CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Title 11. Crimes against Chastity

Art. 333 Adultery

Attempted & Frustrated Stages - The tenor

of the law refers to consummation only. However,
most of the Spanish commentators as well as the
Supreme Court of Spain hold that attempted
adultery is possible, if the acts of execution have
been commenced directly towards the commission
of the sexual intercourse, as for example, when the
couple were surprised in the room of the hotel
already undressed. There is no frustrated stage.
Accomplice- If a person performs the acts
of an accomplice (e.g., informing the accused of
the absence of the husband of the married woman
and watching for his return), said person cannot be
punished as an accomplice because this crime
must be understod in the restrictive sense.
Both woman and the paramour must be
prosecuted. However, it is not necessary that
there be joint criminal intent, hence, the conviction
of one does not necessarily result in the conviction
of the other.
BAR Q: A, a married woman, had sexual
intercourse with a man who was not her husband.
The man did not know she was married. What
crime, if any, did each of them commit?
A: A, the married woman, committed the crime of
adultery under Art 333 of the RPC, having sexual
intercourse with a man not her husband while her
marriage is still subsisting. But the man, not
knowing her to be married, shall not be liable for
adultery

Art. 334. Concubinage - Three ways of committing:

1) by keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling;
2) by having sexual intercourse in scandalous
circumstances with a woman, who is not his wife;
3) by cohabiting with her in any place.

BAR Q: Abe, married to Liza, contracted another

marriage with Connie in Singapore. Thereafter,
Abe and Connie returned to the Philippines and
lived as husband and wife in the hometown of Abe
in Calamba, Laguna. 1) Can Abe be prosecuted for
bigamy? 2) If not, can he be prosecuted for any
other crime?
A: ) No, Abe may not be prosecuted for bigamy
since the second marriage was celebrated in
Singapore , x x x
2) Yes, Abe, together with Connie, may be
prosecuted for concubinage under Art. 334 of the
RPC for having cohabited as husband and wife.

BAR Q: A is married. He has a girlfriend with whom

he has sexual relations on a more or less regular
basis. They meet at least once a week in hotels,
motels and other places where they can be alone.
Is A guilty of any crime? Why?

A: You can answer this in two ways. First, you can

say that A is guilty of the crime of concubinage by
having sexual intercourse under scandalous
circumstances with a woman who is not his wife.
Having sexual intercourse on a more or less regular
basis in hotels, motels and other places may be
considered a scandalous circumstance that offends
public conscience. Second, you can say that his
weekly meetings with his girlfriend does not per se
constitute scandalous circumstance.

If the problem does not say that the sexual relation

is not on a regular basis, like a husband caught on
videotape having sexual relation with another
woman, that is not concubinage. Why? Because he
did not keep a mistress in the conjugal dwelling;
did not have sexual intercourse in scandalous
circumstances with a woman, who is not his wife;
or did not cohabit with her in any place.

Art, 336. Acts of lasciviousness or lewdness; under

any of the following circumstances: using force or
intimidation/offended party is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious/offended party is under 12
years of age.
BAR Q: When is embracing, kissing and
touching a girl's breast considered only unjust
vexation instead of acts of lasciviousness?
A: The acts of embracing, kissing a woman
arising either out of passion or other motive and
the touching of her breast as a mere incident of the
embrace without lewd design constitutes merely
unjust vexation, however, when the kissing and the
embracing and the touching of the breast of a
woman are done with lewd design, the same
constitute acts of lasciviousness.

Art. 337 - Qualified Seduction

BAR Q: What are the 3 classes of offenders in a
crime of qualified seduction?
A: 1. Those who exercise moral influence over the
victim, like a priest who acts as the spiritual
adviser of the victim, or a teacher where the victim
is enrolled;
2. a brother or an ascendant by consanguinity,
like an uncle;
3. those considered as "domestic" in relation to
the victim, enjoying the confidence and intimacy
shared by the members of the household.

