degree. Reclusion temporal is still another MU
degree. But in situations enumerated in Article 77, the three of them together TAU Question: State the legal effects of insanity of the accused.
as one and each part is a period. Answer: The answer should be based on the questions. When it will take
MU effect? When did he become insane? When he is insane at the time he
commits a crime, he is exempt.
Chapter Five TAU
Execution and Service of Penalties MU Suppose, he was normal, but when he is charged in court, he
becomes insane. Meaning, he became insane after the information was filed.
TAU He is no longer exempted.
Section One MUT
General Provisions AU Question: But can we proceed for the trial of this guy?
MU Answer: Definitely, we cannot.
TAU Question: So, what is the effect?
ARTICLE 78. When and how a penalty is to be executed. MU Answer: Under Criminal Procedure, in Rule 116, that is a ground for the
No penalty shall be executed except by virtue of a final suspension of an arraignment of the accused on the ground of insanity.
judgement. TAU
MU Question: Now what happens if the accused was sane, but after he was
TAU arraigned, he become insane?
Answer: That is a ground to suspend the trial until he recovers because
A penalty shall not be executed in any other form than that MU
otherwise, it will violate his right to defend himself, to present his evidence.
prescribed by law, not with any other circumstances or incidents than those
And he is not competent to testify. So, his rights will be violated if we will
expressly authorized thereby. In addition to the provisions of the law, the
continue the trial.
special regulations prescribed for the government of the institutions in which
the penalties are to be suffered shall be observed with regard to the character
Question: Suppose, he became insane when he was already sentenced?
of the work to be performed, the time of its performance and other incidents
What is the effect?

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 121 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Answer: Article 79. It is a ground to suspend the execution or service of the MU
penalty. TAU
MU
TAU
ARTICLE 81. When and how the death penalty is to be MU
executed. The death sentence shall be executed with TAU
reference to any other and shall consist in putting the MU
person under sentence to death by electrocution. The TAU ARTICLE 83. Suspension of the execution of the death
death sentence shall be executed under the authority of the MU sentence. The death sentence shall not be inflicted upon a
Director of Prisons, endeavoring so far as possible to TAU woman within the 3 years next following the date of the
mitigate his sufferings of the person under sentence during MU sentence or while she is pregnant, nor upon ant person
the electrocution as well as during the proceedings prior to TAU over 70 years of age. In this last case, the death sentence
the execution. MU shall be commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua
TAU with the accessory penalties provided in Article 40.
If the person under sentence so desires, he shall be MU
anaesthetized at the moment of electrocution. TAU In all cases where the death sentence has become
MU final, the records of the case shall be forwarded
This article is already amended, like the manner of execution - immediately by the Supreme Court to the Office of the
TAU
from electrocution to lethal injection. But some of the parts are still true. The
death sentence should be carried out not later than 1 year after the judgement MU President for possible exercise of the pardoning power.
has become final. Within 1 year, it should be carried out. Unless he will be TAU
pardoned by the President or commute his sentence. So, there will be no MU
prolonged delay.
TAU
The law says the death sentence shall be executed with preference to any MU Question: When should the death penalty be suspended?
other. This jibes well with Article 70. In executing 2 or more penalties, you TAU Answer: There are 3 instances:
start at the most severe, going down to the less severe. And therefore, if a
person is sentenced to death for one crime, and 5 days for arresto menor, you
MU 1. If the woman is pregnant - let us not kill the fetus. It is the
do not start with arresto menor going to death. TAU mother who is guilty, not the child.
MU 2. A woman within 1 year after delivery - Let us allow her to
nurse the child. After 1 year, after she delivered the baby, let
TAU us kill her with impunity.
PEOPLE vs. JOSE MU 3. When the convict is over 70 years old.
TAU
Facts: Four boys, one of them a Bosconian, were charged with rape of
Maggie de la Riva. Each of them was charge four times. That is the law on MU ARTICLE 47, RPC. In what cases the death
multiple rape. You are not only liable for raping the victim, but also to the TAU
other rape where you helped your co-accused. So, all of them were found MU penalty shall not be imposed. The death penalty shall be
guilty by the trial court. All of them were meted the penalty of death penalty. imposed in all cases in which it must be imposed under
TAU
existing laws, except when the guilty person is below 18 at
The trial court said that legally speaking; each of them should be MU
the time of the commission of the crime, or is more than 70
sentenced to death 4 times because they have been found guilty of rape for TAU
four counts. One rape is one death penalty. So, each of them should be years of age or when upon appeal or automatic review of the
sentenced to death four times, but since they have only one life to give, the
MU case by the Supreme Court, the required majority vote is not
court cannot sentence them four times. So, the court is saying that despite the obtained for the imposition of the death penalty, in which
fact that they deserved to be sentenced for four times, the court sentenced TAU
them to death only once.
case the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua.
MU
TAU
Held: The Court on appeal affirmed the decision and sentenced them to death
four times. The other three death penalties are not useless. It has the effect MUT Question: Now, how do you compare Article 47 from Article 83?
when the President pardons a convict. Thus, the convict is not really spared AU Answer: In Article 47, when the accused is over 70 years of age, he should
from death even if pardoned because there are still three death penalties to be MU not be sentenced to death. There should be an automatic commutation to
observed. The president has to pardon the convict to be spared from the death reclusion perpetua. In Article 83, when the accused is over 70 years of age,
penalty. TAU the death penalty should be suspended. So there will only be suspension of
MU sentence.
This provision about sentencing a person for two or more death
penalties, if he deserves it, is a check on the pardoning power of the president. TAU Question: Now which is which? Will it be a permanent reprieve from a
Now, who is this kind of president who will risk his neck and political death penalty under Article 47, or will there be a suspension? Is there a
popularity four times to you? He will not risk his reputation before the MU conflict between Article 47 and Article 83?
Filipino people by pardoning the convict. He might risk only once. TAU Answer: It could be both, the reprieve or suspension.
MU
To say that the four penalties could not be carried out because it is Suppose you were 69 years old when the lower court convicted
impossible to carry out 4 times is also wrong. It can be carried out four times you. You appealed but it was affirmed. You are safe when the judgment
because under Article 70, when a person is sentenced to two or more becomes final. Under Article 47, it should be commuted to reclusion
penalties, he will serve them SIMULTANEOUSLY, unless it is not possible. perpetua. But the president has to commute it, it is not automatic. While we
When you are sentenced to four death penalties, and you are lethally injected, are waiting for his official act, the execution will be suspended. That is how
that is a simultaneous service of the four penalties. to reconcile Article 47 and Article 83.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 122 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU
Question: When a minor, who is below 18 years of age, his minority could TAU
Code, or its amendments, the court shall sentence the
either be mitigating or Privileged mitigating. How about 70 years old. Is it accused to an indeterminate sentence the maximum period
MU
ordinary mitigating or privileged mitigating? of which shall be that which, in view of the attending
Answer: Under Article 13, over 70 is only ordinary mitigating. It is not TAU circumstances, could be properly imposed under the rules
considered as privileged. Except only when a person over 70 years of age will MU
be sentenced to death and because of Article 47, it will be commuted to TAU
of the said Code, and the minimum which shall be within
reclusion perpetua. the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by
MU the Code for the offense; and if the offense is punished by
So, in that case, it will have the effect of the privilege. But that’s TAU another law, the court shall sentence the accused to an
the only instance. If he is sentenced to reclusion perpetua, it will not be MU
commuted. Old age could never be a privileged mitigating, except when the
indeterminate sentence, the maximum term of which shall
TAU not exceed the maximum term fixed by said law and the
impossible penalty is death. Because under Article 47, it has to be commuted
automatically to one degree lower. MU minimum shall not be less than the minimum term
TAU prescribed by the same.
MU
TAU
ARTICLE 87. Destierro. Any person sentenced to MU Section 1 states that the application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law is
destierro shall not be permitted to enter the place or places TAU mandatory. What the law says is if a person is found guilty of a crime, a
sentence should cover a certain range. There should be a maximum and a
designated in the sentence, nor with in the radius therein MU minimum.
specified, which shall not be more than 250 and not less TAU
than 25 kilometers from the place designated. MU
TAU Question: What happens with the medium period?
Answer: There is no such thing as a medium sentence because the word
MU maximum here does not carry the same meaning as maximum period in
Question: How do you classify destierro? TAU divisible penalties.
Answer: Actually, it is a correccional penalty, which has the same duration MU
as prision correccional. It is not less than 6 months and 1 day to 6 years. The
court will tell you that you are not allowed on that particular place, within that
TAU
Question: What is the procedure?
particular period (6 months and 1 day to 6 years). MU Answer: First, the court should determine the maximum. This is done by
TAU applying the RPC.
Question: What is that radius? MU
Answer: The court will specify that you are not allowed to enter the radius of
not more than 250 kilometers or the minimum, not less than 25 kilometers. TAU Question: What is the consideration?
MU Answer: There are so many. You take into consideration what is the penalty
TAU for the crime, whether it is frustrated or attempted. So, you have to apply
graduation of penalties - one degree, two degrees. Whether the accused is a
MU principal, accomplice or accessory to the crime.
TAU
Second, are the privileged mitigating circumstances? The
ARTICLE 88. Arresto menor. The penalty of arresto MU application of Articles 68 and 69. And then, the application of ordinary
menor shall be served in the municipal jail, or in the house TAU mitigating…in Article 64. You have to exhaust first all known provision of
of the defendant himself under the surveillance of an MU the RPC in finding the maximum sentence.
officer of the law, when the court so provides in its TAU
And then, after you have determined the maximum, the next step is
decision, taking into consideration the health of the MU to determine the minimum sentence. You do not look for the minimum and
offender and other reasons which may seem satisfactory. then go to the maximum. You have to look first for the maximum before you
TAU look for the minimum.
MU
TAU
EXAMPLE: A is accused of Homicide, as principal. He was found guilty.
Question: Where will you serve it? MUT There was no mitigating circumstance in his favor. There was also no
Answer: They do not bring you to the Davao Penal Colony for one day. It AU aggravating. Now, impose the proper penalty under the RPC and
could be served in the city jail, or in the municipal jail, or even in the MU Indeterminate Sentence Law.
residence of the accused, under the city jail, or in the municipal jail, or even in
the residence of the accused, under the surveillance of the police officer. But TAU So we will find out in the case of homicide the penalty is reclusion
the judge will have to provide for a valid reason. MU temporal with its 3 periods:

TAU Minimum : 12y 1d to 14y 8m


INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW MU Medium : 14y 8m 1d to 17y 4m
ACT 4103 Maximum : 17y 4m 1d to 20y
TAU
MU So, we will determine. Homicide is punishable by reclusion
temporal and in the problem there is neither mitigating nor aggravating.
Applying the RPC, the penalty should be within the medium. As judge, you
now have to impose the exact numbers - the years, the months and the days.
SECTION 1. Hereafter, in imposing a prison You can give him 14 years, 8 months and 1 day. That is the best. But you can
sentence for an offense punished by the Revised Penal impose upon him 17 years and 4 months. That is the worst. Or any
combination in between.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 123 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU Now, supposed 6 years and 1 day have passed. It is now the 7 th
So, for example, the court says, I will sentence you to 14 years TAU years and no parole yet I favor for you until the 7 th year. There you will be
8months and 1 day because I'm very liberal. That will now be maximum released because you have reached you maximum. That is the meaning of the
MU
sentence. The next step will be finding the minimum. Indeterminate Sentence Law.
TAU
The law says that the minimum should be within the range of the MU Question: What is the purpose for this?
penalty next lower in degree. So what is the penalty next lower in degree to TAU Answer: According to the SC in the case of People vs. Docusin, the purpose
reclusion temporal? It is prision mayor. And what is the range of prision of Indeterminate Sentence Law is to uplift and redeem the value of all human
mayor? It is 6 years and 1 day to 12 years. MU material and to prevent unnecessary and excessive deprivation of personal
TAU liberty and economic usefulness. That is the exact language of the SC.
The law says that you must now impose the minimum within the MU
range of 6 years and one day. So it would be 6 years and 2 days, etc.. up to 12 To simplify this, the individual even during his sentence can be
TAU
years. Now we will say that the court will give him the best thing. I will give useful to society. When paroled, he is not anymore in jail, but can mix with
you now 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor to 14 years 8 months and 1 day or MU the community, look for a job and feed his family. And also for this reason,
reclusion temporal. TAU the government is benefited. It would lessen the inmates in the jails thereby
MU lessening mouths to feed and decongesting prisons.

