CRIMINAL LAW FAQ

1
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 2018 – 2019

CHAIRPERSON Catriona Janelle Gayatin

VICE CHAIRPERSON FOR ACADEMICS Jerekko Cadorna
VICE CHAIRPERSON FOR ACADEMIC OPERATIONS Rodel Cadorniga Jr.
VICE CHAIRPERSON FOR HOTEL OPERATIONS Emmanuel Josef Jovellanos
EXECUTIVE OFFICER FOR HOTEL OPERATIONS Christian Boy Benedict Tiangco
VICE CHAIRPERSON FOR FINANCE Katreena Frances Monje
VICE CHAIRPERSON FOR SECRETARIAT Odette Marie Jumao-as
VICE CHAIRPERSON FOR COMMUNICATIONS Maryll Ann Ragpala
VICE CHAIRPERSON FOR RECRUITMENT AND MEMBERSHIP Giulia Ingrid Calub
VICE CHAIRPERSON FOR ELECTRONIC DATA PROCESSING John Eli Zuriel Bitong

San Beda College Alabang School of Law Administration

Dr. Ulpiano P. Sarmiento III

Dean and Adviser

ATTY. Anna Marie Melanie B. Trinidad

Vice Dean

ATTY. Carlo D. Busmente

Prefect of Student Affairs

2
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ

CRIMINAL LAW TEAM

Subject Head Arnold Bolkiah Unidad

Members Karen Abarra

Anna Andaya
Bettina Barrion
April Carelo
Cassandra Catalo
Audrey De Guzman
Lisa Garcia
Reena Marquez
Carl Mendoza
Rmay Samarita
Kuki Singson
Rai Sotelo
Larisse Sumanga
Aika Taban-ud
Priscilla Villafor

