Criminal Law 1 Scenarios and Examples Article 03 to Article 08

T, while driving his taxi, someone suddenly enters and holds up the gun to his face and orders him to
drive. He drove so fast that he killed a boy. Is T criminally liable for Reckless imprudence resulting to
homicide?
ANS: No, because he did not have freedom in executing the act

An imbecile enters the car and starts the bus resulting to the damage of nine other cars, is he held
criminally liable?
ANS: No, because he did not have the intelligence

A law student got sick of hunting girls thus he got a gun and saw an animal and he shot the bull but
he hit the teeth of the bull and the bullet redounded and hit another boy, killing him. Is the law
student liable?
ANS: No, because it has to be an act with imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight or lack of skill.

A law student committed suicide but killed a kid in the process, is the law student criminally liable for
the death of the kid?
ANS: No, because suicide was not a crime thus A4 cannot apply.

A was played a practical joke on B, who had a feint heart. Is A criminally liable for the act?
ANS: No.

Error in personae (mistake in the identity of the victim)

Two peace officer were ordered to arrest B, an escaped notorious convict, and proceeding to the
latter’s house, saw a man sleeping with his back towards the door and fired at him but turns out to be
A. Are the two peace officers liable?
ANS: Yes, when they fired at the sleeping man without making any inquiry they committed an offense a
felony. Their wrongful intent was to kill B but the wrongful act was killing A.

Aberratio ictus (mistake in the blow)

A wanted to kill E. He shot E but missed and instead hit his father. Is A criminally liable?
ANS: Yes, he is guilty of attempted homicide with parricide. When A shot at E he was perpetrating a felony
with the wrongful intent to kill E and the wrongful act was killing his father.

Accused wanting to kill President Roxas threw a hand grenade, ended up killing Simeon Varela, and
injured several other people. Is he liable?
ANS: Yes, he is guilty of murder with assault and multiple attempted murder

Praeter intentionem (injurious result is greater than that intended)

 A slapped his wife B. B falls down and hits her head and dies. Is A liable?
ANS: Yes, A is liable for Parricide. When he slapped his wife, he was committing a felony. His wrongful intent
is only to cause injury but the wrongful act done was greater – the killing of the spouse.

A attacked B and in trying to avoid A, B’s left hand was injured, severing the extensor tendon in one of
the fingers. Is A liable?
ANS: Yes, because of what the A did it resulted to B’s injury. 1

Conductor shouted “Lusacan, Lusacan” knowing that the train would reach the lusacan stated full
three minutes more and deceased Martina Bool, a passenger, walked towards the left front door
facing the direction of Tiaong, Quezon carrying a child with one hand and baggages another. And
when the train that slowed down suddenly picked up speed causing Martin and the child to fall from
the door causing their death. Is the conductor liable?
ANS: Yes, the premature announcement of the conductor prompted the victims to stand and proceed to the
nearest exit, they would have been safely seated when the train picked up speed. Thus the connection
between the premature and erroneous announcement of the accused and the deaths of the victims is direct
and natural, unbroken by any intervening efficient causes

A person who is against the accused, jumped into the water despite not knowing how to swim
because he reasonably believed that he would be in great bodily harm. Is the accused Liable?
ANS: Yes, the death resulting from downing owing to his possible inability to swim or the strength of the
current can be considered as intervening causes but not efficient ones since they are not acts of facts
absolutely foreign from the criminal act.

A knocked down B who was then jumped on by a horse. Is A liable?

ANS: No, because the nearby horse constituted an efficient intervening cause without the horse, B would not
have died and the horse is considered as absolutely foreign from the criminal act

A belonged in a gang. In one of the fights, he brought a nailcutter to slash the old guy who was “siga”.
The nail cutter turned out to have tetanous. Is A liable?
ANS: Yes, because of the wrongful intent of A and the wrongful act done. But the wrongful act resulted to a
greater injury.

Impossible Crime2

1 Felony committed should be proximate cause. Proximate cause has been defined as “that cause, which, in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any
efficient intervening cause, produces the injury and without which the result would no have incurred.
2 An act performed with malice, which would have been an offence against persons or property, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or

on account of inadequate or ineffectual means.