Art. 342. Forcible Abduction

Elements of FA with rape: 1) the person
abducted is a woman, regardless of age, civil
status or reputation; 2) she is taken against her
will; 3) the abduction is with lewd design; 4) the
abducted woman is raped under any of the
circumstances in Art. 266-A.
Only one of the several rapes is complexed
with FA. The other rapes are charged separately as
one count each.

For the conviction of various defendants for

the crime of abduction, it is enough that there was
lewd design by one of them, and the same was
known to the others who cooperated in the
commission of the felony. Once conspiracy is
established, the acts of the co-conspirator should
be considered as the acts executed by all, and
therefore, the conspiracy of each and everyone
should be the same.
BAR Q: Pretty was a campus beauty queen who,
because of her looks and charms, attracted many
suitors. Having decided that she would become a
nun, Pretty turned down all her suitors. Gwapo,
one of her persistent suitors, could not handle
rejection and one night decided decided to accost
Pretty as she walked home. Together with Pogi,
Gwapo forced Pretty into his car and forced Pretty
into his car and drove her to an abandoned
warehouse where he and Pogi froced Pretty to
dance for them. Later, the two took turns in raping
her. After satisfying their lusts, Gwapo and Pogi
dropped her off at her house.
1) What crime was committed? - complex crime
of forcible abduction with rape, plus separate
counts of rape. The forcible abduction was a
necessary means of committing the rape.
2) If after the ordeal, Pretty decided to take her
own life by hanging herself. Will the duo be liable
for Pretty's death? - No. Suicide is an efficient
intervening cause that has broken the causal
connection between the rapes and the death.

Art. 343 - Consented Abduction (versus seduction)

In consented abduction, the gravamen is the
alarm and disturbance to the parents and the
family of the victim and the infringement of their
rights. In seduction, the gravamen is the wrong
done to the woman.
BAR Q: A, with lewd design, took a 13-yr old gir
to a nipa hut in his farm and there had sexual
intercourse with her. The girl did not offer any
resisitance because she was infatuated with the
man, who was good-looking and belonged to a rich
and prominent family in the town. What crime was
committed?
A: A committed the crime of consented
abduction under Article 343 of the Revised Penal
Code. The said Article punishes the abduction of a
virgin over 12 and under 18 years of age, carried
out with her consent and with lewd designs.
Although the problem did not indicate the victim to
be a virgin, virginity should not be understood in its
material sense, as to exclude a virtuous woman of
good reputatio, since the essence ofthe crime is
not the injury to the woman but the outrage and
alarm to her family.

TITLE 12. CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF

PERSONS

Art. 347. Simulation of Birth - must be made in the

record of birth; simulation in any other document is
falsification.
Under RA 7610, child trafficking is committed
by the parents who agree to the adoption of a child
for consideration and by a physician who makes it
appear in the record of birth that the supposed
parents are the natural parents.

BAR Q: A childless couple, A and B, wanted to have

a child they could call their own. C, an unwed
mother, sold her newborn baby to them.
Thereafter, A and B caused their names to be
stated in the birth certificate of the child as his
parents. This was done in connivance with the
doctor who assisted in the delivery of C. What are
the criminal liabilities, if any, of the couple and the
doctor?

A: The couple and the doctor shall be liable for the

crime of simulation of birth, penalized under Article
347 of the RPC, as amended. Tha act of making it
appear in the birth certificate that the persons
named therein are the parents of the child when
they are not really the biological parents of said
child constitutes the crime of simulation of birth.
C, the unwed mother is criminally liable for
"child trafficking", a violation of Article IV, Sec. 7 of
Rep. Act No. 7610. The law punishes inter alia the
act of buying and selling of a child.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

The couple A and B, the unwed mother C, and the

doctor being all involved in the simulation of birth
of the newborn child, violated Rep. Act No. 7610.
Their acts constitute child trafficking which are
penalized under Article IV of said law.

Art. 349. Bigamy.