3
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
A. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
1. DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION
Q: (2014)Mr. Red was drinking with
his buddies, Mr. White and Mr. Blue
when he saw Mr. Green with his
former girlfriend, Ms. Yellow. Already
drunk, Mr. Red declared in a loud
voice that if he could not have Ms.
Yellow, no one can. He then
proceeded to the men’s room but
told Mr. White and Mr.Blue to take
care of Mr. Green. Mr. Blue and Mr.
White asked Mr. Red what he meant
but Mr. Red simply said, “You already
know what I want,” and then left. Mr.
Blue and Mr. White proceeded to kill
Mr. Green and hurt Ms.Yellow. (4%)
(A)What, if any, are the
respective liabilities of Mr. Red, Mr.
White and Mr. Blue for the death of
Mr. Green?
(B) What, if any, are the
respective liabilities of Mr. Red, Mr.
White and Mr. Blue for the injuries of
Ms. Yellow?
SUGGESTED ANSWER
(A) Mr. White and Mr. Blue are
liable for the death of Mr. Green as
principals by direct participation.
They were the ones who directly took
part in the killing of the victim. Mr.
Red is not liable as a principal by
inducement because his statement
that Mr. White and Mr. Blue were “to
take care of Mr. Green” was not
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
made directly with the intent of
procuring the commission of the
crime. The words he uttered to Mr.
White and Mr. Blue: “You already
know what I want,” may not be
considered as powerful and
threatening so as to amount to
physical or moral coercion. Likewise,
there is no showing that Mr. Red
exercised moral ascendency or
influence over Mr. White and Mr.
Blue.
(B) Mr. White and Mr. Blue
are liable as principals by direct
participation for the crime of
physical injuries for hurting Ms.
Yellow. Their liability would depend
on the extent of the physical injuries
inflicted – either serious, less serious,
or slight physical injuries. Mr. Red has
no criminal liability because he did
not participate in the act of hurting
Ms. Yellow.
2. COMPLEX CRIMES AND
COMPOSITE CRIMES
Q: (2014)Sexy boarded a taxi on her
way home from a party. Because
she was already tipsy, she fell asleep.
Pogi, the taxi driver, decided to take
advantage of the situation and
drove Sexy to a deserted place
where he raped her for a period of
two (2) weeks.
What crime did Pogicommit? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Pogi committed the special complex
crime of Kidnapping and Serious
Illegal Detention with Rape. All the
4
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
elements of Kidnapping and Serious
Illegal Detention are present. Pogi, a
private individual, kidnapped and
detained Sexy by bringing her to a
deserted place. Said detention is
illegal and is serious because it lasted
for more than 3 days and the victim
is a female.
The special complex crime of
Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention with Rape resulted
because Sexy, the victim of the
kidnapping and detention, was
raped as a consequence of the
detention. (Article 267, last par., RPC)
Since it is a special complex crime,
regardless of the number of times the
victim had been raped, there is only
one single indivisible offense of
Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention with Rape.
3. IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
Q: (2014)Putidetested Pula, his
roommate, because Pula was
courting Ganda, whom Putifancied.
One day, Putidecided to teach Pula
a lesson and wentto a veterinarian
(Vet) to ask for poison on the pretext
that he was going tokill a sick pet,
when actually Putiwas intending to
poison Pula.The Vet instantly gave
Putia non-toxic solution which, when
mixedwith Pula’s food, did not kill
Pula. (4%)
(A) What crime, if any, did
Puticommit?
(B) Would your SUGGESTED
ANSWER be the same if, as a result of
the mixture, Pula got an upset
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
stomach and had to be hospitalized
for 10 days?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) Puti committed the impossible
crime of murder. All the elements of
an impossible crime are present.
Puti’s act of mixing a solution with
Pula’s food would have been
murder, a crime against persons. The
act was done evil intent which is to
kill Pula. However, the crime was not
accomplished because of the
employment of ineffectual means,
i.e., the solution turned out to be
non-toxic which would not kill Pula.
And said act would not fall under
any other provision of the RPC.
(B) No, my answer would not be
the same. If as a result of the mixture,
Pula got an upset stomach and had
to be hospitalized for 10 days, the
crime committed by Puti is Less
Serious Physical Injuries. It is not an
impossible crime because the last
element of an impossible requires
that the act performed should not
constitute a violation of another
provision of the RPC.
4. JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE
Q: (2014)Ms. A had been married to
Mr. B for 10 years. Since their
marriage, Mr. B had been jobless
and a drunkard, preferring to stay
with his “barkadas” until the wee
hours of the morning. Ms. A was the
breadwinner and attended to the
needs of their three (3) growing
5
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
children. Many times, when Mr. B
was drunk, he would beat Ms. A and
their three (3) children, and shout
invectives against them. In fact, in
one of the beating incidents, Ms. A
suffered a deep stab wound on her
tummy that required a prolonged
stay in the hospital. Due to the
beatings and verbal abuses
committed against her, she
consulted a psychologist several
times, as she was slowly beginning to
lose her mind. One night, when Mr. B
arrived dead drunk, he suddenly
stabbed Ms. A several times while
shouting invectives against her.
Defending herself from the attack,
Ms. A grappled for the possession of
a knife and she succeeded. She
then stabbed Mr. B several times
which caused his instantaneous
death. Medico-Legal Report showed
that the husband suffered three (3)
stab wounds.
Can Ms. A validly put up a
defense? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Ms. A can put up the defense of
battered woman syndrome. She is
suffering from physical and
psychological or emotional distress
resulting from cumulative abuse by
her husband. She even consulted a
psychologist several times, as she
was slowly beginning to lose her
mind. Under Section 26, RA 9262 of
The Anti- Violence against Women
and their Children Act, “victim
survivors who are found by the court
to be suffering from battered woman
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
syndrome do not incur any criminal
and civil liability notwithstanding the
absence of any of the elements for
the justifying circumstance of self-
defense under the Revised penal
Code.”
5. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC
ORDER
Q: (2013)Miss Reyes, a lady professor,
caught Mariano, one of her students,
cheating during an examination.
Aside from calling Mariano's
attention, she confiscated his
examination booklet and sent him
out of the room, causing Mariano
extreme embarrassment.
In class the following day, Mariano
approached Miss Reyes and without
any warning, slapped her on the
face. Mariano would have inflicted
grave injuries on Miss Reyes had not
Dencio, another student, intervened.
Mariano then turned his ire on
Dencio and punched him
repeatedly, causing him injuries.
What crime or crimes, if any,
did Mariano commit? (7%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Mariano is liable of 2 counts of Direct
Assault.
The elements of Direct Assault are:
(a) that the accused makes an
attack, employs force, makes a
serious intimidation or a serious
resistance; (b) that the person
assaulted is a person in authority or
his agent; (c) that at the time of the
assault the person in authority or his
6
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
agent is engaged in the
performance of his official duties or
that the assault was on the occasion
of the performance of his official
duties; (d) that the accused knows
that the person he is assaulting is a
person in authority or his agent in the
exercise of his duties; and (e) that
there is no public uprising.The first
Direct Assault is qualified by laying of
hands on a person in authority.
Mariano slapped Ms. Reyes, a
person in authority under Article 152,