Question: Since there is no mitigating, there is no aggravating, should we not TAU Now, under the Indeterminate Sentence Law, do not start from the
divide prision mayor also into 3 parts - minimum, medium, maximum? MU minimum period going up to maximum period because the maximum might
Meaning if the maximum is with the range of reclusion temporal medium, the TAU still go down or go up.
minimum should also be within the range of prision mayor medium?
Answer: NO. MU
TAU Question: How do you determine the maximum?
In other words, Article 64 is only for the maximum. Here, the MU Answer: By applying all the applicable provisions of the RPC.
discretion of the judge is wider - the range of the entire penalty without regard
TAU
to any period. So the best thing that you can get is the indeterminate sentence PROBLEM: X is accused of a complex crime of homicide with less serious
ranging from 6 years and 1 day of reclusion temporal as maximum. Or the MU physical injuries. Take note that homicide is punishable by reclusion
worst thing - 12 years of prision mayor as minimum to 17 years and 4 months TAU temporal. Less serious physical injuries are punishable by arresto mayor.
of reclusion temporal as maximum. That will now be a penalty. MU However, it is established during trial that he was only 17 years old at the time
he committed the crime. And after its commission, he voluntarily surrendered
TAU to the authorities, plus the fact that he entered a plea of guilty upon
Question: Suppose A was found guilty of homicide with one mitigating MU arraignment. Based on these facts, impose the proper penalty under the RPC
circumstance. What will the penalty? TAU and under the Indeterminate Sentence Law.
Answer: Applying Article 64, if there is a mitigating circumstance, the
MU
penalty should be within the minimum period. The best thing is 12 years and Question: What is the rule?
1 day as maximum. TAU Answer: First look for the maximum…He is accused of a complex crime of
MU homicide with less serious physical injuries, with the penalty prescribed by
TAU law for each. So, what will be our starting penalty? Prision mayor or
Question: What is the minimum? Reclusion Temporal? Lower the penalty by one degree because of Article
Answer: The same answer. That will be 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor MU 68(2). So, it goes down to Prision Mayor. Then impose the proper penalty
as minimum. TAU under the RPC and the Indeterminate Sentence Law.
MU
Or if there is an aggravating circumstance, apply Article 74 to the
maximum of the reclusion temporal. It will now become 17 years, 4 months
TAU PROBLEM: Vhenigna Vangkhiyud was convicted of homicide. The trial
and 1 day to 2 years and the minimum is the same - 6 years and 1 day. MU court appreciated the following modifying circumstances. The aggravating
TAU circumstance of nocturnity and the mitigating circumstance of passion and
Example: A is sentenced to 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor as minimum MU obfuscation, no intent to commit so grave a wrong as that committed,
to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal as maximum. You are now illiteracy and voluntary surrender. The imposable penalty for homicide is
serving. reclusion temporal, the range of which is 12 years and 1 day to 20 years.
TAU
MU Question: Taking into account the attendant aggravating and mitigating
Question: What happens after 6 years and 1 day? Can you demand a release? TAU circumstances and applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, determine the
Answer: NO. You cannot demand such because that is not really you proper penalty to be imposed on the accused.
sentence. Your sentence is 17 years and 4 months. There is only a minimum MUT Answer: Determine the maximum by applying all the known provision of the
under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. The real penalty is 17 years and 4 AU RPC on penalties. Well, the problem says there is one aggravating. But there
months. MU are 4 mitigating circumstances offsetting the aggravating circumstances of
nocturnity. With one aggravating and four mitigating, there is a balance of 3
TAU mitigating in favor of the offender.
Question: So what is 6 years and 1 day for? MU
Answer: When you reach 6 years and 1 day, the minimum you re now Applying Article 64(5), since there are 4 mitigating, I will fix the
qualified for parole. If you go to the Board of Pardon and Parole, you will be TAU penalty 1 degree lower - prision mayor - because Article 64(5) says if there
considered. You will be released through parole. But you have to comply are two mitigating without any aggravating xxxx. Even if you still have a
with certain conditions. At least you can enjoy with the society. If you
MU balance of three, you only apply the provision that it should be within the
violate the conditions, you will be arrested to finish your sentence. TAU minimum period.
MU
Remember that you will not be automatically paroled. You are Therefore, the maximum penalty should be within the range of
only a candidate for parole. But whether you are paroled or will depend also reclusion temporal. IT is not necessary for you to give the precise number of
on your stay with 6 years and 1 day. If for example during the 6 years and 1 years. IT is enough if you will just say within the range of reclusion temporal
day your record is very bad, you cannot be paroled. It will depend now on minimum.
how you behave.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 124 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
And now, under the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the proper MU
penalty should be within the range of prision mayor, the penalty next lower in TAU
delinquents; to those who shall have escaped from
degree anywhere within the range of the entire penalty. You do not have to confinement or evaded sentence; to those who having been
MU
say how many years. granted conditional pardon by the Chief Executive shall
TAU have violated the terms thereof; to those whose maximum
But suppose there is no aggravating circumstance and there are MU
four mitigating circumstances. Therefore, applying Article 64, the penalty TAU
term of imprisonment does not exceed one year, not to
should be lower boy one degree. Meaning the maximum should be within the those already sentenced by final judgment at the time of
range of prision mayor, and the minimum should be within the range of MU approval of this Act, except as provided in Section 5
prision correccional. There is a danger if you start determining the penalty TAU thereof.
from the minimum going up. You should start from the maximum going MU
down. That is the correct application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law.
TAU
Question: Is the Indeterminate Sentence Law applicable to crimes punished MU There is no such thing as reclusion perpetua as minimum and death
under special laws? TAU as the maximum. Or if the person is sentenced to life imprisonment, the
Answer: YES. According to section 1 xxxx if the offense is punished by MU sentence will be within that period.
another law, the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate
sentence, the maximum term of which shall not exceed the maximum term TAU Suppose, the penalty is reclusion perpetua. Obviously, life
fixed by said law and the minimum shall not be less than the minimum term MU imprisonment is not the same as reclusion perpetua. However, by practice,
prescribed by the same. As a matter of fact, it is easier to apply the TAU the SC, for the purpose of the Indeterminate Sentence Law, has considered life
Indeterminate Sentence Law to crimes punished by special laws. imprisonment and reclusion perpetua as analogous because, when a person is
MU
sentence to reclusion perpetua, the court will just simply say, You are hereby
TAU sentenced to reclusion perpetua without any minimum. They will just impose
Question: Give an example of a penalty found in special laws. MU it without a minimum penalty.
Answer: Anyone who is found guilty of violation of this Act shall, upon
TAU
conviction be punished by imprisonment ranging form 1 year to 5 years. For example, a person commits a crime punished by reclusion
MU perpetua to death. The crime is a heinous crime. But since, for example, he is
TAU entitled to a privileged mitigating circumstance; the penalty will be lowered.
That is not prision correccional. One year to five years. That's it. MU It will go down to reclusion temporal.
There are no more degrees lower or higher. Under the Indeterminate Sentence Question: Is he entitled to the benefit of the Indeterminate Sentence Law?
Law, it will sentence you to the maximum, the maximum would be anywhere TAU That the range must be within the period of prision mayor and reclusion
within that range, and the minimum should also be within that range. So, I MU temporal?
can say one year as minimum to five years as maximum. Or one year as TAU
minimum to four years as maximum. Anywhere between one to five, for as
MU
long as it does not go down to less that one, or exceed five. For penalties
under special laws, there is no such thing as periods, no such thing as one TAU PEOPLE vs. ROQUE
degree lower. This is easier. Just fix it anywhere within the prescribed MU
penalty. TAU The SC applied the Indeterminate Sentenced Law despite the fact
that the accused committed a capital offense. Because since the penalty will
In other words, the court will just imposed the straight penalty only MU be lowered by one degree, the imposable penalty is reclusion temporal. Since
the maximum without any minimum. So obviously, the convict has no chance TAU the penalty is now reclusion temporal, the Indeterminate Sentence Law is
of being paroled or commutation. These are out of the question. MU applicable because the imposable penalty is not death, reclusion perpetua or
life imprisonment.
TAU
MU PEOPLE vs. CONMAN
TAU
MU Facts: A person is accused of murder punishable by death, reclusion perpetua
but because of privileged mitigating circumstances, the penalty went down to
TAU reclusion temporal. So the imposable penalty is at most 20 years.
MU
Held: The SC did not apply the ISL because this is covered by the exception.
TAU The crime punishable by death.
MUT
AU Question: What is the difference between the two cases?
Answer: In the Roque case, the SC considered the penalty to be imposed, not
MU the penalty prescribed for the crime. Even is the crime is punishable with the
TAU death penalty or perpetua, if however, the actual penalty is not death or
MU perpetua, the ISL will apply.

