TITLE EIGHT

I. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS

DESTRUCTION OF LIFE
A. ELEMENTS OF PARRICIDE: (246)
1. That a person is killed.
2. That the deceased is killed by the accused.
3. That the deceased is the father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or
illegitimate, or a legitimate other ascendant or other descendant, or the
legitimate spouse of the accused.
Notes:
1. The relationship of the offender with the victim is the essential element of the
felony
2. Parents and children are not included in the term ascendants or
descendants
3. The other ascendant or descendant must be legitimate. On the other hand,
the father, mother or child may be legitimate or illegitimate
4. The child should not be less than 3 days old. Otherwise, the offense is
infanticide
5. Relationship must be alleged
6. A stranger who cooperates in committing parricide is liable for murder or
homicide
7. Even if the offender did not know that the person he had killed is his son, he
is still liable for parricide because the law does not require knowledge of the
relationship
B. DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
Requisites:
1. A legally married person or parent surprises his spouse or daughter (the
latter must be under 18 and living with them) in the act of committing sexual
intercourse with another person
2. He/she kills any or both of them or inflicts upon any or both of them any
serious physical injury in the act or immediately thereafter
3. He has not promoted or facilitated the prostitution of his wife or daughter, or
that he has not consented to the infidelity of the other spouse.
Notes:
1. Article does not define or penalize a felony
2. Not necessary that the parent be legitimate

1 | Page

3. Article applies only when the daughter is single

4. Surprise: means to come upon suddenly or unexpectedly
5. Art 247 is applicable when the accused did not see his spouse in the act
sexual intercourse with another person. However, it is enough that
circumstances reasonably show that the carnal act is being committed or has
been committed
6. Sexual intercourse does not include preparatory acts
7. Immediately thereafter: means that the discovery, escape, pursuit and the
killing must all form parts of one continuous act
8. The killing must be the direct by-product of the rage of the accused
9. No criminal liability is incurred when less serious or slight physical injuries are
inflicted. Moreover, in case third persons caught in the crossfire suffer
physical injuries, the accused is not liable. The principle that one is liable for
the consequences of his felonious act is not applicable because he is not
committing a felony
C. ELEMENTS OF MURDER: (248)
1. That a person was killed.
2. That the accused killed him.
3. That the killing was attended by any of the following qualifying circumstances
1. with treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid or
armed men, or employing means to weaken the defense or of means
or persons to insure or afford impunity
2. in consideration of price, reward or promise
3. by means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of
vessel, derailment or assault upon a street car or locomotive, fall of
airship, by means of motor vehicles or with the use of any other means
involving great waste or ruin
4. on occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the preceding
paragraph, or of an earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive
cyclone, epidemic or any other public calamity
5. with evident premeditation
6. with cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanely augmenting the suffering
of the victim or outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse
4. The killing is not parricide or infanticide.
Notes:
1. The victim must be killed in order to consummate the offense. Otherwise, it
would be attempted or frustrated murder
2. Murder will exist with only one of the circumstances. The other circumstances
are absorbed or included in one qualifying circumstance. They cannot be
considered as generic aggravating circumstances
2 | Page

3. Any of the qualifying circumstances must be alleged in the information.

Otherwise, they will only be considered as generic aggravating circumstances
4. Treachery and premeditation are inherent in murder with the use of poison.
D. ELEMENTS OF HOMICIDE: (249)
1. That a person was killed.
2. That the accused killed him without any justifying circumstances.
3. That the accused had the intention to kill, which is presumed.
4. That the killing was not attended by any of the qualifying circumstances of
murder, or by that of parricide or infanticide.
Notes:
1. Intent to kill is conclusively presumed when death resulted. Hence, evidence
of intent to kill is required only in attempted or frustrated homicide
2. There is no crime of frustrated homicide through negligence
3. When the wounds that caused death were inflicted by 2 different persons,
even if they were not in conspiracy, each one of them is guilty of homicide
4. In all crimes against persons in which the death of the victim is an element,
there must be satisfactory evidence of (1) the fact of death and (2) the
identity of the victim
E. PENALTY FOR FRUSTRATED PARRICIDE, MURDER OR HOMICIDE (250)
F. ELEMENTS OF DEATH IN A TUMULTOUS AFFRAY: (251)
1. That there be several persons.
2. That they did not compose groups organized for the common purpose of
assaulting and attacking each other reciprocally.
3. That these several persons quarreled and assaulted one another in a
confused and tumultuous manner.
4. That someone was killed in the course of the affray.
5. That it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the deceased.
6. That the person or persons who inflicted serious physical injuries or who used
violence can be identified.
Notes:
1. Tumultuous affray exists hen at least 4 persons take part in it
2. When there are 2 identified groups of men who assaulted each other, there is
no tumultuous affray
3. Persons liable are:
1. person/s who inflicted serious physical injuries
2. if it is not known who inflicted serious physical injuries on the
deceased, all persons who used violence upon the person of the victim.
3 | Page