RPC, while she was in the
performance of her official duties.
The second Direct Assault was
committed when Mariano
repeatedly punched Dencio who
became an agent of a person in
authority when he came to the aid
of Ms. Reyes, a person in authority
who was a victim of direct assault
6. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL
LIBERTY AND SECURITY
Q: (2014)Carla, four (4) years old,
was kidnapped by Enrique, the
tricycle driver engaged by her
parents to drive her to and from
school every day. Enrique wrote a
ransom note demanding that
Carla’s parents pay him P500,000.00
ransom in exchange for her liberty.
However, before the ransom note
could be received by Carla’s
parents, Enrique’s hideout was
discovered by the police. Carla was
rescued while Enrique was arrested.
The prosecutor considered that the
ransom note was never received by
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
Carla’s parents and filed a case of
“Impossible crime to commit
kidnapping” against Enrique.
Is the prosecutor correct? If he is not
correct, can he instead file a case of
grave coercion? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Prosecutor is not correct. There is
no “Impossible crime to commit
kidnapping”. First, an impossible
crime applies only to Crimes against
Persons and Crimes against Property
under Titles 8 and 10 of the RPC,
respectively. Kidnapping is a Crime
against Personal Liberty and Security
under Title 9, RPC. Second, even if
the ransom note was not received
by Carla’s parents, the crime of
kidnapping and serious illegal
detention for ransom is already
consummated. Under Article 267,
RPC, Kidnapping for Ransom is
committed “when the kidnapping or
detention is for the purpose of
extorting ransom from the victim or
any other person.” To consummate
the crime, it suffices that the purpose
is to extort ransom; it is not necessary
that the ransom note be received or
that ransom be paid.
No, the Prosecutor cannot file
a case of grave coercion because
the crime committed, as explained
above, is kidnapping for ransom
7. CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
Q: (2013)William is the son-in-law of
Mercedes who owns several pieces
7
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
of real property. In 1994, William's
wife, Anita, died. In 1996, William
caused the preparation of a Special
Power of Attorney (SPA) giving him
the authority to sell two (2) parcels of
land registered in the name of
Mercedes. The signature of
Mercedes in the SPA was forged
and, through this forged SPA and
without the consent and knowledge
of Mercedes, William succeeded in
selling the two (2) parcels for
Php2,000,000. He pocketed the
proceeds of the sale.Mercedes
eventually discovered William's
misdeeds and filed a criminal
complaint. William was subsequently
charged with estafa through
falsification of public document.
Was the criminal charge proper?
(7%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the criminal charge of estafa
through falsification of public
document is proper. William forged
the signature of his mother in law in
the Special Power of Attorney, a
public document, as a necessary
means to sell her properties without
remitting the proceeds thereof,
thereby committing estafa. Although
the relationship of affinity created
between Wiliam and his mother in
law survived the death of his wife
Anita, the absolutory cause under
Article 332(1), RPC does not apply to
him. Said absolutory cause is strictly
limited to the simple cases of theft,
estafa/swindling, and malicious
mischief. It does not apply where
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
any of these crimes is complexed
with another crime. (Intestate Estate
of Manolita Gonzales vda. De
Carungcong vs. People, GR 181409,
February 11, 2010)
Madam X, a bank teller, received
from depositor Madam Y a check
payable to cash in the amount of P1
million, to be deposited to the
account of Madam Y. Because the
check was not a crossed check,
Madam X credited the amount to
the account of her good friend,
Madam W, by accomplishing a
deposit slip. Seven (7) days after,
Madam X contacted her good
friend, Madam W and told her that
the amount of P1 million was
wrongfully credited to Madam W,
thus, Madam X urged Madam W to
withdraw the amount of P1 million
from her account and to turn over
the same to MadamX. As a dutiful
friend, Madam W readily acceded.
She was gifted by Madam X with an
expensive Hermes bag after the
withdrawal of the amount.
What crime/s, if any, did Madam X
and Madam W commit? Explain.
(5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Madam X committed the crime of
Qualified Theft under Article 310,
RPC. When Madam X, a bank teller,
received the check payable to cash
in the amount of P1million for deposit
to the account of Madam Y, what
was transferred to her was merely
8
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
the physical or material possession
thereof. Hence, her subsequent
misappropriation of the amount shall
constitute theft, qualified by grave
abuse of confidence. There is grave
abuse of confidence because the
relationship of guardianship,
dependence, and vigilance
between the depositor and the bank
created a high degree of
confidence between them which
Madam X, as the bank teller
representing the bank, abused.
8. ANTI-FENCING LAW
Q: (2014)Manolo, an avid art
collector, was invited to Tonio’s
house. There, Manolonoticed a nice
painting that exactly looked like the
painting which he reported was
stolen from him some years back.
Manoloconfronted Tonio about the
painting, but Toniodenied any
knowledge, claiming that he bought
the painting legitimately from a
friend. Manololater proved to
Toniothat the painting was indeed
the stolen painting. (4%)
(A) What crime/s, if any, may
Toniobe charged with?
(B) Manolodecided to take matters
into his own hands and, one night,
broke into Tonio’s house by
destroying the wall and taking the
painting. What, if any, would be the
liability of Manolo?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
(A) Tonio may be charged with
violation of PD 1612, The Anti-
Fencing Law. Under Section 5 of the
said law, mere possession of any
article, item, object, or anything of
value which has been the proceeds
of robbery or thievery is prima facie
evidence of fencing. Since Tonio is in
possession of a stolen painting, the
law presumes that he committed the
crime of fencing.
(B) Manolo is liable of Qualified
Trespass to Dwelling under Article
280, RPC. Trespass to dwelling is
qualified by use of force and
violence since Manolo entered the
house of Tonio against the will of the
latter.
9. B.P.22
Q: (2013?)Frank borrowed Pl,000,000
from his brother Eric. To pay the loan,
Frank issued a post-dated check to
be presented for payment a month
after the transaction. Two days
before maturity, Frank called Eric
telling him he had insufficient funds
and requested that the deposit of
the check be deferred. Nevertheless,
Eric deposited the check and it was
dishonored. When Frank failed to
pay despite demand, Eric filed a
complaint against him for violation of
Batas Pambansa Big. 22 (The
Bouncing Checks Law).
Was the charge brought against
Frank correct? (7%)
9
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the charge is correct. Violation
of Batas Pambansa Big. 22, The
Bouncing Checks Law,
ismalumprohibitum which is
committed by mere issuance of a
check without sufficient funds. Good
faith is not a defense. As long as the
check was issued on account or for
value, the purpose for which the
check was issued, the terms and
conditions relating to the issuance
are irrelevant to the prosecution of
the offender. Hence, the request of
Frank to defer the deposit of the
check as it has insufficient funds will
not militate against the prosecution
for violation of BP 22
10. JUVENILE JUSTICE WELFARE
ACT
Q: (2014)A, a young boy aged
sixteen (16) at the time of the
commission of the crime, was
convicted when he was already
seventeen (17) years of age for
violation of Section 11 of R.A. 9165 or
Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs
for which the imposable penalty is
life imprisonment and a fine. Section
98 of the same law provides that if
the penalty imposed is
lifeimprisonment to death on minor
offenders, the penalty shall be
reclusionperpetuato death. Under
R.A. 9344, a minor offender is entitled