But in the case of Conman, because the law says persons convicted
TAU of offenses punishable with the death penalty, or life imprisonment. Even if
MU the penalty imposed is not death or life imprisonment, since the crime is
SECTION 2. This Act shall not apply to person TAU punishable by death or life imprisonment, you are now entitled to the ISL.
convicted of offenses punished with death penalty or life MU
Question: Which of the two is correct?
imprisonment; to those convicted of treason, conspiracy or
Answer: There are many other cases, which came after that, which upheld
proposal to commit treason; to those convicted of the older ruling. Even if the crime is punished by death or life imprisonment,
misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition or espionage; to if the imposable penalty, after the mitigating circumstance re applied, will not
those convicted of piracy; to those who are habitual be perpetua to death, the SC will give him the benefit.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 125 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
The other exceptions are based on the following. The benefit of MU
the law does not apply to certain crimes. If you are accused of these crimes, TAU
even if the penalty is very low, like prision correccional, still you are not
MU
entitled to minimum sentence.
TAU
 To those convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to MU
commit treason; TAU
 To those convicted of misprision of treason, rebellion,
MU
sedition or espionage;
 To those convicted of piracy; TAU
 To those who are habitual delinquents; MU
 To hose who shall have escaped from confinement or evaded TAU
sentence;
MU
 To those who having been granted conditional pardon by the
Chief Executive shall have violated the terms thereof; TAU
 To those whose maximum term of imprisonment does not MU
exceed one year; TAU
 Not to those already sentenced by final judgement at the time
MU
of approval of this Act, except as provided in Section 5
thereof. TAU
MU
So, definitely, if you are charged with arresto menor, there is no TAU
ISL there. That is straight. Even in arresto mayor, it's the same. In the first
place, there is no Board of Pardon in the city jail. It is only the national MU
penitentiary. TAU
MU
Question: How about prision correccional (6 months and 1 day to 6 years)?
TAU
Answer: If the penalty is six months and 1 day to 1 years, the ISL will not
apply. It is when you exceed one year that the law will apply. MU
TAU
Another exception not found in the law is when the principal MU
penalty to be imposed is suspension or destierro. Because 1 degree lower than
destierro is arresto menor. It is absurd to say that the minimum penalty is 1 TAU
month of arresto menor and the maximum is 5 years of destierro. Destierro MU
does not involve imprisonment. TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU

TAU
MU
TAU
MUT
AU
MU
TAU
MU

TAU
MU
TAU
MU

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 126 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
PROBATION LAW OF 1976 MU 2. Apply for probation.
PD 968, as amended TAU
And you must apply for probation within the period to appeal.
MU
You cannot apply for probation after 15 days. You choose between the two.
Question: How do you describe probation? TAU
Answer: Probation is simply the law on suspended sentence for adult MU Question: Can I appeal later on, when I am found guilty and the judgement
offenders. This is the counterpart of PD 603, which is the law on suspended become final, apply for probation?
sentence for youthful offenders. In the same manner, we can call PD 603 as TAU Answer: Under the law, you cannot have your cake and eat too. When you
the probation law for youthful offenders. MU file a petition for probation, you are automatically waiving you right to appeal.
TAU You are accepting the correctness of the decision. If you appeal, then you
MU stake your future in that appeal. In the event that your conviction is affirmed,
It is awkward that only minors are entitled to suspended sentence. then you cannot say that you will now apply for probation. Now, you go to
Because we cannot deny the fact that not everybody is a natural-born criminal. TAU jail. Probation and appeal cannot go together.
When we commit a mistake only once, it is too harsh that you have no choice MU
but to go to jail. So, in the same manner that a minor proves to reform, the TAU
suspended sentence will be forgotten. That should also be applied to adults.
We call him the probationer. In the same pattern that the child will apply for MU YUSI VS. MORALES
suspended sentence with the court, the convict adult must also apply for TAU 121 SCRA 653
probation. MU
TAU Facts: The accused was convicted. What the lawyer did was, within 15 days,
With the minor, the court will refer him to the DSWD. With the he applied for probation. Four or five days after the date of the application,
adult, the case will be referred to the Probation Administration. So, there is a MU the accused changed his mind. So, through his lawyer he sought to withdraw
city probation officer, provincial probation officer for case study and TAU his application. Instead, he would file a notice of appeal.
recommendation. If the recommendation is favorable and there is nothing in MU
law, which disqualifies you, the court will suspend your sentence, subject to The court a quo said that he could not do that anymore because
certain conditions. If you break the conditions, then you serve your sentence. TAU under Section 4, from the moment he filed an application for probation, he is
If you do not break the conditions during the period of probation, then you MU waiving his right to appeal.
pass. Forget about your sentence. You are a free man. That is what the TAU
Probation Law is all about. Held: The trial court is wrong. Probation and appeal are both for the benefit
MU
of the accused. He can change his mind. The important thing is that he is not
TAU availing of both, and provided he does one of the two within 15 days. The
MU choice is not irrevocable so long as it is done within 15 days.
SECTION 4. Grant of probation. Subject to the TAU
provisions of the Decree, the trial court may, after it shall MU
have convicted and sentenced a defendant, and upon TAU
application by said defendant within the period of MU
perfecting an appeal, suspend the execution of the sentence TAU
and place the defendant on probation for such period and MU
upon such terms and conditions as it may deem best; TAU
Provided, that no application for probation shall be MU
entertained or granted of the defendant has perfected the TAU
appeal from the judgement or conviction. MU
TAU
Provision may be granted whether the sentence MU
imposes a term of imprisonment or a fine only. An
application for probation shall be filed with the trial court. TAU SECTION 9. Disqualified Offenders. The benefits of
The filing of the application shall be deemed a waiver of MU this Decree shall not extend to those:
the right to appeal. TAU
MUT a. Sentenced to serve a maximum of
An order granting or denying probation shall not AU imprisonment of more than 6 years;
be appealable. MU b. Convicted by subversion, or any crime against
TAU the national security or the public order;
MU c. Who have previously been convicted by final
judgement of an offense punished by
Actually, the Probation Law applies not only to people who are TAU imprisonment of not less than one month and one
sentenced to imprisonment, but also including those who have been sentenced MU day and/or a fine of not less than P200;
to pay fine with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. They are also TAU d. Who have been once on probation under the
covered by that. provision of this Decree; and, who are
MU
already serving sentence at the time the
Now, one important point about Section 4 is that when you are substantive provision of this Decree became
convicted in a court you have two options: applicable pursuant to Section 33 hereof.
1. Appeal, or

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 127 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU penalty to a maximum of 4 years and 4 months. Taking in to consideration
TAU certain qualifying circumstances, the accused applies for probation.
Question: Who are disqualified offenders: MU
Held: She is not entitled to probation. The language of the law is that when
Answer: They are people who are not qualified. Even if they will apply, the TAU
you appeal, you cannot apply for probation. She has already appealed.
application will be automatically denied. But there are also people who are
not disqualified under Section 9, but the court may still deny the probation
MU
TAU Should an appeal bar an accused from applying for probation, if
because of Section 8.
the appeal is reduced the penalty within the probational limit… while the
MU proposition is equitable to allow the accused to apply for probation, we are not
TAU yet prepared to accept this interpretation under existing laws and
MU jurisprudence.
TAU It is simply contrary to the clear express mandate of Section 4 of
SECTION 8. Criteria for Placing an Offender on MU the Probation Laws as amended, which states that no application for probation
Probation. In determining whether an offender may be TAU shall be entertained if the defendant has perfected an appeal from the
judgement of conviction. That is what the law says. And when the law does
placed on probation, the court shall consider all MU not distinguish, the court should not distinguish. Where the law does not
information relative to the character, antecedents, TAU make an exception, neither shall the courts. That is the literal approach.
environment, mental and physical condition of the MU
EXAMPLE: You are charged 5 time for the same crime committed on
offender, and available institutional and community TAU different occasions. That usually happens when you commit a crime against
resources. Probation shall be denied if the court finds MU the individual several times and the maximum penalty, assuming, for each
that: TAU crime, is 2 years. So there are 5 informations. So, there is a joint trial - all 5
MU cases are consolidated. After trial, the accused is found guilty beyond
reasonable doubt on all 5 charges. Therefore, the court sentenced the accused
a. the offender is in need of correctional TAU to 2 years imprisonment for every crime. Total maximum is 10 years. Now,
treatment that can be provided effectively by his MU he applies for probation.
commitment to an institution; TAU
b. there is an undue risk that during the period MU Question: Is he entitled?
Answer: YES. You look at the individual crimes, not the totality. The sum
of probation the offender will commit another TAU of the multiple terms imposed against an applicant should not be determined
crime; or, MU of his eligibility or his disqualification from probation. The multiple prison
c. probation will depreciate the seriousness of TAU terms are distinct from each other, and if none of the terms exceeds the limit
the offense committed. set out in the Probation Law, that is not more than 6 years, then he is entitled
MU
to probation.
TAU
MU What is important is that the penalty for each crime does not
TAU exceed 6 years, unless he is specifically disqualified by other laws. The
Under Section 8, there still other grounds for the court to consider. number of offenses is immaterial. As long as all the penalties imposed taken
But these are discretionary or based on the sound judgement of the court. We
MU separately are within the probational period…for Section 4 uses the term
are more interested in Section 9 because really, the law disqualifies TAU "maximum" not "total". The law does not intend to sum up the penalties
MU imposed, but to take each penalty separately and distinctly.
Six years and 1 day is already disqualified. So, those who re TAU
sentenced to prision mayor up are disqualified. Obviously, based on the law Question: When a crime is punishable by 6 years and 1 day, that is an
on jurisdiction now, no crime triable by the RTC is probationable. MU afflictive penalty. The crime is already grave. But 6 years down, the crime is
TAU less grave. Why did the law make the years the cut-off?
Answer: The purpose of the law is to exclude grave felonies. It is not the
MU
PROBLEM: In case of violation of Section 8 of RA 6425 (Dangerous intention of the law to exclude less grave. Therefore, if you commit 2 or more
Drugs Act), accused Vhenigna Vangkhiyud was given the benefit of the less grave felonies, you do not say five less grave equals grave. No. There is
mitigating circumstance of voluntary plea of guilty and drunkenness, not TAU no such thing. Even if you are convicted 100 times of that offense, the
habitual. She was sentenced to suffer the penalty of 6 years and 4 days and to MU penalty is still for less grave. You do not consider the total.
pay the fine of P60, 000.00 with the accessory penalty provided by law plus TAU
costs of probation. One thing to remember is that when you are under probation, you
MUT will be under the supervision of a probation officer. There are conditions to
Question: If you were the judge, what action will you take on the probation? AU be imposed under Section 10.
Answer: If I were the judge, I will deny the application because the problem MU
says that despite the 2 mitigating circumstances, she was sentenced to suffer TAU Now, if you pass the period of probation, no problem. You will be
the penalty of 6 years and 4 days. According to Section 9 (a), the benefits of disbarred. If you will not pass or if you violated the conditions, you will be
the Probation Law shall not extend to those sentence to serve the maximum MU arrested, then summary hearing to determine or to prove that there was
term of imprisonment of more than 6 years and 4 days. She is disqualified. violations. And then the probation is lifted. You will now serve
TAU imprisonment
MU Suppose you pass. The court, according to Section 16, will now
FRANCISCO vs. CA TAU order you final discharge and the final discharged of the probationer shall
240 SCRA 24 MU operate to restore to him all civil rights lost or suspended, as a result of his
conviction, and to fully discharge his liability for any fine imposed as to the
Facts: The accused was convicted for a crime for which she was sentenced to offense for which the probation was granted.
a maximum penalty of 10 years, she seasonably appealed for conviction.
While affirming the judgement of conviction, the appellate court reduced the Meaning, if you are sentenced to pay fine with subsidiary
imprisonment and you applied for probation, the probation will erase the
payment of the fine forever. Try to compare that with the subsidiary penalty

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 128 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
under Article 39, which provides that the service of the subsidiary MU
imprisonment will not relieve you from paying the fine in the future if you TAU
become solvent. In probation, payment of the fine is discharged.
MU
Question: What happens to the civil liability? Will probation extinguish the TAU
civil liability? MU
Answer: No, the civil liability is distinct and separate from the criminal. TAU
Section 16 only discharges the accused from payment of the fine. There is no
mention of civil liability. It will still have to be paid to the offended party. MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU

TAU
MU
TAU
MUT
AU
MU
TAU
MU

TAU
MU
TAU
MU

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 129 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Title Four MU
TAU Question: Suppose a convict is sentenced to pay a fine. And then he dies,
 EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY what happens to his obligation to pay the fine?
  MU
Answer: This time, the RPC distinguishes whether he died BEFORE the
Chapter One TAU judgment became final, or AFTER the judgments became final.
TOTAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY MU
TAU For example, while the case is on appeal, he dies, and then it is
also finished. The obligation to pay the fine is extinguished. But, if the
MU pecuniary judgment has become final and executors', then he dies, the
  TAU obligation to pay the fine is not extinguished because the fine can be
collected by the Slate through his assets. Based on his assets, the government
Art. 89. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. — MU can enforce the payment of the fine. That is the distinction. Distinguish
Criminal liability is totally extinguished: TAU whether the penalty is personal or pecuniary.
MU How about the civil liability? Suppose, a person is convicted by
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal TAU the RTC for homicide, sentenced to imprisonment and ordered to indemnify
MU the family of the victim the sum of P2G,000 by way of compensatory
penalties and as to pecuniary penalties, liability damages. Or, any other type of criminal case where there is civil liability.
therefor is extinguished only when the death of TAU The accused appealed. While the appeal is pending in the CA, the accused
the offender occurs before final judgment. MU died.
2. By service of the sentence; TAU
What happens not to the civil liability? Can this continue or not?
3. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the MU The old rule was, from the moment the convict died, the case would be
penalty and all its effects; TAU dismissed. The civil liability would also be extinguished.
4. By absolute pardon; MU However, that ruling - that the case can no longer continue after
5. By prescription of the crime; the death of the accused as to both criminal and civil liability - was reversed
TAU
starting with the rulings in the case of Torrejos vs. CA, (67 SCRA 349),
6. By prescription of the penalty; MU reiterated in the more famous case of People vs. Sendaydiego, (81 SCRA
7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as TAU 120).
provided in Article 344 of this Code. MU These cases are commentaries on what happens after the death of
the convict, as to civil liability. What will happen to the case on appeal? The
TAU first two cases are followed by a few more cases, then in 1992, People vs.
MU Badico, (204 SCRA 182) - and among others, about 8 cases where upon the
TAU death of the accused or convict, while the case is on appeal, the criminal
The modes of extinguishing criminal liability. Take note that liability extinguished but not the civil liability.
criminal liability begins with a crime. Criminal liability starts by incurring it, MU
but there is also an end or extinction to criminal liability. TAU
MU Question: But how can the civil liability proceed?
Question: What are the grounds for the total extinction of criminal liability? Answer: By substitution of party defendant. In other words, convert it into
TAU
Answer: There are exactly 7 Ways of totally extinguishing criminal liability civil case.
under the Revised Penal Code. MU
TAU
MU Question: What is the basis for that?
Answer: The cases for that were Article 30 of the Civil Code and Section
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties; TAU 20, Rule 3 of the 1997 Rules of Court. Remember Civil Procedure, Sec. 20,
and as to the pecuniary penalties, liability therefore is MU Rule 3? That's where after the death of the defendant, if there is already a
extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs TAU final judgment by the RTC but not yet final, and then the defendant dies, you
before final judgment. do not dismiss the case anymore but you substitute with the their of legal
MU
representative.
What more can you ask of him if he dies? So, if the accused dies TAU
during the trial, after the trial, or even while he is serving sentence, it does not MU ARTICLE 9 of the CIVIL CODE provides that
matter. From the moment he dies, his criminal liability is extinguished. The when a separate civil action is brought to demand civil
trial cannot proceed; the case has to be dismissed; TAU
liability arising from a criminal offense, and no criminal
MUT
We cannot say that we will continue the trial for the record, if he is AU
proceedings are instituted during the pendency of the civil
serving his sentence, after his death, that the end. Who will serve his sentence case, a preponderance of evidence shall likewise he
after his death? If you will say, “we will let the family continue - they will MU sufficient to prove the met complained of.
inherit the penalty.” Is there such a thing as criminal liability by succession? TAU
MU SECOND 20, RULE 3, RULES OF COURT. Where
Note: The death of the convict extinguishes his criminal liability as to the
personal penalties. claim does not survive. - When the action is for recovery of
TAU
money, debt or interest thereon, and the defendant dies
Question: What are personal penalties? MU before final judgment in the RTC, it shall be dismissed to he
Answer: They are penalties which consist in imprisonment, loss of rights TAU
like disqualification, suspension, these are what you call personal liabilities MU
prosecuted in the manner especially provided in these rules.
perpetual disqualification, suspension, civil interdiction.
That was the basis. And that ruling .subsisted until the SC en bane
so, doctrinal, reversed all these previous cases and reverted to the original
Question: How about the pecuniary penalty? rule, in the leading case of People vs. Bayotas (236 SCRA 239). This was
Answer: An example of a pecuniary penalty promulgated by the SC en banc on Sept. 2, 1994.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 130 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU other source - for example contract or quasi-delict, then you
Question: Does the death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction TAU
can still recover despite the death of the defendant.
extinguish his civil liability? Does such death affect his criminal responsibility
MU
and civil liabilities which are the consequences of his crime?
Answer: Yes. We go back to the old rule, The SC said the earlier ruling in TAU
Torrejos vs. CA; People vs. Sendaydiego and succeeding cases, are MU Question: What is the correct procedure?
abandoned. Why? In these cases, there was a mistaken reliance on Article 30 TAU Answer: The correct procedure is not to continue with the criminal case but to
of the Civil Code and Section 20, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court. In other file a separate civil action. Or, if it is arising from the contract, you can file a
words, the SC after several cases said, "We made a mistake." MU claim against, the estate of the deceased under Rule 85, under the Rules on
TAU Special Proceedings. That is the correct procedure now, but definitely you
If we were to render the penalty in the intendment of Art. 100 of MU cannot ask the criminal ease to be continued and convert it into a civil case.
the RPC, which provides that every person criminally liable for a felony is
TAU
also liable, in such cases extinction of the criminal action due to the death of This distinction presupposes that the civil liability is deemed
the accused pending appeal inevitably signifies the concomitant extinction of MU instituted in the criminal case. That the victim never made the reservation for
the civil liability, works only in absolving. So, meaning, no more substitution. TAU an independent or separate civil action.
You cannot say, "Okay, we will substitute the heirs to continue the case as to MU
the civil aspect."
TAU Do not be afraid because when you file the criminal case where the
MU civil case is deemed instituted
Question: Don't you think it is quite unfair-just imagine if you're a victim of TAU To summarize the new rulings in the case of Bayotas:
Theft or Estafa, and there is no more means of getting back what was taken
MU
away from you?  The death of the accused pending of his conviction extinguishes
Answer: No, What it is saying is that you cannot collect the civil liability in TAU his criminal as well as the civil liability based solely thereon.
the criminal cases. It cannot continue. Substitution is not allowed. MU Meaning, the source of the obligation is only the crime.
TAU  Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding
Question: What is the philosophy behind this? the death of the accused if the same may also be predicated on a
Answer: You go back to the Civil Code. Article 1157 of the Civil Code. MU source of obligation other than the crime, citing Article 1157 of the
TAU Civil Code.
MU  Where the civil liability survives as explained in #2 above, an
TAU action for recovery thereof may be pursued but only by way of
filing a separate civil action and subject to Sec. 1, Rule III of the
MU 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure. This separate civil action or
ARTICLE 1157, CIVIL CODE. Obligations arises from; TAU claim may be enforced against the executor or administrator of the
1. Law; MU estate of the deceased, depending on the source of obligation upon
2. Contracts; which the same is based. If the claim, is arising form contract, you
TAU claim against the estate. If it is arising from quasi-delict, claim by
3. Quasi-contracts; MU civil action against, the executor.
4. Acts or omissions punished by law; and, TAU  The private offended party need not fear the forfeiture of his rights
5. Quasi-delicts. MU to file a separate civil action by prescription.
TAU In such case, the statute of limitations does not run, The liability is
Number 4, acts or omissions by law - that includes civil liability
arising from crimes. That is also a source of obligations. But obligations arise MU deemed interrupted during the pendency of the criminal case conformably
not only from crimes; they also arise from quasi-delict (culpa-aquiliana), TAU with Article 1155 of the Civil Code. That should avoid any apprehensions the
quasi-contracts, or contract, or the law itself. possible of right by prescription
MU
The SC said, in this case of Bayotas, if the obligation to recover is TAU 3.) By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the
extinguished," the case is only coming from the crime the only .source of the MU
penalty and all its effects;
obligation is the crime. The death of the convict also extinguishes it.
However, it is also possible that the obligation to pay arises also from the TAU 4.) By absolute pardon;
crime and from other sources.
MU
Example: You entrusted me to your goods, and then I run away with your TAU Question: Distinguish amnesty from pardon?
goods. That is estafa. I will be liable for estafa, abuse of confidence. Do I have MUT Answer:
the obligation to return to you your goods? Of course. Why? As a civil AU
liability for the crime of estafa. But even if there is no estafa, I still have to
return to you your goods because of the contract of agency. So, the obligation MU AMNESTY PARDON
here arises from 2 possible sources. TAU Covers a group of people Individually
MU Covers political crimes only May be granted for
Or, for example, you hit a pedestrian while you are driving a
vehicle. So you are accused of homicide or reckless imprudence, if you are
common crimes
convicted, you have to indemnify the family. Your obligation here arises from TAU Erases the crime Erases the penalty but not
a criminal act. But, even without the criminal act, WQH are still liable under MU the crime. The conviction
the source of quasi-delict. Meaning, the civil liability here can arise from 2 TAU remains.
possible sources,
MU Amnesty can come before Generally pardon comes
conviction. Meaning, during after conviction.
If the source of the liability is only the crime, then it's or after conviction. It can be
goodbye for you. Death dissolves everything. But, if aside given anytime.
from the crime the civil liability can be recovered from any Amnesty is an OFFICIAL Pardon is a private act by