G. ELEMENTS OF PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED IN A TUMULTOUS AFFRAY:

(252)
1. that there is a tumultuous affray as referred to in the preceding article.
2. That a participant or some participants thereof suffer serious physical injuries
or physical injuries of a less serious nature only.
1. that the person responsible therefor cannot be identified.
2. That all those who appear to have used violence upon the person of the
offended party are known.
H.GIVING ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE: (253)

Acts punishable:

1. Assisting another to commit suicide, whether the suicide is consummated or

not
2. Lending his assistance to another to commit suicide to the extent of doing
the killing himself.

Notes:

1. A person who attempts to commit suicide is not criminally liable

2. A pregnant woman who tried to commit suicide by means of poison but
instead of dying, the fetus in her womb was expelled, is not liable for abortion
3. Assistance to suicide is different from mercy-killing. Euthanasia/mk is the
practice of painlessly putting to death a person suffering from some incurable
disease. In this case, the person does not want to die. A doctor who resorts to
euthanasia may be held liable for murder
4. Penalty is mitigated if suicide is not successful.
I. ELEMENTS OF DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS: (254)
1. that the offender discharges a firearm against or at another person.
2. That the offender has no intention to kill that person.

Notes:

1. The offender must shoot at another with any firearm without intention of
killing him. If the firearm is not discharged at a person, the act is not
punished under this article
2. A discharge towards the house of the victim is not discharge of firearm. On
the other hand, firing a gun against the house of the offended party at
random, not knowing in what part of the house the people were, it is only
alarm under art 155.
3. Usually, the purpose of the offender is only to intimidate or frighten the
offended party
4. Intent to kill is negated by the fact that the distance between the victim and
the offender is 200 yards

4 | Page

5. A person can be held liable for discharge even if the gun was not pointed at
the offended party when it fired for as long as it was initially aimed at or
against the offended party.
J. ELEMENTS OF INFANTICIDE: (255)
1. That a child was killed.
2. That the deceased child was less than three days (72 hours) of age.
3. That the accused killed the said child.
Notes:
1. When the offender is the father, mother or legitimate ascendant, he shall
suffer the penalty prescribed for parricide. If the offender is any other person,
the penalty is that for murder. In either case, the proper qualification for the
offense is infanticide
2. When infanticide is committed by the mother or maternal grandmother in
order to conceal the dishonor, such fact is only mitigating
3. The delinquent mother who claims that she committed the offense to conceal
the dishonor must be of good reputation. Hence, if she is a prostitute, she is
not entitled to a lesser penalty because she has no honor to conceal
4. There is no infanticide when the child was born dead, or although born alive it
could not sustain an independent life when it was killed.
K. ELEMENTS OF INTENTIONAL ABORTION: (256)
1. That there is a pregnant woman.
2. That violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages administered, or that the
accused otherwise acts upon such pregnant woman.
3. That as a result of the use of violence or drugs or beverages upon her, or any
other act of the accused, the fetus dies, either in the womb or after having
been expelled therefrom.
4. That the abortion is intended.
L. ELEMENTS OF UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION: (257)
1. That there is a pregnant woman.
2. That violence is used upon such pregnant woman without intending an
abortion.
3. That the violence is intentionally exerted.
4. That as a result of the violence that fetus dies, either in the womb or after
having been expelled therefrom.
Notes:
1. Unintentional abortion can also be committed through negligence
1. The accused can only be held liable if he knew that the woman was
pregnant
5 | Page