to a privileged mitigating
circumstance. (8%)
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
(A) May the privileged mitigating
circumstance of minority be
appreciated considering that the
penalty imposed by law is
lifeimprisonment and fine?
(B) Is the Indeterminate Sentence
Law applicable considering that life
imprisonment has no fixed duration
and the Dangerous Drugs Law is
malumprohibitum?
(C) If the penalty imposed is more
than six (6) years and a notice of
appeal was filed by A and given
due course by the court, mayA still
file an application for probation?
(D) If probation is not allowed by
the court, how will A serve his
sentence?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) Yes. As stated above, under
Section 98, RA 9165, if the offender is
a minor, the penalty of life
imprisonment shall be considered as
reclusion perpetua. Now that it has
the nomenclature of penalties under
the RPC, the modifying
circumstances therein may also be
applied. Even if reclusion perpetua is
a single indivisible penalty, the
privileged mitigating circumstance
of minority would still be considered
to lower the imposable penalty. The
rule in Article 63, RPC that if the
penalty prescribed by law is a single
indivisible penalty, it shall be
imposed regardless of mitigating and
aggravating circumstance refers
only to ordinary mitigating
circumstances.
10
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
(B) Yes. The Indeterminate
Sentence Law is applicable even to
special penal laws. Since life
imprisonment was converted into
reclusion perpetua, which in turn was
graduated to reclusion temporal
because of the privileged mitigating
circumstance of minority, the
Indeterminate Sentence Law is
applicable. (People vs. Mantalaba,
GR 186227, July 20, 2011)
(C) Yes. A may still file an
application for probation even if he
filed a notice of appeal. Section 42,
RA 9344 provides: “The court may,
after it shall have convicted and
sentenced a child in conflict with the
law, and upon application at any
time, place the child on probation in
lieu of service of his/her sentence
taking into account the best interest
of the child. For this purpose, Section
4 of PD 968, otherwise known as the
Probation Law of 1976, is hereby
amended accordingly.”
The phrase “at any time”
mentioned in Section 42 means that
the child in conflict with the law may
file an application for probation at
any time, even beyond the period
for perfecting an appeal and even if
the child has perfected the appeal
from the judgment of conviction.
(D) If probation is not
allowed by the court, the minor
offender shall serve his sentence in
agricultural camp or other training
facility in accordance with Section
51 of RA 9344 as amended.
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
11. STAGES OF EXECUTION
Q: (2009)Charlie hated his
classmate, Brad, because the latter
was assiduously courting Lily,
Charlie's girlfriend. Charlie went to a
veterinarian and asked for some
poison on the pretext that it would
be used to kill a very sick, old dog.
Actually, Charlie intended to use the
poison on Brad.
The veterinarian mistakenly
gave Charlie a non-toxic powder
which, when mixed with Brad's food,
did not kill Brad.
[a] Did Charlie commit any
crime? If so; what and why? If not,
why not? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Charlie committed an impossible
crime of murder. His act of mixing the
non-toxic powder with Brad's food,
done with intent to kill, would have
constituted murder which is a crime
against persons, had it not been for
the employment of a means which,
unknown to him, is ineffectual (Art.4,
par. 2, RPC).
[b] Would your SUGGESTED
ANSWER be the same if Brad proved
to be allergic to the powder, and
after ingesting it with his food, fell ill
and was hospitalized for ten (10)
days? Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the answer would not be the
same. Charlie would be, criminally
11
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
liable for less serious physical injuries
because his act of mixing the
powder with Brad's food was done
with felonious intent and was the
proximate cause of Brad's illness for
10 days. It cannot constitute
attempted murder, although done
with intent to kill, because the means
employed is inherently ineffectual to
cause death and the crime
committed must be directly linked to
the means employed, not to the
intent. Liability for an impossible
crime can only arise from a
consummated act.
12. CONTINUING CRIMES
Q: (2010)The president, treasurer,
and secretary of ABC Corporation
were charged with syndicated
estafa under the following
Information: That on or about the 1st
week of January 2010 or subsequent
thereto in Cebu City and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,
the above-named accused,
conspiring and confederating
together and all, of them mutually
helping and aiding one another in a
syndicated manner, through a.
corporation registered with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC), with intention of carrying out
the unlawful or illegal act,
transaction, enterprise or scheme,
with intent to gain and by means of
fraud and deceit, did then and there
willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously
defraud Virna, Lana, Deborah and
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
several other persons by falsely or
fraudulently transactions, which they
made with complainants and the
public in general, to the effect that
they were in a legitimate business of
foreign exchange trading
successively or simultaneously
operating under the name and style
of ABC Corporation and DEF
Management Philippines,
Incorporated, induced and
succeeded in inducing
complainants and several other
persons to give and deliver to said
accused the amount of at least
P20,000,000.00 on the strength of
said manifestations and
representations, the accused
knowing fully well that the above-
named corporations registered with
the SEC are not licensed nor
authorized to engage in foreign
exchange trading and that such
manifestations and representations
to transact in foreign exchange were
false and fraudulent, that these
resulted to the damage and
prejudice of the complainants and
other persons, and that the
defraudation pertains to funds
solicited from the public in general
by such corporations/ associations.
Will the case for syndicated
estafa prosper? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, a case for syndicated estafa will
not prosper because a syndicate for
such crime under Pres. Decree 1689
must be comprised of five (5) or
more persons committing the estafa
12
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
or other forms of swindling defined in
Arts. 315 and 316 of the Revised
Penal Code; whereas the case given
involved only three (3) accused who
are alleged to have conspired in the
commission of the swindling. But
because the amount defrauded
exceeds P100,000.00, the case is still
under the same P.D. 1689 with a
lower penalty than syndicated
estafa.
13. AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCES
Q: (2009)Wenceslao and Loretta
were staying in the same boarding
house, occupying different rooms.
One late evening, when everyone in
the house was asleep, Wenceslao
entered Loretta's room with the use
of a picklock. Then, with force and
violence, Wenceslao ravished
Loretta. After he had satisfied his lust,
Wenceslao stabbed Loretta to
death and, before leaving the room,
took her jewelry.
[a] What crime or crimes, if
any, did Wenceslao commit?
Explain. (4%).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Wenceslao committed the following
crimes: (1) the special complex
crime of rape with homicide (2) theft
and (3) unlawful possession of
picklocks and similar tools under Art.
304, RPC. His act of having carnal
knowledge of Loretta against her will
and with the use of force and
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
violence constituted rape, plus the
killing of Loretta by reason or on the
occasion of the rape, gave rise to
the special complex crime of rape
with homicide. Since the taking of
the jewelry was an afterthought as it
was done only when he was about
to leave the room and when Loretta
was already dead, the same
constitutes theft. His possession and
use ofthe picklock "without lawful
cause" is by itself punishable under
Art. 304, RPC.
[b] Discuss the applicability of