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 131 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
ACT. The Executive the president. And notMU 5.) By prescription of the crime;
Department confers it and within the realm of judicialTAU
there is no need to present notice. In order to invoke it,MU Prescription of the crime means the State forfeits or loses its right
to prosecute the Offender by reason of the lapse of time. So there is a
evidence on the amnesty one must present evidenceTAU deadline for the filing of a criminal case. Beyond that, the criminal liability is
proclamation. with respect to the pardon. MU already extinguished. The periods for the
TAU prescription of crimes is found in the next article.
MU
TAU 6.) By prescription of penalty;
Monsanto vs. Factoran MU
TAU The State forfeits its right to enforce a given penalty also because
170 SCRA 190
of the lapse of time. They are already all convicted, take note. They have been
MU convicted- final, there is already a
Facts: Linda Lopez, was convicted by the Sandigan Bayan of Estafa and TAU sentence. There is already a penalty.
falsification of public documents. She was sentenced accordingly. She was MU
ordered to pay, among others, P5.000.00 representing the balance of the Suppose, somehow you are able to evade the penalty. The penalty
amount defrauded. That is the civil liability for the crime of estafa. The case TAU cannot be served because you cannot be found. You disappeared. The State
reached the SC, which affirmed the judgment of conviction. During the MU also has a deadline within which to catch you compel you to serve your
pendency of the appeal, Lopez filed a motion for reconsideration in the SC. In TAU penalty. Beyond a certain period of time, the penalty also will prescribe. After
the said court, the President extended to her an, absolute pardon. By reason of that, you can no longer be compelled to serve penalty.
such pardon, she returned to the Department of Finance and requested that she
MU
be reinstated to her former position as Asst. Treasurer which was still vacant. TAU
7.) By marriage of the offended woman, provided
MU
The Department ruled that Linda may be reinstated to her former TAU in Article 344 of this Code; this is applicable only to Crimes
position without the necessity of reappointment and directed her to see to it against Chastity --rape, seduction, abduction, acts of
that the sum of P 5,000.00 is satisfied. She may be reinstated but she has to MU lasciviousncss. When the victim of the rape, etc. marries the
pay the civil liability. Claiming that she is not obliged to pay P 5,000. Linda TAU
appealed to the Office of the President. Even the P 5,000, she would not like MU
abduction or the rapist, the criminal liability of the accused
to pay , The Office of the President dismissed the appeal, and her acquittal due is automatically extinguished. So, from victim to wife.
to the pardon is flic only ground for her reinstatement to her former position. TAU
That absolute pardon does not exempt the culprit from paying the civil MU
liability. Mosanto went to the SC. TAU
Art. 90. Prescription of crime. — Crimes punishable by
MU
Held: She will be entitled to apply again. The SC based its ruling on the death, reclusion perpetua or reclusion temporal shall
nature of the pardon. Pardon implies guilt. It does not erase the fact of the TAU prescribe in twenty years.
commission of the crime and the conviction thereof. The conviction stays. MU
Pardon does not was out the moral stain. It involves forgiveness and not TAU
Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall
forgetfulness. Pardon looks to the future If is not retrospective, ft makes no prescribe in fifteen years.
amends for the past If affords to relieve from what has been suffered by the MU Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall
defendant. TAU prescribe in ten years; with the exception of those
MU punishable by arresto mayor, which shall prescribe in five
Pardon may relieve a person form disability of fines and forfeitures
attendant, in a conviction. But it cannot erase the stain of bad character which
TAU years.
has definitely been fixed. MU The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall
TAU prescribe in one year.
Pardon cannot produce such moral charges as to equate the pardoned convict MU
in character and conduct with one who was constantly maintained the mark of The crime of oral defamation and slander by deed
good law-abiding citizen. shall prescribe in six months.
Pardon cannot bring back lost virtue for honesty, integrity and credibility. TAU Light offenses prescribe in two months.
MU When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one,
So, what is the ruling? Lopez is not entitled. The pardon docs not TAU
entitle her to get back her former position. There is a missing Question: How the highest penalty shall be made the basis of the
about the civil liability9 Art, 113. Pardon extinguishes only the criminal MUT application of the rules contained in the first, second and
aspect; the civil liability in favor of the government, the fine, yes, but not the AU third paragraphs of this article. (As amended by RA 4661,
civil aspect of the case. MU approved June 19, 1966).
TAU
ARTICLE 113, RPC. Obligation to satisfy civil MU
liability.—Except in case of extinction of his civil liability as Meaning, a case must be filed within a certain period. Otherwise,
provided in the nest preceding article, the offender shall TAU lapsed I he period starts from the highest to the lowest. From crimes
continue to be obliged to satisfy the civil liability resulting MU punishable by death, reclusion perpetua the gravity. Then from 15 to 20
from the crime committed by hi, not withstanding the fact TAU years. Afflictive penalties: prision mayor, reclusion temporal. Etc.
that he has served his sentence consisting of deprivation of MU Then, crimes punishable by CORRECTIONAL PENALTIES with
liberty or other rights, or has not been required the same by the exception of arresto mayor. Suspension, destierro are 10 years. The
reason of amnesty, pardon, commutation of sentence or any lowest, arresto mayor is 5 years. So, 20-10-5, and then light felonies—
other reason. prescribed penalty 2 months-(60 days).

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 132 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
There are certain crimes with special prescriptive periods, like MU
libel, which prescribes only in 1 year. Oral defamation and slander by deed
on which the crime is discovered by the offended party, the
TAU
are also special crimes. But oral defamation and slander by deed (6 months) authorities, or their agents, and shall be interrupted by the
MU
refer to grave oral defamation, or serious or grave slander by deed. If it is filing of the complaint or information, and shall commence
slight oral defamation, that's only 2 month; that’s only a light felony. TAU to run again when such proceedings terminate without the
. MU accused being convicted or acquitted, or are unjustifiably
TAU stopped for any reason not imputable to him.
MU
Damasco vs. Laqui TAU
166 SCRA 214 MU
TAU The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent
Facts: A is accused of less serious physical injuries. This is punishable by MU from the Philippine Archipelago.
arresto mayor, prescriptive period: 5 years. The case was tied within in year
after the incident. So, it was filed on time. The case was tried. After trial, the TAU The period of prescription commences to run from the date the
court said: "The accused is guilty as charged." But actually this case, less MU crime is discovered. Take note, the word is “discovered” and not committed.
serious physical, injuries, the injury is only slight, Lesser or Tense, So the TAU Normally, the crime is discovered only when it is committed. It is absurd.
court convicted the accuse of the crime of slight physical injuries. When you box me and you will only discover this fact tomorrow. You
MU
discovered the offense upon commission. But there are some crimes where the
But the charge is less serious physical injuries. With that, the accuse said:" I TAU date of discovery will not coincide with the date of commission of the offense.
move to set aside the conviction including the penalty." Why? "Because if it is MU
slight physical injuries only, I committed only a light felony. Therefore, the TAU A good example is murder or homicide. If a victim is killed and his
charge against me should have been filed within 2 months. You filed the cadaver is buried to prevent its discovery. So the person is killed is a missing
information for 1 year." The prosecutor said: "But we did not accuse you of MU person because nobody know where his cadaver is. But after one year his
slight physical injuries. We accused you of less serious physical injuries, TAU cadaver was discovered and identified. In other words, the discovery came
which prescribes in 5 years. It is only accidental that you were convicted of MU after one year from its commission.
slight physical injuries."
TAU
Another example is if in a public gathering you were not there.
Held: Prescribed. The information should have been filed within 2 months. If MU There, you were defamed by the accused. He said so many things about you
we will follow the prosecution's theory, you can easily heat prescription. That TAU publicly. But you did hot know about it. So one day one of those who were
will be one way of circumventing the law of prescription. MU present in the gathering told you that this is what happened. Oh, so I see how
do you compute the prescriptive period in this case? It is not the day of the
Where the accused has been found to have committed a lesser TAU commission but on the date of discovery. That is how discovered and
offense included within the criminal offense charged, he cannot be convicted MU commission of the offense will not coincide.
of the lesser offense if it has already prescribed. To hold otherwise would be TAU
to sanction a circumvention of the law on prescription by the simple expedient But the law says, not only discovered... discovered by whom? Now
of accusing the defendant of the grave offense.
MU
in the case of offended party in crimes against persons, it is not the person
TAU who died first but his family.
MU
Question: The crime is committed on March 15, 1995. Slight physical TAU
injuries (light felony) The information was filed on May 15, 1995. Has the PROBLEM: Suppose, A murders B in an uninhabited place without knowing
crime prescribed, or was the deadline met by the prosecution? MU it that there is somebody who saw it. X who is a farmer saw it. He did not
Answer: What do you mean by months? Months mean 30 days. March has 31 TAU say anything about it. So assuming A hid the cadaver and thought that nobody
days. March 15 to April 14 is one month. April has only 30 days (April 14 lo MU has seen the crime. Now, for several years, X. kept them and then after several
May 14). Therefore, in the given case, the information was filed on May 15, years, he told the authorities of the death of B and the killer, A. Just look over
so the deadline to file was supposed to be on May 14. So you must know how TAU there, where the body is.
to compute. MU
The law says the discovery of the crime not the discovery of the
TAU criminal. Suppose the crime is committed today and it was discovered today
Question: Suppose the last day fall on a Sunday? How can I file the case on a but nobody knows the criminal. When do you start computing the prescriptive
Sunday? Or if the last day is holiday? MU period? Of course today. Because today, the crime is discovered. But nobody
Answer: The law on pleadings. If you failed to file an answer in a civil case, TAU knows the killer, for 20 years the killer is in hiding And after 10 years he
or if the filing of the appeal falls on a Sunday or a holiday, it can be done on MUT surfaces.
the next business day that is found in the revised Administration Code.
AU
Meaning, there is an automatic extension. So, now the failure to file an answer When does the time of running the prescriptive period stop to run?
in a civil case, the period to file the notice of appeal, if it falls on a Sunday, MU By filing a complaint or criminal information. Well, you know in criminal
then file it in die next business day. Thai was the issue in the case of TAU procedure, you know the distinction between a complaint and a criminal
Vapdiangco vs. Buencamino (122 SCRA 713). MU information.

Answer: The prescriptive period under Article 90 applies only to those which TAU In criminal procedure, a MTC judge can conduct preliminary
are in the penal code. If does not apply to crimes punishable by special laws. investigation on cases triable by the RTC. Unlike in the city, it is not allowed
In special laws, it provides for its own prescriptive period. Well, I think most
MU Suppose the complaint for murder is filed in the MTC for preliminary
annotated books, the author cites an old law which gives the prescriptive TAU investigation because they cannot try the murder case because it is not within
period of crimes punishable by special law. their jurisdiction. Is the filling of the criminal complaint for preliminary
MU investigation in the MTC sufficient to interrupt the running of (he prescriptive
period or is it the filing of a case in a court which has jurisdiction?

Art. 91. Computation of prescription of offenses. — The That is where jurisprudence sets in.. People vs. del Rosario, but the
doctrine is in thecase of People vs. Olarte. The SC said: The filing of the
period of prescription shall commence to run from the day complainant for the peupose of preliminary investigation stops the running of