The subsequent judicial declaration of nullity
of marriage does not retroact to the date of the
celebration of marriage insofar as the penal laws
are concerned. One who contracts a subsequent
marriage during the subsistence of a valid
marriage is liable for bigamy, notwithstanding the
subsequent judicial declaration that the second
marriage is void ab initio.
The prescriptive period for the crime of bigamy
is computed from the time the crime was
discovered by the offended party, the authorities or
their agents. The principle ofconstructive notice
which ordinarily applies to land or property
disputes should not be applied to the crime of
bigamy, as marriage is not property.

BAR Q: Joselito married Ramona in July, 1995,

only to learn later on that Ramona was previously
married to David, from whom Ramona had been
separated for more than ten years. Believing that
his marriage to Ramona was an absolute nullity,
Joselito contracted a subsequent marriage with
Anabelle. Can Joselito be prosecuted for bigamy?
A: Yes, Joselito can be prosecuted for bigamy for
his subsequent marriage with Anabelle even
though his marriage with Ramona was an absolute
nullity. Despite the nullity of the first marriage,
Joselito should have filed a case of dissolution of
such marriage under Art. 40, Family Code, before
contracting a second marriage.

BAR Q: CBP is legally married to OEM. Without

obtaining a marriage license, CBP contracted a
second marriage to RST. Is CBP liable for bigamy?
A: Whether CBP could be held liable for bigamy or
not, depends on whether the second marriage is
invalid or valid even without a marriage license.
Although as a general rule,marriages solemnized
without license are null and void ob initio, there are
marriages exempted from license requirement
under Chapter 2, Title 1 of the Family Code. If the
second marriage was valid even without a
marriage license, then CBP would be liable for
bigamy. Otherwise, CBP is not liable for bigamy but
for Illegal Marriage in Art. 350 for the Revised Penal
Code.

BAR Q: Assuming the existence of the first

marriage when accused contracted the second
marriage and the subsequent judicial declaration of
nullity of the second marriage on the ground of
psychological incapacity, would you render a
judgment of conviction for bigamy?

A: Yes. A declaration of the nullity of the second

marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity
is of no moment insofar as the State's penal laws
are concerned. Since a marriage contracted during
the subsitence of a valid marriage is automatically
void, the nullity of the second marriage is not per
se an argument for the avoidance of the criminal
liability for bigamy.

BAR Q: Raissa and Martin are married to each other

but had been separated for the last five years.
Raissa decided to wed Juan, her suitor, who had no
inkling that she was married. Raissa and Juan
accomplished an application for marriage license
which they subscribed and swore to before the
Local Civil Registrar. Raissa declared in the
application that she is single. The marriage license
was issued. In due time, the couple were married
by the mayor. Raissa and Juan had their first
sexual intercourse later in the evening. What
crime/crimes, if any, did Raissa commit?

A: Raissa committed bigamy for contracting a

second marriage while her first marriage was
subsisting. She is also guilty of perjury for making
untruthful statements under oath or executing an
affidavit upon a material matter, when she
declared she was not married in the application for
marriage license, a public document. She also
committed adultery for having sexual intercourse
with Juan, although she is a married woman.
Art, 353. Libel
Every defamatory imputation is presumed
malicious, except in:
1. Private communication made by any person
to another in the performance of any legal, moral
or social duty;
2. A fair and true report made in good faith,
without any comments or remarks of a) any
judicial, legislative, or other official proceedings
which are not of confidential nature, or b) any
statement, report, speech delivered in said
proceedings, or c ) any other act performed by
public officers in exercise of their functions.
3. Fair commentaries on matters of public
interest.

ABSOLUTELY PRIVILEGED STATEMENTS - not

actionable regardless of the existence of malice in
fact.
QUALIFIEDLY PRIVILEGED STATEMENTS - are
susceptible to libel suits provided the presence of
malice in fact is established.
 Kinds of malice: 1) malice in law- that which the
law presumes to be present where the offender
cannot establish justifiable reasons or good
motives for the imputation. The complainant does
not have to prove its existence because it is
presumed by law.
2) malice in fact- that which
the complainant must prove to exist. The offended
party must prove, where malice in law does not
exist, the existence of malice in order to hold the
offender criminally and civilly liable.