the relevant aggravating
circumstances of dwelling,
nocturnityand the use of the
picklock to enter the room of the
victim. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Dwelling is aggravating because the
crimes were committed in the
privacy of Loretta's room which in
law is considered as her dwelling. It is
well settled that "dwelling" includes a
room in a boarding house being
occupied by the offended party
where she enjoys privacy, peace of
mind and sanctity of an abode.
Nocturnity or nighttime is also
aggravating because although it
was not purposely or especially
sought for by Wenceslao, nighttime
was obviously taken advantage of
by him in committing the other
crimes. Under the objective test,
nocturnity is aggravating when
taken advantage of by the offender
during the commission of the crime
13
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
thus facilitating the same. The use of
a picklock to enter the room of the
victim is not an aggravating
circumstance under Art. 14 of the
Code but punished as a crime by
itself where the offender has no
lawful cause for possessing it. The use
of picklocks is equivalent to force
upon things in robbery with force
upon things.
[c] Would your answer to [a]
be the same if, despite the serious
stab wounds she sustained, Loretta
survived? Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the answer will be different. In
that case, the crimes committed
would be four separate crimes of ( I)
rape (2) frustrated homicide or
'murder (3) theft and (4) unlawful
possession and use of picklocks
under Art. 304, RPC. The special
complex crime of rape with
homicide is constituted only when
both the rape and the killing are
consummated; when one or both of
them are not consummated, they
are to be charged and punished
separately. In any event, the
possession of the picklock "without
lawful cause", more so its use in an
unlawful entry is punished as a crime
by itself.
14. PRINCIPALS, ACCOMPLICES
AND ACCESSORIES
Q: (2009)Ponciano borrowed
Ruben's gun, saying that he would
use it to kill Freddie. Because Ruben
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
also resented Freddie, he readily lent
his gun, but told Ponciano: "0,
pagkabarilmokay Freddie,
isaulimokaagad, ha." Later,
Ponciano killed Freddie, but used a
knife because he did not want
Freddie's neighbors to hear the
gunshot.
[a] What, if any, is the liability
of Ruben? Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Ruben's liability is that of an
accomplice only because he merely
cooperated in Ponciano's
determination to kill Freddie. Such
cooperation is not indispensable to
the killing, as in fact the killing was
carried out without the use of
Ruben's gun. Neither may Ruben be
regarded as a co-conspirator since
he was not a participant in the
decision-making of Ponciano to kill
Freddie; he merely cooperated in
carrying out the criminal plan which
was already in place (Art. 18, RPC).
ALTERNATIVE SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Ruben cannot be held liable as an
accomplice in the killing of Freddie
because his act of lending his gun to
Ponciano did not have a relation
between the acts done by the latter
to that attributed to Ruben. Even if
Ruben did not lend his gun,
Poncian.o would have
consummated the act of killing
Freddie. In other words, Ruben's act
in lending his gun was not a
14
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
necessary act to enable Ponciano to
consummate the crime.
[b] Would your answer be the
same if, instead of Freddie, it was
Manuel, a relative of Ruben, who
was killed by Ponciano using Ruben's
gun? '- Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. The answer would not be the
same because Ruben lent his gun
purposely for the killing of Freddie
only, not for any other killing.
Ponciano's using Ruben's gun in
killing a person other than Freddie is
beyond Ruben's criminal intent and
willing involvement. Only Ponciano
will answer for the crime against
Manuel.
It has been ruled that when
the owner of the gun knew that it
would be used to kill a particular
person, but the offender used it to kill
another person, the owner of the
gun is not an accomplice as to the
killing of the other person. While
there was community of design to kill
Freddie between Ponciano and
Ruben, there was none with respect
to the killing of Manuel.
ALTERNATIVE SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. The SUGGESTED ANSWER would
be same because Ruben lent his gun
to Ponciano with knowledge that it
would be used in killing a person,
thus with knowledge that the gun
would be used to commit a crime. It
is of no moment who was killed, so
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
long as Ruben is aware when he lent
the gun that it would be used to
commit a crime.
15. CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL
Q: (2008)Lucas had been the stay-in
houseboy of spouses Nestor and
Julia for five years. One night, while
Nestor and Julia were out having
dinner, Lucas and his friend Pedro
gained entry into the masters'
bedroom with the use of a false key.
They found Julia's jewelry box in one
of the cabinets, which was
unlocked. Lucas believed that Julia's
jewelry v inside the box. Unknown to
Lucas and Pedro, the box v empty.
Pedro took the box and left the
bedroom with Luc They were
shocked when they saw Nestor in the
sz pointing a gun at them. Nestor
ordered them to stop hand over the
box. Pedro complied. It turned out
that Nes had just arrived in time to
see Lucas and Pedro leaving
masters' bedroom with the box.
State with reasons, the crime or
crimes, if any, Lu, and Pedro
committed. (7%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Lucas committed qualified theft.
Pedro commit simple theft only.
There was taking of personal propel
the jewelry box, belonging to
another (Julia), with int to gain and
15
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
without the consent of the owner but
with violence, intimidation of persons
or force upon thin The use of a false
key is legally considered as a force III
things, if used to gain entry to the
house or building not when used
enter a locked room inside such
house building. Thus, the taking only
constitutes theft. The crime is
qualified theft as to Lucas only, althoi
there is evident conspiracy between
him and Pedro, beta the
circumstance qualifying the theft is
personal only Lucas but not to Pedro.
The theft is already consummated
because offenders had already
taken out of the cabinet Jul jewelry
box, which she intended to remain in
the cable Theasportation was
completed when they succeeded
taking out Julia's jewelry box from the
cabinet.
ANOTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Lucas and Pedro may be held liable
only for impossible crime of theft
because what they had in in in
taking the jewelry box was to take
Julia's jewelry. However, it turned out
to be empty. The impossibility of
committing the crime of theft is
factual or physical since there is no
jewelry to steal inside the box.
ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
Lucas and Paolo would also be
liable for possession of picklocks or
similar tools under Art. 304, in relation
to Art.305 of the Penal Code.
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
16. EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL
LIABILITY
Q: (2010)A killed his wife and buried
her in their backyard. He
immediately went into hiding in the
mountains. Three years later, the
bones of A's wife were discovered by
X, the gardener. Since X had a
standing warrant of arrest, he hid the
bones in an old clay jar and kept
quiet about it. After two years, Z, the
caretaker, found the bones and
reported the matter to the police.
After 15 years of hiding, A left the
country but returned three years
later to take care of his ailing sibling.
Six years thereafter, he was charged
with parricide but raised the defense
of prescription.
A. Under the Revised Penal
Code, when does the period of
prescription of a crime commence
to run? (1%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Generally, the period of prescription
of a crime commences to run from
the date it was committed; but if the
crime was committed clandestinely,
the period of prescription of the
crimes under the Revised Penal
Code commence to run from the
day on which the crime was
discovered by the offended party,