2. If there is no intention to cause abortion and neither was violence

exerted, arts 256 and 257 does not apply.
M. ELEMENTS OF ABORTION PRACTICED BY THE WOMAN HERSELF OR BY
HER PARENTS: (258)
1. That there is a pregnant woman who has suffered an abortion.
2. That the abortion is intended.
3. That the abortion is caused by
1. the pregnant woman herself
2. any other person, with her consent, or
3. any of her parents, with her consent for the purpose of concealing her
dishonor.
Notes:
1. Liability of the pregnant woman is mitigated if the purpose is to conceal her
dishonor. However, there is no litigation for the parents of the pregnant
women even if their purpose is to conceal their daughters dishonor
2. In infanticide, parents can avail of the mitigating circumstance of concealing
the dishonor of their daughter. This is not so for art 258
N. ELEMENTS OF ABORTION PRACTICED BY A PHYSICIAN OR MIDWIFE AND
DISPENSING OF ABORTIVES: (259)
1. That there is a pregnant woman who has suffered an abortion.
2. That the abortion is intended.
3. That the offender, who must be a physician or midwife, causes or assists in
causing the abortion.
4. That said physician or midwife takes advantage of his or her scientific
knowledge or skill.
Notes:
1. It is not necessary that the pharmacist knew that the abortive would be used
to cause abortion. What is punished is the act of dispensing an abortive
without the proper prescription. It is not necessary that the abortive be
actually used
2. If the pharmacist knew that the abortive would be used to cause abortion and
abortion results, he is liable as an accomplice
O. RESPONSIBILITY OF PARTICIPANTS IN A DUEL: (260)
Acts punished:
1. Killing ones adversary in a duel
2. Inflicting upon the adversary serious physical injuries
3. Making a combat although no physical injuries have been inflicted

6 | Page

Persons liable:
1. Principals person who killed or inflicted physical injuries upon his adversary,
or both combatants in any other cases
2. Accomplices as seconds
Notes:
1. Duel: a formal or regular combat previously concerted between 2 parties in
the presence of 2 or more seconds of lawful age on each side, who make the
selection of arms and fix all the other conditions of the fight
2. If death results, the penalty is the same as that for homicide
P. CHALLENGING TO A DUEL: (261)
Acts punishable:
1. Challenging another to a duel
2. Inciting another to give or accept a challenge to a duel
3. Scoffing at or decrying another publicly for having refused to accept a
challenge to fight a duel
Persons liable:
1. Challenger
2. Instigators
II. PHYSICAL INJURIES
1. A.

MUTILATION: (262)

Kinds of Mutilation
1. Intentionally mutilating another by depriving him, totally or partially, of some
essential organ for reproduction
2. Intentionally making another mutilation, i.e. lopping, clipping off any part of
the body of the offended party, other than the essential organ for
reproduction, to deprive him of that part of the body
Elements:
1. There be a castration i.e. mutilation of organs necessary for generation
2. Mutilation is caused purposely and deliberately
Notes:
1. In the first kind of mutilation, the castration must be made purposely.
Otherwise, it will be considered as mutilation of the second kind
2. Mayhem: refers to any other intentional mutilation
1. B.

SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES: (263)

How Committed

7 | Page

1. Wounding
2. Beating
3. Assaulting
4. Administering injurious substances
What are serious physical injuries:
1. Injured person becomes insane, imbecile, impotent or blind
2. Injured person
1. loses the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, loses an eye,
a hand, foot, arm or leg
2. loses the use of any such member
3. becomes incapacitated for the work in which he had been habitually
engaged
3. Injured person
1. becomes deformed
2. loses any other member of his body
3. loses the use thereof
4. becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of the work in which
he had been habitually engaged in for more than 90 days
1. Injured person becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for more
than 30 days (but not more than 90 days)
Notes:
1. Serious physical injuries may be committed through reckless imprudence or
simple imprudence
2. There must be no intent to kill
3. Impotent should include inability to copulate and sterility
4. Blindness requires lost of vision in both eyes. Mere weakness in vision is not
contemplated
5. Loss of power to hear must involve both ears. Otherwise, it will be considered
as serious physical injuries under par 3
6. Loss of use of hand or incapacity of usual work in par 2 must be permanent
7. Par 2 refers to principal members of the body. Par 3 on the other hand, covers
any other member which is not a principal part of the body. In this respect, a
front tooth is considered as a member of the body, other than a principal
member
8. Deformity: means physical ugliness, permanent and definite abnormality. Not
curable by natural means or by nature. It must be conspicuous and visible.