- statements by lawyers in pleadings which are

defamatory but not relevant to the issue may be
subject to proof of actual malice.
- truth is not an absolute defense in libel. Proof
of truth shall be admissible in libel cases only if
the same imputes a crime or is made against a
public officer with respect to the fact related to the
discharge of their official duties, and moreover
must have been published with good motives and
for justificable ends. Truth then, on its own, is not
enough.
Doctrine of Fair Comment - while in general every
discernable imputation publicly made is deemed
false, and every false imputation is deemed
malicious, nevertheless, when the discreditable
imputation is directed against a public person in his
public capacity, it is not necessary actionable. In
order that discreditable imputation to a public
official may be actionable, it must either be a false
allegation of fact or a comment based on a false
supposition.

BAR Q: In her weekely gossip column in a tabloid,

Gigi wrote an unflattering article about Pablo, a
famous singer, and his bitter separation from his
wife. The article portrayed Pablo as an abusive
husband, which caused the loss of his lucrative
endorsement contracts. Pablo charged Gigi with
libel. In her defense, Gigi countered that she did
not commit libel because Pablo has attained the
status of a public figure so that even his personal
lif has become a legitimate subject of public
interest. Is Gigi correct?
A: No. Gigi was attacking the personal life of Pablo
as a husband and not his public life as a famous
singer. She portrayed Pablo as an abusive
husband. Such defamatory utterances are not
protected. Any attack upon the private character
of a public figure on matters which are not related
to their works would constitute libel.

BAR Q: In his Answer to the complaint, Atty. A

stated that Atty B is "bobo, inutil, good for nothing,
stupid, and a menace to the clients. Can Atty A be
liable for libel?
A: Yes. Although a pleading is a privileged
communication, malicious statements that are
irrelevant and impertinent to the issue in the
pleading may be libelous.

BAR Q: Angelina maintains a website where visitors

can give their comments on the posted pictures of
the goods she sells in her exclusive boutique.
Bettina posted a comment that the red Birkin bag
shown in Angelina's website is fake and that
Angelina is known to sell counterfeit items.
Angelina wants to file a case against
Bettina. She seeks your advice. What advice will
you give her?
A: I will advise Angelina to file a criminal case of
libel against Bettina because the imputation made
by Bettina is libelous. Whether the imputation of a
defect, status or condition is real or imaginary, if it
publicly tends to discredit, dishonor, or place in
contempt or ridicule a particular person who is
identified, the imputation is presumed by law to be
malicious and thus penalized as libel.

Moreover, if Bettina is engaged in similar line of

trade, her statement against the goods sold by
angelina may constitute a violation of the law on
Unfair Competition.