the authorities or their agents (Art 91,
RPC).
B. When is it interrupted? (1%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
16
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
The running of the prescriptive period
of the crime is interrupted when "any
kind of investigative proceeding is
instituted against the guilty person
which may ultimately lead to his
prosecution" (Panaguiton, Jr. v.
Dept. of Justice, G.R. No. 167571,
Nov. 25, 2008).
C. Is A's defense tenable?
Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the defense of prescription of
the crime is not tenable. The crime
committed is parricide which
prescribes in twenty (20) years (Art
90, RPC). It was only when the care-
taker, Z, found the victim's bones
and reported the matter to the
police that the crime is deemed
legally discovered by the authorities
or their agents and thus the
prescriptive period of the crime
commenced to run. When A left the
country and returned only after
three (3) years, the running of the
prescriptive period of the crime is
interrupted and suspended because
prescription shall not run when the
offender is absent from the Philippine
Archipelago (Art. 91, RPC). Since- A
had been in hiding for 15 years after
the commission of the crime and the
prescriptive period started running
only after 5 years from such
commission when the crime was
discovered, only 10 years lapsed and
3 years thereof should be deducted
when the prescriptive period was
interrupted and suspended. Hence,
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
the 3 years when A was out of the
Philippines should be deducted from
the 10 years after the prescription
starts running. Adding the 7 years of
prescription and the 6 years that
lapsed before the case was filed,
only a total of thirteen (13) years of
the prescriptive period had lapsed.
Hence the crime has not yet
prescribed.
17. CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC
OFFICERS
Q: (2009)Charina, Clerk of Court of
an RTC Branch, promised the plaintiff
in a case pending before the court
that she would convince the
Presiding Judge to decide the case
in plaintiff's favor. In consideration
therefor, the plaintiff gave Charina
P20,000.00.Charina was charged
with violation of Section 3 (b) of
Republic Act No. 3019, prohibiting
any public officer from directly or
indirectly requesting or receiving any
gift, present, percentage, or benefit
in connection with any contract or
transaction x xx wherein the public
officer, in his official capacity, has to
intervene under the law. While the
case was being tried, the
Ombudsman filed another
information against Charina for
Indirect Bribery under the Revised
Penal Code. Charina demurred to
the second information, claiming
that she can no longer be charged
under the Revised Penal Code
having been charged for the same
act under R.A. 3019.
17
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
Is Charina correct? Explain.
(3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Charina is not correct. Although
the charge for violation of Rep. Act
No. 3019 and the charge for Indirect
Bribery (Art. 211, RPC) arose from the
same act, the elements of the
violation charged under Rep. Act
No. 3019 are not the same as the
felony charged for Indirect Bribery
under the Rev. Penal Code (Mejia v.
Pamaran, 160 SCRA 457 [1988]).
Hence, the crimes charged are
separate and distinct from each
other, with different penalties. The
two charges do not constitute a
ground for a motion to dismiss or
motion to quash, as there is no
jeopardy against the accused.
18. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
Q: (2008)Francis and Joan were
sweethearts, but their parents had
objected to their relationship
because they were first cousins. They
forged a pact in writing to commit
suicide. The agreement was to shoot
each other in the head which they
did. Joan died. Due to medical
assistance, Francis survived. Is Francis
criminally liable for the death of
Joan? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Francis is criminally liable for
Joan's death. His act of shooting her,
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
although done pursuant to a solemn
pact, is nevertheless felonious and is
the proximate cause of Joan's death
(Art. 4, par. 1, RPC). Moreover, the
mere act of giving assistance to a
suicide is a crime (Art. 253, RPC).
19. CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
Q: (2008)Upon opening a letter
containing 17 money orders, the mail
carrier forged the signatures of the
payees on the money orders and
encashed them. What crime or
crimes did the mail carrier commit?
Explain briefly. (6%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The mail carrier's act of opening the
letter containing the 17 money
orders and encashing them
constitutes a continued crime of
qualified theft, because the object
taken is mail matter and the taking
was with evident intent to gain (Art.
310, RPC).
Moreover, the mail carrier's act of
forging the signatures of the payees
of said money orders constitutes
falsification of commercial
documents. It was made to appear
that the payees signed them when
in fact they did not. When the mail
carrier encashed the money orders,
he defrauded and caused damage
to the remitters who gave the cash.
The mail carrier further incurred the
crime of estafa through falsification
of commercial documents.
18
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
20. CRIMES AGAINST CIVIL STATUS
OF A PERSON
Q: (2008)Hubert and Eunice were
married in the Philippines. Hubert
took graduate studies in New York
and met his former girlfriend Eula.
They renewed their friendship and
finally decided to get married. The
first wife, Eunice, heard about the
marriage and secured a copy of the
marriage contract in New York.
Eunice filed a case of bigamy
against Hubert in the Philippines.
a) Will the case prosper?
Explain. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) No, a case for bigamy filed in the
Philippines will not prosper because
the bigamous marriage appears to
have been committed in New York,
U.S.A., not in the Philippines. The
governing rule of procedure as to
the place where the criminal action
is to be instituted directs that the
criminal action should be instituted
and tried in the court of the
municipality or territory where the
offense was committed, or where
any of its essential ingredients
occurred if it were a continuing
crime. In criminal cases, the venue
where the action should be instituted
is jurisdictional; if this is not complied
with, it would render the prosecution
invalid or void.
b) If Eunice gave her consent to the
second marriage, what will your
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
SUGGESTED ANSWER be? Explain.
(3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b) The answer would be the same
even if the wife by the first marriage,
which is subsisting, gave her consent
to the second marriage. Bigamy is a
public crime and not subject to
agreement between the victim and
the accused. Moreover, the legal
obstacle to the institution of a case
for bigamy in the Philippines is
jurisdictional and cannot be excused
or waived by the parties affected.
21. CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
Q: (2009) At the Maligaya Disco
Club, Leoncio and Evelyn were
intimately dancing a very seductive
dance number. While gyrating with
their bodies, Leoncio dipped his
private parts in Evelyn's buttocks.
Incensed, Evelyn protested, but
Leoncio continued and tightly
embraced her.
[a] What crime or crimes, if any, did
Leoncio commit? Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Leoncio committed the crime of
unjust vexation only because the act
was done in the course of dancing.
The act of dipping his private parts in
Evelyn's buttocks during a very
seductive dance, although offensive
to Evelyn, may be viewed as part of
a dirty dancing. Lewd intent cannot
simply be presumed from the act of
19
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
dirty dancing. The fact that the act
was perpetrated in a public place
and with an audience, negates lewd
designs or lascivious intent, which is
essential in the crime of acts of
lasciviousness.
[b] Would your answer be the
same if, even after the music had
stopped, Leoncio continued to
dance dirty, rubbing his private parts