8 | Page

Thus, if the scar is usually covered by a dress, it would not be conspicuous

and visible
9. The loss of 3 incisors is a visible deformity. Loss of one incisor is not.
However, loss of one tooth which impaired appearance is a deformity
10. Deformity by loss of teeth refers to injury which cannot be impaired by the
action of the nature
11. Loss of both outer ears constitutes deformity and also loss of the power to hear.
Meanwhile, loss of the lobule of the ear is only a deformity
12. Loss of the index and middle fingers is either a deformity or loss of a member,
not a principal one of his body or use of the same
13. Loss of the power to hear in the right ear is considered as merely loss of use of
some other part of the body
14. If the injury would require medical attendance for more than 30 days, the illness
of the offended party may be considered as lasting more than 30 days. The fact that
there was medical attendance for that period of time shows that the injuries were
not cured for that length of time
15. Under par 4, all that is required is illness or incapacity, not medical attendance
16. In determining incapacity, the injured party must have an avocation at the time
of the injury. Work: includes studies or preparation for a profession
17. When the category of the offense of serious physical injuries depends on the
period of the illness or incapacity for labor, there must be evidence of the length of
that period. Otherwise, the offense will only be considered as slight physical injuries
18. There is no incapacity if the injured party could still engage in his work although
less effectively than before
19. Serious physical injuries is qualified when the crime is committed against the
same persons enumerated in the article on parricide or when it is attended by any
of the circumstances defining the crime of murder. However, serious physical
injuries resulting from excessive chastisement by parents is not qualified serious
physical injuries

1. C. ELEMENTS OF ADMINISTERING INJURIOUS SUBSTANCES OR

BEVERAGES: (264)
1. That the offender inflicted upon another person any serious physical
injury
2. That it was done knowingly administering to him any injurious
substances or beverages or by taking advantage of his weakness of
mind of credulity
3. He had no intent to kill
Notes:
1. It is frustrated murder when there is intent to kill

9 | Page

2. Administering means introducing into the body the substance, thus throwing
of the acid in the face is not contemplated.
1. D.

ELEMENTS OF LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES: (265)

1. That the offended party is incapacitated for labor for 10 days or more
(but not more than 30 days), or needs medical attendance for the
same period of time
2. That the physical injuries must not be those described in the preceding
articles

Notes:
1. Circumstances qualifying the offense:
1. when there is manifest intent to insult or offend the injured person
2. when there are circumstances adding ignominy to the offense
3. when the victim is either the offenders parents, ascendants,
guardians, curators or teachers
4. when the victim is a person of rank or person in authority, provided the
crime is not direct assault
5. It falls under this article even if there was no incapacity but the
medical treatment was for 13 days
1. E.

SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES: (266)

3 Kinds:
1. That which incapacitated the offended party for labor from 1-9 days or
required medical attendance during the same period
2. That which did not prevent the offended party from engaging in his habitual
work or which did not require medical attendance (ex. Black-eye)
3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without causing any injury (ex. slapping but
without causing dishonor)
1. F.

RAPE (ART 355)

The Anti-Rape Law of 1997 (RA 8353) now classified the crime of rape as Crime
Against Personsincorporated into Title 8 of the RPC to be known as Chapter 3
Elements: Rape is committed
1. By a man who have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following
circumstances:
1. through force, threat or intimidation
2. when the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious
3. by means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority
4. when the offended party is under 12 years of age or is demented, even
though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present
10 | P a g e

5. By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in par 1

hereof, shall commit an ac of sexual assault by inserting
1. his penis into another persons mouth or anal orifice, or
2. any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of
another person
Rape committed under par 1 is punishable by:
1. reclusion perpetua
2. reclusion perpetuato DEATH when
1. victim became insane by reason or on the occasion of rape
2. b. the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or
on the occasion thereof
3. DEATH when
1. homicide is committed
2. victim under 18 years and offender is:
1. parent
2. ascendant
3. step-parent
4. guardian
5. relative by consanguinity or affinity with the 3 rd civil degree or
6. common law spouse of parent of victim
3. c. under the custody of the police or military authorities or any law
enforcement or penal institution
4. committed in full view of the spouse, parent or any of the children or
other relatives within the 3rd degree of consanguinity
5. victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious vocation or calling
and is personally known to be such by the offender before or at the
time of the commission of the crime
6. a child below 7 years old
7. g. offender knows he is afflicted with HIV or AIDS or any other
sexually transmissible disease and the virus is transmitted to the
victim
8. h. offender; member of the AFP, or para-military units thereof, or the
PNP, or any law enforcement agency or penal institution, when the
offender took advantage of his position to facilitate the commission of
the crime
9. victim suffered permanent physical mutilation or disability