Requisites:
(1) The act performed would be an offense against persons or property like parricide, murder, homicide, abortion, duel or physical injuries, or robbery,
brigandage, theft, usurpation, culpable insolvency, estafa and other deceits, chattel mortgage, arson and malicious mischief
(2) The act was done with deliberate intent
(3) its accomplishment is inherently impossible or that the means employed is either inadequate or ineffectual
 A wanted to kill his mortal enemy, B. He saw his chance and stabbed B, but later found out that he
was already dead before he stabbed him. Is A liable?
ANS: Yes, he is liable for the commission of an impossible crime

Legal Impossibility

A stole a ring from B which he left on a table. It turns out that the ring A stole was the same ring he
lost a few days before. Is A liable?
ANS: ???

Physical Impossibility

A, B, C, D, & E, all armed, proceeded to the house of X whereupon A pointed to the room that X used
to occupy and all shot the room. There was no one in the room. Are they liable?
ANS: ??? This is an impossible crime to commit murder

A saw a dead lady lying on the ground, thinking that the lady was merely sleeping. He got naked and
raped the lady. Is he liable?
ANS: Yes, since rape is considered a crime against person and not chastity, A is liable as he committed an
impossible crime to commit rape

A wanted to kill his mortal enemy. He saw B lying on the ground. He knew he was dead but still A
stabbed him. Is A liable?
ANS: No, since A had knowledge of B being dead. There can be no case of impossible crime.

A wanted to kill his wife. He placed a little bit of poison in her food. It did not affect his wife as it was
not sufficient. Is A still liable?
ANS: Yes, he committed a felony by inadequate means 3

A wanted to kill B and he thought that the drink he gave was poison but it was only Gatorade. Is he
liable?
ANS: Yes, because he committed a felony by ineffectual means

X lost his ring. He saw it on Y’s table and he got it. Y accused him of stealing. Is X liable for an
impossible crime to commit theft?
ANS: No, because it was his ring to begin with

Common Law Crimes

3 The offended party must not be injured in any way otherwise it would result to attempted or frustrated homicide or murder as the case may be.
There is no such thing in the Philippines. As the Section 5 states that “whenever the court has knowledge …”
Batasang Pambansa Bilang 22 4(B.P. Blg. 22) is a product of that Article.
Elements of offense under this article
1. The making, drawing and issuance of any check to apply to account or for value
2. The maker, drawer, and issuer knows at the time of issue that he does not have sufficient funds
in or credit with the drawee bank for the payment of such check in full upon its presentment
3. Check is subsequently dishonored by the drawee bank for insufficiency of funs or credit or
would have been dishonored for the same reason, had not the drawee without any valid reason,
ordered the bank to stop payment.

X saw a check lying on the ground where the owner was A. X got it and went to the bank to have it
converted to cash. The check was dishonored. Is A liable for estafa and Can X be liable for theft?
There is not enough information to determine if A is liable for estafa. He can be as one of the elements is
present. But the question of the two other elements has been yet to be determined. No as X is liable for
committing an impossible crime to commit theft but he is not liable for theft.

Duty of the Court

Daughter killed her father who has been raping her for several years. Is she guilty of parricide & be
punished with death by the court with the aggravating circumstance of treachery, & no mitigating
circumstances, as the penalty is an indivisible penalty? If yes, Can the judge impose a different
penalty? If no, why not?
Yes, she is guilty of parricide based on the RPC. No, the judge cannot impose a different penalty. The only
thing the judge can do is to write a letter to the Chief Executive explaining the situation.

Stages of Execution

A, intending to kill B, shoots him. What is A liable for?

A is liable for Consummated5 Homicide or Murder

A intending to kill B, shoots B at a vital portion of his body, but because of timely medical attention. B
did not die. What is a liable for?
A is liable for frustrated6 homicide or murder

A intending to kill B, shoots B but missed or hit B only on a superficial part of his body which would
not cause B’s death. What is A liable for?
A is liable for attempted7 homicide or murder

A intending to kill B, points his gun at B and squeezed the trigger but it jammed and no bullet was
fired. What is A liable for?
A is liable for attempted homicide or murder

4 Estafa
5 Article 6 A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present
6 Article 6 And it is frustrated, when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which nevertheless do
not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator
7 Article 6 There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution
which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance
 How to properly determine the stage of execution
Consider the following in order to determine whether a crime is consummated, frustrated, or attempted
1. nature of the crime
2. elements constituting the offense
3. manner of committing the same

Peson A is about to set a house on fire but was apprehended before any portion is burned. Is he
liable?
Yes, he is liable for attempted arson.