on Evelyn's buttocks? Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The crime would then be acts of
lasciviousness. That the music for
dancing had already stopped, puts
an end to any pretense of dancing
by Leoncio. His continued dirty acts
absent the dancing as there was no
music anymore is patently lewd and
lascivious. More so, Evelyn already
protested Leoncio's lewd acts in the
course of dancing. So where the
dance ended, Leoncio's continued
dirty acts cannot be veiled as still
part of dancing.
22. ANTI-CARNAPPING LAW
Q: (2008)While Carlos was
approaching his car, he saw it being
driven away by Paolo, a thief. Carlos
tried to stop Paolo by shouting at
him, but Paolo ignored him. To
prevent his car from being
carnapped, Carlos drew his gun,
aimed at the rear wheel of the car
and fired. The shot blew the tire
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
which caused the car to veer out of
control and collide with an
oncoming tricycle, killing the tricycle
driver.
A. What is the criminal liability of
Carlos, if any? Explain. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) Carlos did not incur criminal
liability because his act of firing at
the rear wheel of the car to stop the
vehicle and prevent Paolo from
taking away his (Carlos') car is
neither done with dolo nor culpa.
The act does not constitute a crime;
it is a reasonable exercise of his right
to prevent or repel an actual
unlawful physical invasion or
usurpation of his property pursuant to
Art. 429 of the Civil Code.
b) What is the criminal liability of
Paolo, if any? Explain. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b) Paolo is criminally liable for (1)
carnapping under Rep. Act No. 6539
for driving away the motor vehicle of
Carlos against the latter's will and
obviously with intent to gain and (2)
for homicide for the death of the
tricycle driver which resulted from
the criminal act deliberately being
committed by Paolo (which is the
carnapping), The homicide was the
result of praeterintentionem and not
a component of the crime of
carnapping or a result of reckless
imprudence or of simple negligence.
20
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
ANOTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b) Paolo is criminally liable for
qualified theft because the object
taken is a motor vehicle (Art. 310,
RPC) and the taking was simply
without the consent of Carlos, the
owner of the motor vehicle.
Since the death of the tricycle
driver was brought about by Paolo's
felonious taking of Carlos' car, Paolo
is liable for homicide because his act
was the proximate cause thereof.
ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
b) Paolo is liable for the complex
crime of frustrated robbery, with
homicide and damage to property
(tricycle) in trying to rob the car. This
resulted in the shooting of the car by
Carlos and the subsequent collision
destroying the tricycle and the
death of the driver.
23. ANTI- GRAFT AND CORRUPT
PRACTICES ACT
Q: (2010) May a public officer
charged under Section 3(b) of
Republic Act No. 3019 [“directly or
indirectly requesting or receiving any
gift, present, share, percentage or
benefit, for himself of for any other
person, in connection with any
contract or transaction between the
government and any other party,
wherein the public officer in his
official capacity has to intervene
under the law”] also be
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
simultaneously or successively
charged with direct bribery under
Article 210 of the Revised Penal
Code? Explain. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, a public officer charges under
Sec. 3 (b) of Rep. Act 3019 (Anti-
Graft and Corrupt Practices Act)
may also be charged simultaneously
or successively for the crime of direct
bribery under Art. 210 of the Revised
Penal Code, because two crimes
are essentially different and are
penalized under distinct legal
philosophies.Whereas violation of
Sec. (b) of R.A. 3019 is a
malumprohibitum, the crime under
Art. 210 of the Code is a malum in se.
24. COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS
ACT
Q: (2010)Matt was found guilty of
drug trafficking while his younger
brother Jeff was found guilty of
possession of equipment, instrument,
apparatus and other paraphernalia
for dangerous drugs under Section
12 of Republic Act No. 9165. Matt
filed a petition for probation. Jeff
appealed his conviction during the
pendency of which he also filed a
petition for probation. The brothers'
counsel argued that they being first
time offenders, their petitions for
probation should be granted. How
would you resolve the brothers'
petitions for probation? Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTEDANSWER:
21
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
The brothers' petition for probation
should both be denied. Matt's
petition for probation shall be
denied because he was convicted
for drug-trafficking. Section 24 of RA
9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous
Drug Act of 2002) expressly provides,
"Any person convicted for drug
trafficking or pushing under this Act,
regardless of the penalty imposed by
the court, cannot avail of the
privilege granted by the Probation
Law or Presidential Decree No. 968,
as amended." On the other hand,
Jeff's application for probation
cannot also be entertained or
granted because he has already
appealed his conviction by the trial
court (Section 4, P.D. 968, as
amended).
25. INDETERMINATE SENTENCE
LAW
Q: (2009)[a] In a conviction for
homicide, the trial court
appreciated two (2) mitigating
circumstances and one (1)
aggravating circumstance.
Homicide under Article 249 of the
Revised Penal Code is punishable by
reclusion temporal, an imprisonment
term of twelve (12) years and one (1)
day to twenty (20) years. Applying
the Indeterminate Sentence Law,
determine the appropriate penalty
to be imposed. Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
Under the Indeterminate Sentence
Law, the minimum of the sentence
shall be anywhere within the range
of 6 years and 1 day to 12 years
imprisonment while the maximum of
the sentence shall be anywhere
within the range of Reclusion
Temporal minimum i.e., not lower
than 12 yrs. and 1 day to not more
than 14 yrs. and 8 months.
[b] Will your SUGGESTED
ANSWER be the same if it is a
conviction for illegal possession of
drugs under R.A. 9165 (Dangerous
Drugs Act of 2002), the prescribed
penalty of which is also imprisonment
for a term of twelve (12) years and
one (1) day to twenty (20) years?
Why or why not? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. My answer will not be the same
because violations of Rep. Act 9165
are mala prohibita in which
mitigating and aggravating
circumstances are not appreciated.
Although in People v. Simon (234
SCRA 555 [1994]), it was held that
Art. 64 can be applied if the special
law adopted the nomenclature of
penalties provided under the RPC,
such pronouncement cannot be
applied in the instant case because
the penalties for illegal possession of
drugs under RA 9165 do not follow
the technical nomenclature of
penalties in the RPC and thus,
cannot be divided into periods.
Hence, the existence of mitigating
22
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
and aggravating circumstances
cannot be appreciated.
26. PROBATION
Q: (2009)Joe was 17 years old when
he committed homicide in 2005. The
crime is punishable by reclusion
temporal. After two years in hiding,
he was arrested and appropriately
charged in May 2007. Since Republic
Act 9344 (Juvenile Justice and
Welfare Act of 2006) was already in
effect, Joe moved to avail of the
process of intervention or diversion.
[a] Suppose Joe was
convicted of attempted murder with
a special aggravating circumstance
and was denied suspension of
sentence, would he be eligible for
probation under Presidential Decree
(PD) 968, considering that the death
penalty is imposable for the
consummated felony? Explain. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. He would be eligible for
probation because the penalty
imposable on Joe will not exceed 6
years imprisonment. Even if it would
be considered that the crime
committed was punishable by
death, the penalty as far as Joe is
concerned can only be reclusion
perpetua because Rep. Act 9344
forbids the imposition of the capital
punishment upon offenders
thereunder. The murder being
attempted only, the prescribed
penalty is two degree lower than