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 133 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
the prescriptive period. Why? Because according to the SG, Article 91 does MU including the rules on constructive notice can be applied to rules on criminal
not distinguish whether the complaint was filed for trial or for preliminary TAU actions. The rule on prescription of crimes is an act of amnesty or liberality on
investigation. the part of the state tin favor of the accused. The rule on constructive notice in
MU
the construction of Art. 91 would work favorably to the accused.
Let us go to the fiscal because a complaint for a preliminary TAU
investigation can also be filed in the fiscal's office. It is called a "denuncia". MU
Suppose a police files a criminal complaint for murder or denuncia before the TAU
fiscal's office. Will the filing thereof interrupt the prescriptive period? The old Sermon vs. CA
rule in No. That which is filed in the MTC, yes, in the fiscal, no. But one MU 233 SCRA 155
division of the SC in 1983 said the filing of complaint before fiscal's office TAU
stops the running of the prescriptive period. MU Facts: This involves prosecution of bigamy. A man has 2 marriage contracts.
TAU He was prosecuted for bigamy and he pleaded prescription. The wife said: "I
Then, two years later came the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure discovered the second marriage when I was in the State. The husband said
which rejected the ruling. So, the filing does not interrupt. But in 1998, the MU nothing. Remember the marriage contract was registered in the civil registry
criminal procedure was amended. The last paragraph of Rule 110 says: “ The TAU and that is also constructive place under the case of Reyes.
institution of the criminal case, whether it is instituted in the fiscal’s office or MU Issue: Whether in computing the prescriptive period for the crime of bigamy,
court, whether for trial or criminal investigation is sufficient to interrupt the should discovery be deemed to have taken place from die time the offended
prescriptive period. The amendment in 1988 reinstated the Francisco ruling. TAU party actually knew of the subsequent marriage or from the second marriage
So, since 1988, the filing of a complaint in the fiscal's office is also sufficient. MU was registered in the civil registry consistent with the notice.
TAU
However, in 1991 or 1992 in the case of REYES, the SC Held: The computation stalls form the time the offended party actually knew.
distinguished if the complaint filed in the fiscal's office is covered by the MU So, not the time of registration. While the rules on constructive notice in civil
summary rules, it does not interrupt But if it is not covered by the summary TAU cases may be applied in criminal actions, if the actual and legal circumstances
rules, then it does interrupt. But we will touch this more in the rules on MU so warrants. However, it will not apply in the crime of bigamy not
criminal procedure. So, from the filing of the complaint, the running of the withstanding its favorable being accused.
TAU
prescriptive period stops but it continues to run again if the proceedings are
terminated again without any acquittal or condition. MU
In the criminal cases cited, wherein the constructive notice was
TAU applied, what is involved therein were land or property disputes and certainly
If the case ends with an acquittal or termination, then it cannot be MU marriage is not property. What is constructive notice? That is found in Section
re-filed because there is already double jeopardy. But if the case ends not 52 of the Property Registration Act. This provision has no counterpart either
based on acquittal or termination, meaning the case ends without all the TAU under RA3753 ( Civil Registry Act) or under article 407-412 of the Civil
conditions for double jeopardy present, the running of the prescriptive period MU Code that there is constructive notice which leads US to the conclusion that
continues. A good example is when the case is dismissed because of TAU there is no legal basis on the constructive notice rule to apply to the
technicality like lack of jurisdiction or the information is not charging an documents registered in the Civil Registry.
MU
offense or the person filing the information has no authority to do so.
TAU Where we put our imprimatur to the theory of the accused, in all
And the period of prescription according to article 91 does not run MU likelihood we would be playing right into the hands of philanderers, for we
if the offender is outside the country because there is no way for the court to TAU would be equating the contract of marriage into an ordinary contract or other
acquire jurisdiction over your person and because if you go into hiding it similar document without due regard to the stability of marriage as a social
works against you. MU
inviolable institution the preservation of which is prime social duty.
TAU
MU What is going to prescribe is not the crime but the penalty already
TAU imposed So, what is the assumption"' The assumption is that the accused has
People vs. Reyes
been tried and convicted As a matter of fact, the only thing left is to enforce
175 SCRA 597 MU the penalty but somehow the convict has evaded sentence and after the lapse
TAU of a certain period the penalty will prescribe Read Article 92, For example,
Facts: This involves the crime of falsification of public document. A deed of MU you are convicted to death and you escaped, be sure that you go in hiding for
sale was falsified by the accused. And the accused registered it in the Register 20 years.
of Deeds on May 26, So, I falsified the document, meaning, I made it appear
that the property was sold to me and I forged the signature, then I registered
TAU If you at the prescriptive periods here, they are almost: identical
the deed of sale in the Office of the Registry of Deeds in 1961. Complainants, MU under Article 90- 20-15-10-5. In Article 90, the prescriptive period for a light
the owner of the property claim that they discovered the falsified deed of sale TAU felony is 2 months. But in Article 92, the prescriptive period for a light felony
on June 1983. MUT is one year. That's the difference. So for example, you are found guilty of
committing a light felony and you were sentenced to one day of arresto
So, when was the crime? 1961. Registered? 1961. But the AU menor. You do not want to serve that. So you evade for one year. So, you
complainant said: "We discovered in June 1983. A criminal case for MU need one year before it will prescribe.
falsification was filed on October 1984, one year later. The prescriptive period TAU The assumption here is that the accused has already been tried and
for falsification: ten years. When do you start counting the prescriptive convicted. The only tiling left is to enforce the penalty but somehow the
period? In 1961, there are 22 years, so it cannot be, or in 1983 where the MU convict has evaded serving the sentence and after the lapse of a certain period
complainants claim that they discovered the existence of the falsified the penalty will prescribe For Example: You are sentenced to death. So you'd
document. The law said “discovered”. TAU rather disappear but be sure that you'll not be caught for 20 years. After 20
MU years, the penalty has already prescribed. Prescription of penalties is almost
Held: The crime has prescribed. The prescriptive period starts from 1961. similar to prescription of crimes ( Art. 90). The only variation is in Art, 90 the
Why? Under the law on property registration, registration of the document
TAU prescriptive period for a light felony is 2 months, whereas in Art. 92 it is 1
with the register of deed is notice to the whole world. Meaning, the whole MU year.
world and the complainants are deemed notified. So it is constructive notice.
It is established that registration to the public registry is addressed Example: You are found guilty committing a light felony. You
to the whole world, in legal contemplation, discovery muss be reckoned to were sentenced to 1 day of arresto menor. But you don't want to go to jail to
have taken place from the time it is registered in the Register of Deeds. The serve that 1 day. So, you must evade that for 1 year. So, you need 1 year
presumption in rules of interpretation used in prescription on civil suits before it will prescribe.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 134 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU Requisite: the period of prescription of penalties shall commence to run from
TAU the date when the culprit should evade the service of his sentence. Meaning,
he-must evade.
MU
TAU So for Example: escaping from jail or before you could be brought to jail,
Art. 92. When and how penalties prescribe. — The penalties MU you hide. But it is interrupted when the convict:

imposed by final sentence prescribe as follows: TAU


1. Gives himself up;
MU 2. Is captured;
1. Death and reclusion perpetua, in twenty years; TAU 3. Should go to some foreign country with
MU which the government has no extradition
2. Other afflictive penalties, in fifteen years; treaty; or
3. Correctional penalties, in ten years; with the TAU 4. Should commit another crime before the
exception of the penalty of arresto mayor, which MU expiration of the period of prescription.
prescribes in five years; TAU
4. Light penalties, in one year. MU
TAU
MU
It commence to run from the date culprit evade his sentence. So, TAU
you must evade like escaping from jail. Or before you are to go to jail, you MU
evade like what happened to Rolito Go. The prescriptive period had started to
TAU
run in his favor. The judgment is final. I think that is murder. So, that
prescribes in 20 years. But it is interrupted when you surrender or you are MU
captured. TAU
MU
Suppose, you are sentenced to a crime where the penalty prescribes
in 15 years I evade. After ten years I was captured. So, I have to serve the TAU
penalty. Then, I escaped again. How long should I remain at large? 5 years, MU
because you have a deposit often years. TAU
MU
The law says interrupted but it is not forfeited. It is also interrupted TAU
when you go to a foreign country where our government has no way of
acquiring jurisdiction. So, be sure that you are here when you want that MU
prescription run in your favor. Also, be sure that there is no extradition treaty TAU
in the country where you will hide. Lastly, you must not commit another MU
crime before the expiration of the period of prescription. So, you must behave
while you are in hiding.
TAU
MU
TAU
Question: Is this tantamount to encouraging person to escape? Why should MU
we reward a person from escaping?
Answer: The philosophy behind this provision was cited by Viada. There is a TAU
similar provision in the Spanish Penal Code which was quoted by the SC in MU
the case of Infante vs. Prison TAU
Warden,
MU
This is what is says: If a convict under confinement, at (he risk of
being killed, succeed in breaking jail and also succeeds in evading re-arrest TAU
for a certain period of time which by no means is short, despite the effort of MU
all the instrumentalities of the government including sometimes, the setting of
prize or reward on his head, which here by enlists the aid of the citizenry, thai TAU
calls off the search for him, and condones the penalty. This against the MUT
Government of the Philippines, This is you against the whole world. AU
MU
So, the fight is not even, the Government is stronger than you. So,
if you succeed in outwitting the government, the Government will give a sort TAU
of amnesty. But during that period of prescription, the escaped convict lives a MU
life a hunted animal, hiding mostly in the mountains and forests in constant
mortal fear of being caught. His life is far from being happy, comfortable and TAU
peaceful, is reduced to a mere existence filled with fear, discomfort, loneliness
and misery. As, the convict who evades sentence is sometimes sufficiently MU
punished by this voluntary and self-imposed banishment, and at times the TAU
voluntary is more than grievous than the sentence he was trying to avoid. And MU
at all times he was to utilize every ingenuity and means to outwit the
Government agencies bent on recapturing him. For all this, the government
extends to him a sort of a condonation or amnesty.

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 135 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Chapter Two MU ramifications of Article 100 are not found in the RFC. They are found in Rule
III of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure. What are we going to review in
PARTIAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY TAU Article 100 are only the basic ideas.
MU
TAU When a criminal case if filed against you, whether you like it or
Art. 94. Partial Extinction of criminal liability. — Criminal MU not a civil case is also filed. So in effect, when a criminal case is filed, there is
automatically or impliedly a civil case for recovery of civil liability filed. So
liability is extinguished partially: TAU
when you are sentenced, you are sentenced not only for the criminal offense
MU but you are also sentenced as to your civil liability. That is why there are-2
1. By conditional pardon; TAU aggrieved parties in the criminal action. One is the State represented by the
MU prosecutor for the criminal offense. The other one is the private offended party
2. By commutation of the sentence; and who is given the law the right to recover civil liability. How is this litigated?
3. For good conduct allowances which the culprit TAU Through representation by the private prosecutor.
may earn while he is serving his sentence. MU
TAU
MU Question: How do you divorce the civil from the criminal?
Answer:
There are two ways of extinguishing criminal liability TAU 1. By waiving it. or
 Article 89, Total Extinction MU 2. The most common -he reserves the right to file a separate
 Article 94, Partial Extinction TAU civil action, or
3. When the civil action is instituted ahead of the criminal
Question: What are the modes of totally extinguishing criminal liability? MU action. In this case, this is now purely State vs. accused
Answer: Article 89. TAU because the civil action is litigated separately. With that, you
MU cannot intervene in the criminal action.
Question: What are the modes of partially extinguishing criminal liability?
TAU
Answer: Article 94. So, pardon. There are 2 types: if total. Article 89; if
conditional, Article 94. MU Question: Suppose a civil case is segregated or reversed, the question now is:
TAU Which of the two should be decided or litigated first?
In conditional pardon, the president will grant you pardon out conditions. If MU Answer: The general rule is that the criminal case -must precede the civil
you do not want the conditions, you will not pardoned. But you must not also case. The Civil case must await the outcome of the criminal case. The civil
commit a violation of the condition or else you will be recommitted in jail. TAU case is suspended until the criminal is decided. Suppose, he is acquitted. How
But in absolute pardon, it is different—unless you commit another crime , that MU about that? No problem because Rule 111 says that the extinction of the
is another story. TAU criminal liability does not extinguished civil liability.
MU
Commutation of the sentence is the lowering of the penalty. Another penalty
will be imposed in place of a higher penalty, like you were sentenced to death TAU In civil cases, only preponderance of evidence is needed. The
in the RTC, then the SC will lower it to reclusion perpetua. The President can MU evidence may not be sufficient to convict but it is sufficient to prove your
also commute the penalty. 1 le can pardon and he can also commute. As a TAU cause of action. But what happens if you already have file the civil case?
matter of fact, when the 1987 Constitution was passed, where the death According to Criminal Procedure, when the criminal case is filed, the trial of
penalty could not be imposed anymore unless the Congress revives it because MU the civil case is suspended to await the outcome of the criminal case unless,
of heinous crimes—so, we had no death penalty from 1987 to 1994. The TAU there is an attempt to consolidate the trial.' So, the rule is: The criminal case
heinous crime law took effect on January 1994. Now, what happens to those MU takes precedence over civil case.
people who were sentenced to death but before it could be imposed here
comes the 1987 Constitution. Is says that all those who were sentenced to
TAU Question: Is there an exception? Is there an instance where if the civil action
death are automatically commuted. So, this is constitutional commutation. MU is not suspended it will not await the outcome of the criminal action?
TAU Answer: In other words, let the civil and criminal cases proceed
Good conduct allowance is discussed in the preceeding sections. This is being MU simultaneously separately, without minding the outcome of either. Is that
imposed by the Bureau of Prisons. If a prisoner is behaving well, they deduct possible? This is true if your civil action is classified as an independent civil
days from his penalty. Just like in ROTC, there is merit if you acted in good action.
conduct. TAU
MU Independent civil actions, according to Rule 111 are those found in Arts. 32,
Question: Article 94 only gives 3, but there are others which partially TAU 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code. So, the following can be filed separately
extinguish criminal liability. from the criminal case.
What are they? MUT
 The system of PAROLE under the Indeterminate Sentence Law; AU The third situation is entirely different. The civil case takes precedence over
and MU the criminal case. The pendency of the civil case will suspend the criminal.
 The system of PROBATION under the Probation Law This is the exact opposite of the first rule. What is this rule? This rule is also
TAU known as Prejudicial Question where the innocence or guilt of the accused
MU depends on the outcome of the civil case. These principles and their
TITLE FIVE ramifications are treated more in criminal procedure.
CIVIL LIABILITY TAU
MU
CHAPTER ONE TAU
PERSONS CIVILLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES MU
Art. 101. Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases. —
That is a very short article but the ramifications are very The exemption from criminal liability established in
complicated. A complete understanding of Art 100 is not confined to Criminal subdivisions 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of Article 12 and in subdivision
Law. It also includes some principles in Civil Law—Obligations and 4 of Article 11 of this Code does not include exemption
Contracts;, Torts and Damages, and Criminal Procedure 7 he procedural