11 | P a g e

10.j.
the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party at the
time of the commission of the crime; and
11.k. when the offender knew of the mental disability, emotional
disorder and/or physical handicap or the offended party at the time of
the commission of the crime
Rape committed under par 2 is punishable by:
1. 1.

prision mayor

2. 2.

prision mayor to reclusion temporal

1. use of deadly weapon or
2. by two or more persons

3. reclusion temporal when the victim has become insane

4. reclusion temporal to reclusion pepetua rape is attempted and homicide is
committed
5. reclusion perpetua homicide is committed by reason or on occasion of rape
6. reclusion temporal committed with any of the 10 aggravating
circumstances mentioned above
Notes:
1. The underscored words are the amendments provided by RA 8353
2. Dividing age in rape:
1. less than 7 yrs old, mandatory death
2. less than 12 yrs old, statutory rape
3. less than 18 yrs old and there is relationship (e.g. parent etc);
mandatory death
Elements and Penalty of Estafa by Means of Deceit
Posted on February 15, 2012 by Erineus
Article 315, par. 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code penalizes fraud or deceit when
committed as follows:

xxxx

2.
By means of any of the following false pretenses or fraudulent acts executed
prior to or simultaneously with the commission of fraud:

(a)
by using fictitious name, or actions, falsely pretending to possess power,
influence, qualification, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary
transactions, or by means of other similar deceits.
12 | P a g e

The elements of the crime of estafa under the foregoing provision are: (1) there
must be a false pretense, fraudulent acts or fraudulent means; (2) such false
pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means must be made or executed prior to or
simultaneously with the commission of the fraud; (3) the offended party must have
relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means and was thus
induced to part with his money or property; and (4) as a result thereof, the offended
party suffered damage.[13]

Petitioners presented themselves toLourdesas persons possessing the authority and

capacity to engage in the financing of used vehicles in behalf of Final Access
Marketing. This was a clear misrepresentation considering their previous knowledge
not only of Erlindas complaint but also of several others as regards the failure of
Final Access Marketing to deliver the motor vehicles bought. Lourdesrelied on their
misrepresentations and parted with her money. Almost a week passed by, but
petitioners and Rule did not deliver the said motor vehicle. They also did not fulfill
their subsequent promise to provide a replacement or to refund her payment.
WhenLourdesvisited the office of Final Access Marketing to demand the return of her
money, it was already closed. She could not locate any of them except for Franco
who denied any wrongdoing. Consequently, she suffered damage.

If indeed they were innocent as they claimed to be, Erlindas complaint to

petitioners and the 12 other similar complaints with Hoy Gising regarding
undelivered vehicles should have dissuaded petitioners from further soliciting
customers. The fact that they continued to offer for sale a second-hand car to
Lourdes is indicative of deceit and their complicity in the conspiracy to commit
estafa. The manner in which petitioners transacted business with Erlinda and
Lourdes as well as their awareness of 12 other similar complaints with Hoy Gising
were sufficient to establish the existence of a modus operandi.

Francos attempt to escape culpability by feigning ignorance of the previously failed

transactions on the delivery of vehicles by Final Access Marketing cannot be
countenanced. As gleaned from the testimony of Erlinda, Franco was already with
Final Access Marketing at the time these transactions occurred. She was therefore
familiar with the companys procedure and policy on the sales of second-hand
vehicles. She even accompaniedLourdesto showrooms and introduced her to
Besario and Rule.

As an employee of Final Access Marketing, Franco was expected to be familiar with

its daily activities. It would be unworthy of belief that she did not know of the
complaints for the unexplained failure of Final Access Marketing to deliver vehicles
to its customers. Human nature and experience would compel her to make queries
on her own to discover the reasons for the non-delivery of the vehicles. Her
continued insistence in solicitingLourdesas a client by introducing herself as an
Assistant Administrative Coordinator of Final Access Marketing with the ability to
provide financing for a vehicle of her choice is therefore indicative of fraudulent
misrepresentation.
13 | P a g e

The petitioners also contend that they are not criminally liable since the transaction
withLourdeswas a contract of sale. This contention does not deserve serious
consideration. While the fact that they entered into a contract withLourdescannot
be denied, the transaction transpired due to their deceit. It was their
misrepresentation that inducedLourdesto sign the Sales Proposal agreement and
part with her money.