BAR Q: A was nominated Secretary of a

Department in the Executive Branch of the
government. His nomination was thereafter
submitted to the Commission on Appointments
for confirmation. While the Commission was
considering the nomination, a group of concerned
citizens caused to be published in the newspapers
a full-page statement objecting to A's appointment
They alleged that A was a drug dependent, that he
had several mistresses, and that he was corrupt,
having accepted bribes or favors from parties
transacting business in his previous office, and
therefore he was unfit for the position to which he
had been nominated. As a result of the publication,
the nomination was not confirmed by the
Commission on Appointments. The official sued the
concerned citizens and the newspapers for libel
and damages on account of his non-confirmation.
How will you decide the case?
A: I will acquit the concerned citizens and the
newspapers involved, from the crime of libel,
because obviously they made the denunciation out
of a moral or social duty and thus there is absence
of malice. Since A was a candidate for a very
important public position of a Department
Secretary, his moral, mental and physical fitness
for the public trust in such position becomes a
public concern as the interest of the public is at
stake. It is pursuant to such concern that the
denunciation was made; hence, bereft of malice.
BAR Q. If defamatory imputations are made not by
publication in the newspapers but by broadcast
over the radio, do they constitute libel? Why?
A: Yes, because libel may be committed by radio
broadcast Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code
punishes libel committed by means, among others,
of radio broadcast, inasmuch as the broadcast
made by radio is public and may be defamatory.
BAR Q:During a seminar workshop attended by
government employees from the Bureau of
Customs and the Bureau f Internal Revenue, A, the
speaker, in the course of his lecture, lamented the
fact that a great majority of those serving in said
agencies were utterly dishonest and corrupt. The
following morning, the whole group of employees
in the two bureaus who attended the seminar, as
complainants, filed a criminal complaint against A
for uttering what the group claimed to be
defamatory statements of the lecturer. In court, A
filed a motion to quash the information, reciting
fully the above facts, on the ground that no crime
were committed. If you were the judge, how would
you resolve the motion?
ANSWER: I would grant the motion to quash on the
ground that the facts charged do not constitute an
offense, since there is no definite person or
persons dishonored. The crime of libel or slander, is
a crime against honor such that the person or
persons dishonored must be identifiable even by
innuendoes: otherwise the crime against honor is
not committed. Moreover, A was not making a
malicious imputation, but merely stating an
opinion; he was delivering a lecture with no malice
at all during a seminar workshop. Malice being
inherently absent in the utterance, the statement
is not actionable as defamatory.

BAR Q: Distinguish clearly but briefly between oral

defamation and criminal conversation.
A: Oral defamation, known as SLANDER, is a
malicious imputation of any act, omission,
condition or circumstance against a person, done
orally in public, tending to cause dishonor,
discredit, contempt, embarassment or ridicule to
the latter. This is a crime against honor penalized
in Art. 358 of the Revised Penal Code.
CRIMINAL CONVERSATION. The term is used in
making a polite reference to sexual intercourse as
in certain crimes, like rape, seduction and adultery.
It has no definite concept as a crime.

Art. 365. Criminal Negligence

Culpa is either a crime (Art 365) or a modality
of committing a crime (Art 3).
 Reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily,
but without malice, doing or failing to do an act
from which material damage results by reason of
inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the
person performing or failing to perform such act,
taking into consideration his employment or
occupation, degree of intelligence, physical
condition, and other circumstances regarding
persons, time and place.

BAR Q: Olimpio caught a cold and was running a

fever. His doctor prescribed paracetamol. Olimpio
went to a drug store with the prescription, and the
pharmacist sold him three tablets. Upon arriving
home, he took a tablet. One hour later, he had a
serious seizure and died. The autopsy showed that
the tablet he had taken was not paracetamol but a
pill to which he was allergic. The pharmacist was
charged with murder. Is the charge proper? If not,
what should it be?
A: The charge was improper. The pharmacist
should be charged with criminal negligence, or
reckless imprudence resulting in homicide,
because there was no intent to kill Olimpio. The
accused inexcusably lacked precaution in failing to
dispense the proper medicine to the victim which
caused his death.

BAR Q: Eddie brought his son Randy to a local

faithhealer known as "Mother Himala". He was
diagnosed by the faithhealer as being possessed
by an evil spirit. Eddie thereupon authorized the
conduct of a "treatment" calculated to drive the
spirit from the boy's body. Unfortunately, the
procedure conducted resulted in the boy's death.
The faithhealer and three others who were part
of the healing ritual were charged with murder and
convicted by the lower court. If you are an
appellate court justice, would you sustain the
conviction upon appeal?

A: No, the conviction of murder should not be

sustained, because there is no indication that the
accused acted with intent to kill Randy. On the
contrary, the facts show that the accused acted to
"treat" the victim in a way of driving the evil spirit
which was believed to have "possessed" him.
Considering that the proximate cause of the
victim's death was the healing ritual done by the
accused which is not recognized in law as
legitimate, the accused are criminally liable for the
victim's death. As they may have overdone the
"healing ritual" they conducted on the victim's
body, causing the latter's death, although the
intent to kill was absent, the accused may be held
criminally liable for reckless imprudence resulting
in homicide.