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 136 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
MU Question: What is now the present governing law with respect to the civil
from civil liability, which shall be enforced subject to the TAU liability o minors?
following rules: MU Answer: It is not Article 221 of the Family code as amended by EO 227. This
is what Article 221 says: “Parents and other persons exercising parental
TAU
First. In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of Article 12, the MU authority shall be civilly liable for the injuries and damages caused by the acts
of their unemancipated children living in their company and under their
civil liability for acts committed by an imbecile or insane
TAU parental authority subject to the appropriate defenses provided by law.
person, and by a person under nine years of age, or by one
MU
over nine but under fifteen years of age, who has acted The liability now devolves upon those who exercise parental authority. But
TAU you can raise defenses.
without discernment, shall devolve upon those having such
MU
person under their legal authority or control, unless it Originally, many thought that this Article only applies to quasi-delicts.
appears that there was no fault or negligence on their part. TAU Meaning, parents are only civilly liable for acts or omissions committed by
MU their unemancipated children arising from culpa aquiliana subject to defenses.
Should there be no person having such insane, TAU But the SC said in the case of Libi vs. IAC, 214 SCA 16, Article 221 of the
Family Code applies to civil liability committed by minors arising from a
imbecile or minor under his authority, legal guardianship MU crime. It is not confined only to quasi-delict. The parents are liable and be
or control, or if such person be insolvent, said insane, TAU held primarily liable for civil liability arising from criminal offenses
imbecile, or minor shall respond with their own property, MU committed by their minor children under their authority or control or who live
excepting property exempt from execution, in accordance TAU in their company unless it is proven that the former acted with the diligence of
MU a good father of a family.
with the civil law.
TAU That primary liability under the provisions of Article 101 of the RPC with
Second. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of Article 11, MU respect to damages ex-delicto caused by their children. Such primary liability
the persons for whose benefit the harm has been prevented TAU is imposed pursuant to Article 2180 of the Civil Code. Therefore, ultimately,
the civil liability of parents for the crimes committed-by their children is also
shall be civilly liable in proportion to the benefit which MU governed by Article 2180 of the Civil Code. That Is on quasi-delict where the
they may have received. TAU parents can claim the exercise of a good father of a family.
The courts shall determine, in sound discretion, the MU
proportionate amount for which each one shall be liable. TAU That is why LIB1 case is doctrinal. Before, the issue was: Can the parents
avoid liability by claiming exercise of due diligence in the supervision of their
MU children? Weil, you will say that it is only possible when I am suing for quasi-
When the respective shares cannot be equitably TAU delict, but here we are talking of civil liability arising from a crime. You
determined, even approximately, or when the liability also MU cannot use Article 2180 for this. The SC said, NO. It is because of Article 221
attaches to the Government, or to the majority of the TAU of the Family Code, and clarified by the case of Libi vs. IAC. This question
should have come out in the bar.
inhabitants of the town, and, in all events, whenever the MU
damages have been caused with the consent of the TAU Question: How about state of necessity?
authorities or their agents, indemnification shall be made MU Answer: Article 101. Well, our example before was that the fire department
in the manner prescribed by special laws or regulations. TAU destroyed some
buildings to prevent the fire from spreading. Who will shoulder the civil
MU liability? Well, all
Third. In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of TAU those who benefited.
Article 12, the persons using violence or causing the fears MU
shall be primarily liable and secondarily, or, if there be no TAU The third refers to uncontrollable fear and irresistible force. The
person using violence or cause fear shall be primarily liable civilly. Those
such persons, those doing the act shall be liable, saving MU who do the act are secondarily liable. So, those primarily liable civilly are also
always to the latter that part of their property exempt criminally liable as principals by inducement.
from execution. TAU
MU
TAU
Art. 102. Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers,
MUT
tavernkeepers and proprietors of establishments. —
AU
Question: This goes back to those circumstances which justify criminal In default of the persons criminally liable,
MU
liability. Is there civil liability? innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and any other persons
Answer: None, except those that fall under subdivision 4 of Article II. In TAU or corporations shall be civilly liable for crimes
exempting, the general rule. There is civil liability except paragraphs 4 and 7. MU
This is what the discussion of civil liability in those cases. The first minority committed in their establishments, in all cases
or insanity or imbecility. They are exempt from criminal liability but they are where a violation of municipal ordinances or some
TAU
not exempt from civil liability. general or special police regulation shall have been
MU
committed by them or their employees.
Question: How do you enforce the civil liability of minor with respect to a TAU
crime he has committed? MU
Answer: The law governing the civil liability of minor is this Article 101, Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the
paragraph 1 of the RPC. But this was subsequently amended by PD 603. restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft
However, PD 603 was further modified by Article 221 of the Family Code, as within their houses from guests lodging therein, or
amended by EO 227.
for the payment of the value thereof, provided that
such guests shall have notified in advance the

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 137 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
innkeeper himself, or the person representing him, MU have a better title because the one who sold the land to him is not the real
TAU owner 1 he seller is somebody who merely impersonated the true owner.
of the deposit of such goods within the inn; and
shall furthermore have followed the directions MU
Question: Suppose, a hotel guest was told by the management: Do not keep
which such innkeeper or his representative may TAU your goods inside your hotel room. One day, the room boy or the
have given them with respect to the care and MU chambermaid entered the room. The chambermaid saw the guest's money and
TAU stole it. The thief was identified, so the thief-employee was charged with theft
vigilance over such goods. No liability shall attach and found guilty, lie was sentenced to indemnify -restitution or relation for
in case of robbery with violence against or MU the-loss of property. But he did mil pay. Is his employer liable? Is the hotel
intimidation of persons unless committed by the TAU manager liable for the losses if the victim did not follow his instruction? Is the
innkeeper's employees. MU hotel management liable?
TAU Answer: Under Article 102, the hotel management is not liable. But under
MU Article 103, it is liable because the chambermaid, the thief is its employee.
This refers to liabilities of innkeepers, tavern-keepers. These terms TAU What is integrated by article 102 is theft committed by third persons on hotel
are old English. The modern concept is hotels or lodging houses. Taverns are MU guests, but not theft committed by the hotel employees—Article 103 applies.
bars or restaurants. For example, an ordinance prohibits the selling of liquor Even if the hotel guest did not follow the instructions, that is not an excuse for
after midnight. Suppose one customer kills another customer while still TAU not being liable.
serving liquor. So, when the crime was committed you were still serving MU
liquor. Who is liable criminally? Of course, the customer. Who is civilly TAU
liable? Of course, the customer. What if he is insolvent? The owner of the bar
is liable. This is how you apply the first paragraph. MU
TAU Art. 105. Restitution; How made. — The restitution
MU of the thing itself must be made whenever possible,
TAU with allowance for any deterioration, or diminution
Art. 103. Subsidiary civil liability of other persons. — MU of value as determined by the court.
The subsidiary liability established in the next TAU
preceding article shall also apply to employers, MU The thing itself shall be restored, even though
teachers, persons, and corporations engaged in any TAU it be found in the possession of a third person who
kind of industry for felonies committed by their MU has acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter
servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices, or TAU his action against the proper person, who may be
employees in the discharge of their duties. MU liable to him.
TAU
MU This provision is not applicable in cases in
This is what you call as the subsidiary liability of employees. The perfect TAU which the thing has been acquired by the third
example when you are engaged in a transportation business. That is very MU person in the manner and under the requirements
common. Your driver, while driving the ear, hits somebody- homicide through which, by law, bar an action for its recovery.
.reckless imprudence. So, your driver is the one charged criminally. The TAU
driver was convicted. The judgment has become final. He was sent to jail and MU
to pay the family of the victim the sum of P50,000. He cannot pay. In most TAU
cases, that is what happens. The driver is insolvent,
MU
There is a case involving a robber for theft or robbery for as long
What will happen? The employer will pay. That is subsidiary. If the driver is TAU the property is proven to have been transferred to a third person, who is not a
insolvent, the employer shall be liable. Suppose he happened to be my family MU party. The recovery from the
driver. Can you apply this? NO. Because there you are not engaged in
business. There is employer-employee relationship. But you can sue under
TAU
culpa aquiliana. But not Article 103. This one applies only to employer for
crimes committed by their employees if they are engaged in an industry. He MU
employs a person for his business, not his household. TAU
MUT
AU
Question: Is this not the same culpa-aquiliana where for the act of the Munsayac vs. Villasor
employee, the employer is liable? MU
Answer: No, here in culpa-aquliana, you can sue directly the employer. In TAU
185 SCRA 324
Article 103, you must wait for the conviction to happen. You must wait for the MU
finality. You must prove insolvency of the employee before you can recover, Facts: Two information for theft of jewelry and gold coins were filed against
What is the advantage? The employer cannot say that he exercised diligence Eduardo Asuncion. During the hearing of the cases, complainant, the victim of
in the supervision of his employee That is only applicable in culpa-aquiliana. TAU the theft, desisted from pursuing the criminal cases upon learning that the
That is not available as a defense under Article 103. The defense is that I am MU stolen items were already sold by the accused to Edilberto and Elena
not engaged in an industry, or he is not acting in the discharge of his duties. TAU Munsayac. Obviously, the victim is more interested in recovering the stolen
property than in prosecuting the accused. The cases against Asuncion were
MU dismissed based on complainant's affidavit of desistance. The complainant
The third party will not be liable because of the protection for innocent
purchasers for value. What is your right? You are the owner, your right is to then filed in the same criminal cases a motion for restitution of the stolen
run against the Assurance Fund It is different when I steal your title then I properties directed against F.dilbcrto and Elena Munsayac. The rule is you can
pretend that I knew, let us say, I introduce myself as the title owner, then 1 recover the properties in the same criminal case.
sell it to you citing my name as the name of the true owner. My buyer did not