In denying any criminal wrongdoing, petitioners blame their co-accused, Torres,

whom they claim to be the owner of Final Access Marketing. The shifting of blame is
common among conspirators in their attempt to escape liability. It is a desperate
strategy to compensate for their weak defense. We are not readily influenced by
such a proposition since its obvious motive is to distort the truth and frustrate the
ends of justice.[14]

The Penalty

Having committed the crime of estafa, the petitioners must suffer the proper
penalties provided by law. The law imposes the penalty of prision correccional in its
maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period if the amount is over
P12,000.00 but does not exceed P22,000.00. If the amount swindled exceeds
P22,000.00, the penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period, adding one year
for each additional P10,000.00, but the total penalty which may be imposed shall
not exceed 20 years.[15] To determine the minimum of the indeterminate penalty,
prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period
shall be reduced by one degree, that is, to prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods. The minimum period of the indeterminate penalty shall be taken
from the full range of the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods, which is six (6) months and one (1) day to four (4) years and two (2)
months. With the amount of the fraud at P80,000.00, there is P58,000.00 in excess
of P22,000.00. Five years must therefore be added to the maximum period of the
prescribed penalty ranging from six (6) years, eight (8) months and twenty-one (21)
days to eight (8) years. Thus, the maximum term of the penalty would range from
eleven (11) years, eight (8) months and twenty-one (21) days to thirteen (13) years.
This is in accord with our ruling in People v. Temparada,[16] viz:

The prescribed penalty for estafa under Article 315, par. 2(d) of the RPC, when the
amount defrauded exceeds P22,000.00, is prision correccional maximum to prision
mayor minimum. The minimum term is taken from the penalty next lower or
anywhere within prision correccional minimum and medium (i.e. from 6 months and
1 day to 4 years and 2 months). Consequently, the RTC correctly fixed the minimum
term for the five estafa cases at 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional since
this is within the range of prision correccional minimum and medium.

On the other hand, the maximum term is taken from the prescribed penalty of
prision correccional maximum to prision mayor minimum in its maximum period,
14 | P a g e

adding 1 year of imprisonment for every P10,000.00 in excess of P22,000.00,

provided that the total penalty shall not exceed 20 years. However, the maximum
period of the prescribed penalty of prision correccional maximum to prision mayor
minimum is not prision mayor minimum as apparently assumed by the RTC. To
compute the maximum period of the prescribed penalty, prision correccional
maximum to prision mayor minimum should be divided into three equal portions of
time each of which portion shall be deemed to form one period in accordance with
Article 65 of the RPC. Following this procedure, the maximum period of prision
correccional maximum to prision mayor minimum is from 6 years, 8 months and 21
days to 8 years. The incremental penalty, when proper, shall thus be added to
anywhere from 6 years, 8 months and 21 days to 8 years, at the discretion of the
court.

In computing the incremental penalty, the amount defrauded shall be subtracted by

P22,000.00, and the difference shall be divided by P10,000.00. Any fraction of a
year shall be discarded as was done starting with the case of People v. Pabalan in
consonance with the settled rule that penal laws shall be construed liberally in favor
of the accused. x x x.

WHEREFORE, the petitions for review on certiorari are DENIED. The Decision of the
Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 27414 which affirmed with modification the
Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 52, in Criminal Case No. 99-173688
convicting petitioners Lyzah Sy Franco and Steve Besario of the crime of estafa is
AFFIRMED with further modification that the indeterminate prison term imposed on
each of the petitioners is four (4) years and two (2) months of prision correccional
as minimum to thirteen (13) years of reclusion temporal as maximum.
Qualified theft defined; proper penalty explained
Item No

"x x x.