A placed all the rags soaked in gasoline and placed it near the house that he planned to burn but it
was put to fire before any of the portions of the house was burned. Is he liable?
Yes, he is liable for frustrated arson

A got a hold of the cellphone of B but he was caught by the police. Is he liable?
Yes, he is liable for consummated theft 8.

A got the carabao of B but was apprehended two meters away from where it was tied up. Is he liable?
Yes, he is liable for consummated theft.

B found the proceeds of the sale inside the pocket of A who failed to turn over the cashier. Is A liable
for estafa?
Yes, he is liable for frustrated estafa and not estafa. As there needs to have the element of damage to the
offended party for it to be consummated.

A entered the house of Y and had removed the property he intended to steal but was caught before
he could get out. What is the crime he is liable for?
A is liable for Frustrated Robbery

A was caught inside the house of B while A was trying to pull the plug of the TV in order to steal it.
What is A liable for?
A is liable for attempted robbery

A got the TV of B from B’s house. A was already outside the house when the police arrived. What is A
liable for?
A is liable for consummated robbery

8 For theft, the person need not to get away with the crime to count it as consummated. As long as the got a hold of it with the intent to gain, then it shall be
considered consummated. There is no such thing as frustrated theft.
Offenses consummated at the instance – libel or slander (AKA Formal Crimes)
Offenses consummated by mere attempt, proposal, or overt acts:
Flight to Enemy’s Country (Article 121)
Mere Solicitation or proposal to consummate offense in Abuses against Chastity (Article 245)
Solicit any gift or promise in consideration for refraining from taking part in public auction in
Machinations in Public Auctions (Article 185)

B places himself on top of C raising C’s skirt and unbuttonin his pants, the endeavor is to have sex with
her. What is he guilty of?
B is guilty of attempted rape (but if attempt to have sex is not clear, then the crime is only Acts of
Lasciviousness)

B’s penis enters the lips of the female organ without rupturing the hymen or vagina. What is he guilty
of?
B is guilty of consummated rape9

X, Y, Z & S conspired to kill B. X told the 3 others that he will provide the weapons. Y would monitor
the movement of B. Z would monitor the security guards. S would monitor B’s car. A policeman passes
by & hears them. Can he arrest them?
No. There is no law for conspiracy to murder. 


X sells books in a bookstore. Students sometimes buy the books using checks. X pocketed a check. X
was then frisked, & the check was found in his pocket. What crime did X commit?
X committed frustrated estafa. 


X told Y, “I’ll buy some poison, let’s kill my wife.” Policeman C overhears them. X & Y bough the rat
poison. Immediately, C tries to arrest X & Y. Is this attempted parricide?
No. There is no overt act of Parricide yet.

Armed men yelled at a driver in a bus & told him to stop. The bus accelerated upon knowing that the
area is abundant with hold up cases. The armed men shot at the bus. Are the armed men liable for
attempted robbery?
No. No overt act of robbery was yet committed...the purpose could have been to kill and not to hold up the
bus. They are, however, liable for damaging the bus.


X, Y, Z & S conspire to kill B. S told the 3 others that he will provide the weapons. Y would monitor the
movement of B. Z would monitor the security guards. X would monitor B’s car. A policeman passes by
& hear them. Can he arrest them?
No. There is no law for conspiracy to murder.

9 No such thing as frustrated rape

 A & B conspired to commit a rebellion & were then caught before they could commit it. Are they
liable?
Yes. Conspiracy to Commit Rebellion is covered by law, & is thus punishable.

A & B really committed rebellion. They recruited C & D too. Can A & B be charged with conspiracy to
commit rebellion? How about C & D, who limited their acts 

No. The felony has been consummated, & thus the crime they should be charged with is Rebellion, & not
Conspiracy to Commit Rebellion. 


A, C, D & B conspired to commit rebellion together. C & D, however, limited their acts in the end & did
not participate in the actual rebellion, which A & B committed. Can they be charged with conspiracy to
commit rebellion? 

No. The felony has been consummated, & thus the crime they should be charged with is Rebellion, & not
Conspiracy to Commit Rebellion. 


How about C & D, can they be liable even if they did not push through with the
commission of the rebellion?
Yes, they are liable for committing rebellion. In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all.