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 138 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
Held: The complainant was in error. Why? Because you can recover when the MU
criminal case went on and led to a conviction. But when you desisted from TAU A good example of a third person is, if you are supported by the
prosecuting, the case ends there. The dismissal of the criminal charges at the deceased. You are not his son, nor related to the deceased but he is giving you
MU
complainant's instance carried the dismissal of the civil aspect of the support, like he sent you to school That person was killed. You are entitled to
accompanying the filing of the criminal information of the criminal cases. TAU indemnification even if you are not a member of the family. Because by that,
Without any judgment of conviction in the criminal cases, restitution cannot MU you have cut-off the consideration support. So, third person is not a member
be ordered. Any way, said the SC, complainant still has the right to recover TAU of the family can claim for loss of support.
the properties she lost by filling an entirely new civil action.
MU Exemplary damages are also recoverable. According to the Civil
TAU Code, if the crime is attended by one or more aggravating circumstances, the
MU court can award exemplary damages (Art, 2230, Civil Code). So, that is what
is meant by indemnification.
TAU
Art. 106. Reparation; How made. — The court shall
MU
determine the amount of damage, taking into
consideration the price of the thing, whenever TAU
possible, and its special sentimental value to the MU Art. 108. Obligation to make restoration, reparation for
injured party, and reparation shall be made TAU damages, or indemnification for consequential damages
accordingly. MU
and actions to demand the same; Upon whom it devolves.
TAU
— The obligation to make restoration or reparation
MU
for damages and indemnification for consequential
Reparation is really applied in crimes against property. For example, in theft TAU damages devolves upon the heirs of the person liable.
or in robbery if the object can no longer be returned because it is already MU
consumed if consumable, or it was sold to somebody who can no longer be TAU
found. Or you cannot return The action to demand restoration,
something, like it was razed by fire. How to recover it? The next substitute is MU reparation, and indemnification likewise descends to
reparation. You pay for the value of the property destroyed . property stolen. TAU the heirs of the person injured.
MU
Question: How do you determine the value?
TAU
Answer: The market value, including other factors, like the sentimental value
of the property MU Something, like it was razed by fire. How to recover it? The next substitute is
TAU reparation. You pay for the value of the property destroyed . property stolen.
MU
Question: How do you determine the value?
TAU Answer: The market value, including other factors, like the sentimental value
MU of the property
TAU
If you murder somebody, you have to indemnify the family, actual
MU and compensatory. Of course, what is the value of human life? There is no
TAU definite value. You cannot place a value on how much a life of a human being
MU costs. Based on practice and policy of the SC as of today, what is the standard
TAU rate for the life of a human being? P50,000. But it could be higher but not less.
Art. 107. Indemnification; What is included. — MU That is the standard minimum. That is automatic. If the victim died, the court
will decree indemnity for the family for P50,000. Not only that, there are other
Indemnification for consequential damages shall TAU damages tinder the law.
include not only those caused the injured party, but MU
also those suffered by his family or by a third person Question: Are moral damages recoverable in a felony?
by reason of the crime. TAU
Answer: Yes, for the physical anguish, the suffering, the mental anguish.
MU How about the family, cart they recover? Yes, the law says so: xxx including
TAU those suffered by his family, or by a third person by reason of crime.
For physical injuries, you pay damages to the victim, loss of MUT
earning capacity, actual and compensatory. This is where the law on torts and
damages comes in. AU
MU
If you murder somebody, you have to indemnify the family, actual TAU A good example of a third person is, if you are supported by the
and compensatory. Of course, what is the value of human life? There is no deceased. You are not his son, nor related to the deceased but he is giving you
definite value. You cannot place a value on how much a life of a human being MU support, like he sent you to school That person was killed. You are entitled to
costs. Based on practice and policy of the SC as of today, what is the standard indemnification even if you are not a member of the family. Because by that,
rate for the life of a human being? P50,000. But it could be higher but not less. TAU
you have cut-off the consideration support. So, third person is not a member
That is the standard minimum. That is automatic. If the victim died, the court MU
will decree indemnity for the family for P50,000. Not only that, there are other of the family can claim for loss of support.
damages tinder the law.
TAU
MU

Question: Are moral damages recoverable in a felony? Exemplary damages are also recoverable. According to the Civil
Answer: Yes, for the physical anguish, the suffering, the mental anguish. Code, if the crime is attended by one or more aggravating circumstances, the
How about the family, cart they recover? Yes, the law says so: xxx including court can award exemplary damages (Art, 2230, Civil Code). So, that is what
those suffered by his family, or by a third person by reason of crime.
is meant by indemnification

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 139 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
The action to demand restoration, reparation, and MU he knew he will be an accessory. Or fence. Now, assuming he is m good faith,
indemnification likewise descends to the heirs of the TAU he cannot be held criminally liable as a fence or accessory, but he cannot
MU avoid, civil liability.
person injured.
TAU
If the victim dies before he can recover (damages), his heirs will MU
inherit his right to recover. Suppose, it is accused who died before he could TAU
pay his liability, who will now pay? That law says, it shall devolve upon the MU
heirs of the accused. It does not mean to say that the heirs will pay the liability TAU Question: How do you compare Art.111 from Art.105?
from their own pockets. The heirs of the accused will pay only out of what MU
they inherited from the deceased. if the deceased or accused died a pauper, TAU
you cannot tell his family "you raise money for me". If nothing is left to them,
MU
you cannot recover. if something is left to you, obligation first before ARTICLE 105 ARTICLE 111
TAU
inheritance So. that is based on what the accused left behind. Do not interpret
it in such a way the heirs have to work for raising money to pay for the MU The third person who acquired the He is also bound to make restitution
liability. TAU property is also required to return it
MU to its owner.
TAU
The third person acquired stolen The third person acquired it
Art. 109. Share of each person civilly liable. — If there MU
property by lawful means gratuitously
are two or more persons civilly liable for a felony the TAU
courts shall determine the amount for which each must MU
respond. TAU
MU According to the law, such third person is liable to make a
TAU restitution in an amount equivalent to the extent of his participation. For
MU example, a thief gave his girlfriend a diamond ring worth P 50,000.00 as a
gift. Then, later they broke up. The girl sold the ring for P 20,000.00. Later on,
Art. 110. Several and subsidiary liability of principals, TAU it was established that the ring was stolen. It was given to her, but she was in
accomplices and accessories of a felony; Preference in MU good faith What happened to the ring? She sold it away. To whom did she sell
payment. — Notwithstanding the provisions of the next TAU it? She didn't see her anymore. What is the civil liability of the girlfriend? The
preceding article, the principals, accomplices, and MU P20,000.00 should be returned to its owner. But the ring is worth P50.000.
accessories, each within their respective class, shall be TAU You are able to restitute only in an amount equivalent to the extent of your
liable severally (in solidum) among themselves for their MU participation, The benefit or participation of the girlfriend is only worth
quotas, and subsidiaries for those of the other persons TAU P20,000. She cannot be made to pay higher than that. That is what it means.
liable. MU
Suppose, i steal food, for example, cake from the bakeshop worth P 100. I
The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first against the TAU
gave it to you, you ate it and then there is now civil liability in favor of the
property of the principals; next, against that of the MU
owner of the bakeshop on account of the theft.
accomplices, and, lastly, against that of the accessories. TAU
Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary MU Question: Are you liable because you acquired the cake gratuitously and you
liability has been enforced, the person by whom payment TAU were satisfied because you ate it? Are you liable for reparation in the amount
has been made shall have a right of action against the MU of P100.
others for the amount of their respective shares.
TAU Answer: No, that is not applicable to that case because this applies only when
MU your fortune is augmented – when become richer, your income increases.
TAU
MUT
Art. 111. Obligation to make restitution in certain cases. —AU
Any person who has participated gratuitously in theMU
TAU
proceeds of a felony shall be bound to make restitution in
MU
an amount equivalent to the extent of such participation.
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
What is an example of a person who has participated gratuitously
in the proceeds of a felony? It applies to a person who received, by vvay of
gift, stolen property. He acquired it gratuitously. We will assume that the third
person who received a stolen ring, did not know that it was stolen, because if
CHAPTER THREE

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 140 of 141
The Fraternal Order of St. Thomas More Criminal Law 1 (2012 – 2013)
Dean Hildegardo F. Iñigo

TAU
EXTINCTION AND SURVIVAL OF CIVIL LIABILITY MU to separate the rules" in extinguishing criminal liability from the rules
TAU extinguishing civil liability. That is very clear under Art. 113.
MU
TAU
Do not confuse extinction of criminal liability from the extinction MU
Question: Is there an obligation on the part of the accused despite the pardon
of civil liability. Extinction of criminal liability is Art. 89, total extinction, TAU
to still pay the civil liability?
Art. 94, Partial extinction. MU
TAU Answer: Article 113 is very clear. Pardon does not wipe out civil liability.
MU
TAU
MU
Question: How do you distinguish civil liability TAU
MU
Answer: According to ART. 112, civil liability is extinguished in the same TAU
manner as any obligation extinguished under the Civil Code.
MU
TAU
MU
TAU
MU
Question: What are the modes of extinguishing obligations? TAU
MU
Answer: Civil liability is extinguished by;
TAU
 Payment or performance MU
 Condonation or remission of the debt; TAU
 Confusion or merger of the rights of the creditor and debtor; MU
 Compensation;
 Novation; TAU
 Annulment MU
 Rescission TAU
 Fulfillment of a resolutory condition and Prescription
MU
TAU
So, the modes of extinguishing civil liability are the same with the MU
provisions of the Civil Code. There is only mode for extinction of obligations TAU
under the Civil Code which is not recognized in the Penal Code. That is the MU
loss of the thing due by virtue of fortuitous event. Remember, when the TAU
obligor is to deliver to the oblige a determinate thing, and that determinate MU
thing was lost because of fortuitous event, the obligation is totally
TAU
extinguished.
MU

TAU
MU
TAU
PROBLEM: Somebody was stealing cattle, While the cattle was in his MUT
possession, the cows died because of some disease. AU
MU
TAU
Question: Is the accused, upon conviction, liable to pay for the value of the MU
cattle. So, that is the only mode not recognized under the Penal Code.
TAU
MU
TAU
The grounds for extinction of criminal liability are separate and
MU
distinct from the grounds of extinction of civil liability. Pardon by the
President, or amnesty may extinguish the criminal liability, but does not
extinguish the civil liability because that is separate and distinct. The
President can pardon the criminal liability, but not the civil liability. You have

Edited by: Paul Jared Q. Ng and Yollaine Galias Page 141 of 141

Вам также может понравиться