The elements of the crime of theft as provided for in Article 308 9 of the Revised
Penal Code are as follows: (1) that there be taking of personal property; (2) that said
property belongs to another; (3) that the taking be done with intent to gain; (4) that
the taking be done without the consent of the owner; and (5) that the taking be
accomplished without the use of violence against or intimidation of persons or force
upon things.10 Theft becomes qualified when any of the following circumstances
under Article 31011 is present: (1) the theft is committed by a domestic servant;
(2) the theft is committed with grave abuse of confidence; (3) the property stolen is
either a motor vehicle, mail matter or large cattle; (4) the property stolen consists
of coconuts taken from the premises of a plantation; (5) the property stolen is fish
taken from a fishpond or fishery; and (6) the property was taken on the occasion of
fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any other calamity, vehicular
accident or civil disturbance.12
Here, the prosecution was able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the amount
of P797,187.85 taken does not belong to petitioner but to VCCI and that petitioner
15 | P a g e

took it without VCCIs consent and with grave abuse of confidence by taking
advantage of her position as accountant and bookkeeper. The prosecutions
evidence proved that petitioner was entrusted with checks payable to VCCI or Viva
by virtue of her position as accountant and bookkeeper. She deposited the said
checks to the joint account maintained by VCCI and Jefferson Tan, then withdrew a
total ofP797,187.85 from said joint account using the pre-signed checks, with her as
the payee. In other words, the bank account was merely the instrument through
which petitioner stole from her employer VCCI.
xxx
We find no cogent reason to disturb the above findings of the trial court which were
affirmed by the CA and fully supported by the evidence on record. Time and again,
the Court has held that the facts found by the trial court, as affirmed in toto by the
CA, are as a general rule, conclusive upon this Court 13 in the absence of any
showing of grave abuse of discretion. In this case, none of the exceptions to the
general rule on conclusiveness of said findings of facts are applicable. 14 The Court
gives weight and respect to the trial courts findings in criminal prosecution because
the latter is in a better position to decide the question, having heard the witnesses
in person and observed their deportment and manner of testifying during the
trial.15 Absent any showing that the lower courts overlooked substantial facts and
circumstances, which if considered, would change the result of the case, this Court
gives deference to the trial courts appreciation of the facts and of the credibility of
witnesses.
Moreover, we agree with the CA when it gave short shrift to petitioners argument
that full ownership of the thing stolen needed to be established first before she
could be convicted of qualified theft. As correctly held by the CA, the subject of the
crime of theft is any personal property belonging to another. Hence, as long as the
property taken does not belong to the accused who has a valid claim thereover, it is
immaterial whether said offender stole it from the owner, a mere possessor, or even
a thief of the property.16 In any event, as stated above, the factual findings of the
courts a quo as to the ownership of the amount petitioner stole is conclusive upon
this Court, the finding being adequately supported by the evidence on record.
However, notwithstanding the correctness of the finding of petitioners guilt, a
modification is called for as regards the imposable penalty. On the imposition of the
correct penalty, People v. Mercado17 is instructive. Pursuant to said case, in the
determination of the penalty for qualified theft, note is taken of the value of the
property stolen, which is P797,187.85 in this case. Since the value
exceeds P22,000.00, the basic penalty is prision mayor in its minimum and medium
periods to be imposed in the maximum period, that is, eight (8) years, eight (8)
months and one (1) day to ten (10) years of prision mayor.
To determine the additional years of imprisonment to be added to the basic penalty,
the amount ofP22,000.00 is deducted fromP797,187.85, which yields a remainder
of P775,187.85. This amount is then divided by P10,000.00, disregarding any
amount less thanP10,000.00. The end result is that 77 years should be added to the
basic penalty. However, the total imposable penalty for simple theft should not
exceed 20 years. Thus, had petitioner committed simple theft, the penalty would be
20 years of reclusion temporal. As thepenalty for qualified theft is two degrees
higher, the trial court, as well as the appellate court, should have imposed the
penalty ofreclusion perpetua."

16 | P a g e

MALACAANG
Manila
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 1613
AMENDING THE LAW ON ARSON
WHEREAS, findings of the police and intelligence agencies of the government reveal
that fires and other crimes involving destruction in Metro Manila and other urban
centers in the country are being perpetrated by criminal syndicates, some of which
have foreign connections;
WHEREAS, the current law on arson suffers from certain inadequacies that impede
the successful enforcement and prosecution of arsonists;
WHEREAS, it is imperative that the high incidence of fires and other crimes involving
destruction be prevented to protect the national economy and preserve the social,
economic and political stability of the country;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, President of the Philippines, by virtue
of the powers vested in me by the Constitution, do hereby order and decree as part
of the law of the land, the following:
Section 1. Arson. Any person who burns or sets fire to the property of another shall
be punished by Prision Mayor.
The same penalty shall be imposed when a person sets fire to his own property
under circumstances which expose to danger the life or property of another.
Sec. 2. Destructive Arson. The penalty of Reclusion Temporal in its maximum period
to Reclusion Perpetua shall be imposed if the property burned is any of the
following:
1. Any ammunition factory and other establishment where explosives, inflammable
or combustible materials are stored.
2. Any archive, museum, whether public or private, or any edifice devoted to
culture, education or social services.
3. Any church or place of worship or other building where people usually assemble.
4. Any train, airplane or any aircraft, vessel or watercraft, or conveyance for
transportation of persons or property
4. Any building where evidence is kept for use in any legislative, judicial,
administrative or other official proceedings.
5. Any hospital, hotel, dormitory, lodging house, housing tenement, shopping
center, public or private market, theater or movie house or any similar place or
building.
6. Any building, whether used as a dwelling or not, situated in a populated or
congested area.
Sec. 3. Other Cases of Arson. The penalty of Reclusion Temporal to Reclusion
Perpetua shall be imposed if the property burned is any of the following:
1. Any building used as offices of the government or any of its agencies;
2. Any inhabited house or dwelling;
17 | P a g e

3. Any industrial establishment, shipyard, oil well or mine shaft, platform or tunnel;
4. Any plantation, farm, pastureland, growing crop, grain field, orchard, bamboo
grove or forest;
4. Any rice mill, sugar mill, cane mill or mill central; and
5. Any railway or bus station, airport, wharf or warehouse.
Sec. 4. Special Aggravating Circumstances in Arson. The penalty in any case of
arson shall be imposed in its maximum period;
1. If committed with intent to gain;
2. If committed for the benefit of another;
3. If the offender is motivated by spite or hatred towards the owner or occupant of
the property burned;
4. If committed by a syndicate.
The offense is committed by a syndicate if its is planned or carried out by a group of
three (3) or more persons.
Sec. 5. Where Death Results from Arson. If by reason of or on the occasion of the
arson death results, the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua to death shall be imposed.
Sec. 6. Prima Facie evidence of Arson. Any of the following circumstances shall
constitute prima facie evidence of arson:
1. If the fire started simultaneously in more than one part of the building or
establishment.
2. If substantial amount of flammable substances or materials are stored within the
building note necessary in the business of the offender nor for household us.
3. If gasoline, kerosene, petroleum or other flammable or combustible substances or
materials soaked therewith or containers thereof, or any mechanical, electrical,
chemical, or electronic contrivance designed to start a fire, or ashes or traces of any
of the foregoing are found in the ruins or premises of the burned building or
property.
4. If the building or property is insured for substantially more than its actual value at
the time of the issuance of the policy.
4. If during the lifetime of the corresponding fire insurance policy more than two
fires have occurred in the same or other premises owned or under the control of the
offender and/or insured.
5. If shortly before the fire, a substantial portion of the effects insured and stored in
a building or property had been withdrawn from the premises except in the ordinary
course of business.
6. If a demand for money or other valuable consideration was made before the fire
in exchange for the desistance of the offender or for the safety of the person or
property of the victim.
Sec. 7. Conspiracy to commit Arson. Conspiracy to commit arson shall be punished
by Prision Mayor in its minimum period.
18 | P a g e

Sec. 8. Confiscation of Object of Arson. The building which is the object of arson
including the land on which it is situated shall be confiscated and escheated to the
State, unless the owner thereof can prove that he has no participation in nor
knowledge of such arson despite the exercise of due diligence on his part.
Sec. 9. Repealing Clause. The provisions of Articles 320 to 326-B of the Revised
Penal Code and all laws, executive orders, rules and regulations, or parts thereof,
inconsistent with the provisions of this Decree are hereby repealed or amended
accordingly.
Section 10. Effectivity. This Decree shall take effect immediately upon publication
thereof at least once in a newspaper of general circulation.
Done in the City of Manila, this 7th day of March, in the year of Our Lord, nineteen
hundred and seventy-nine.

19 | P a g e