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
reclusion perpetua; hence, prision
mayor. Because Joe was 17 years
old when he committed the crime,
the penalty of prision mayor should
be lowered further by one degree
because his minority is a privileged
mitigating circumstance; hence,
prisioncorreccional or imprisonment
within the range of six months and 1
day to 6 years is the imposable.
27. ELEMENTS OF CRIMINAL
LIABILITY
Q: (2005)What do you understand by
aberratio ictus; error in personae;
and praeterintentionem? Do they
alter the criminal liability of an
accused? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Aberation ictus, error in personae
and praeterintentionem are the
three ways by which a person may
commit a felony although the
wrongful act done is different from
that which he
intended.Inaberratioictus, there is a
mistake in the blow meaning to say
that the offender intending to cause
an injury to one person actually
inflicts it on another because of lack
of precision, as far for example when
A, intending to kill B, fires his gun at
the latter but because of poor aim or
lack of precision, he hits C instead,
who suffers serious physical injury.
In error in personae, there is a
mistake in the identity of the victim,
as for instance, when A, intending to
23
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
kill B, his enemy lay in ambush for the
latter to pass along a dark alley.
Because of the darkness, A fired his
gun at a person passing by, thinking
him to be B. It turned out that the
person shot was C, A's
father.Inpraeterintentionem, the
injurious result is greater than that
intended by the offender, the act
exceeds the intent, as for instance,
where A, without intent to kill, strikes
B with his fist at the back of the head,
causing B to fall down with his head
hitting the asphalt pavement,
resulting in the fracture of his head
that caused his death.The presence
of these circumstances will alter the
criminal liability of the accused.
Thus:In aberratio ictus, two offenses
are actually committed by the
offender, that which he intended to
commit and that which he actually
committed. But if these two offenses
are both either grave or less grave,
since they are produced by one
single act, a complex crime will
result.In the case of error in personae,
the offender shall be guilty of the
crime actually committed by him,
but the penalty to be imposed shall
either be the penalty for the crime
actually committed or that for the
crime intended to be committed.
Which ever is lower, but the same will
be imposed in its maximum period.In
the case praeterintentionem, the
offended, will incur criminal liability
for the felony actually committed by
him, but he will be entitled to the
mitigating circumstance of not
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
having intended to commit so grave
a wrong as that which he committed.
28. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE
Q: (2003)The conduct of wife A
aroused the ire of her husband B.
Incensed with anger almost beyond
his control, B could not help but
inflict physical injuries on A. Moments
after B started hitting A with his fists, A
suddenly complained of severe
chest pains. B, realizing that A was
indeed in serious trouble,
immediately brought her to the
hospital. Despite efforts to alleviate
A’s pains, she died of heart attack. It
turned out that she had been
suffering from a lingering heart
ailment. What crime, if any, could B
be held guilty of?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B could be held liable for parricide
because his act of hitting his wife
with fist blows and therewith inflicting
physical injuries on her, is felonious. A
person committing a felonious act
incurs criminal liability although the
wrongful consequence is different
from what he intended (Art. 4, par. 1,
Revised Penal Code).Although A
died of heart attack, the said attack
was generated by B’s felonious act
of hitting her with his fists. Such
felonious act was the immediate
cause of the heart attack, having
materially contributed to and
hastened A’s death. Even though B
may have acted without intent to kill
24
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
his wife, lack of such intent is of no
moment when the victim dies.
However, B may be given the
mitigating circumstance of having
acted without intention to commit so
grave a wrong as that committed
(Art. 13, par. 3, Revised Penal Code).
29. PENALTIES – PRINCIPLES
Q: (2004)A. The death penalty
cannot be inflicted under which of
the following circumstances:
1. When the guilty person is at least
18 years of age at the time of the
commission of the crime.
2. When the guilty person is more
than 70 years of age.
3. When, upon appeal to or
automatic review by the Supreme
Court, the required majority for the
imposition of the death penalty is not
obtained.
4. When the person is convicted of a
capital crime but before execution
becomes insane.
5. When the accused is a woman
while she is pregnant or within one
year after delivery.
Explain your answer or choice briefly.
(5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
Understanding the word “inflicted" to
mean the imposition of the death
penalty, not its execution, the
circumstance in which the death
penalty cannot be inflicted is no. 2:
“when the guilty person is more than
70 years of age” (Art. 47, Revised
Penal Code). Instead, the penalty
shall be commuted to reclusion
perpetua, with the accessory
penalties provided in Article 40, RPC.
In circumstance no. I when
the guilty person is at least 18 years
of age at the time of the commission
of the crime, the death penalty can
be imposed since the offender is
already of legal age when he
committed the crime.
Circumstance no. 3 no longer
operates, considering the decision of
the Supreme Court in People vs.
Etfren Mateo (G.R. 147678-87, July 7,
2004) providing an intermediate
review for such cases where the
penalty imposed is death,
reclusionperpetua or life
imprisonment before they are
elevated to the Supreme Court.
In circumtances nos. 4 & 5,
the death penalty can be imposed if
prescribed by the law violated
although its execution shall be
suspended when the convict
becomes insane before it could be
executed and while he is
insane.Likewise, the death penalty
can be imposed upon a woman but
its execution shall be suspended
during her pregnancy and for one
year after her delivery.
25
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
30. PENALTIES –APPLICATION
Q: (2005) Harold was convicted of a
crime defined and penalized by a
special penal law where the
imposable penalty is from 6 months,
as minimum, to 3 years, as maximum.
State with reasons whether the court
may correctly impose the following
penalties:
(a)a straight penalty of 10 months;
(b) 6 months, as minimum, to 11
months, as maximum;
(c) a straight penalty of 2 years. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) The court may validly impose a
straight penalty of 10 months
imprisonment because the penalty
prescribed by law is imprisonment of
6 months to 3 years, and the
Indeterminate Sentence Law does
not apply when the penalty imposed
is imprisonment which does not
exceed one year.
b) A prison term of 6 months as
minimum, to 11 months, as maximum
may not be imposed by the court
because the Indeterminate
Sentence Law does not apply when
the penalty imposed as maximum of
the sentence is imprisonment which
does not exceed one (1) year.
Obviously the Indeterminate
Sentence Law has been applied
where the sentence imposed reflects
a minimum and a maximum.
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
c) The court may not validly impose
a straight penalty of two years
because the Indeterminate
Sentence Law requires the court to
set a minimum and a maximum of
the sentence where the
imprisonment to be imposed already
exceeds one (1) year, unless the
offender is disqualified from the
benefits of the said Law.
ALTERNATIVE SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) Yes, the trial Court may impose a
straight penalty of ten months. The
Indeterminate Sentence Law applies
to crimes punished either by the
Revised Penal Code or by special
laws, where the maximum period of
imprisonment exceeds one year.
No, because the Indeterminate
Sentence Law cannot be applied
where the maximum period of
imprisonment imposed, which is
eleven months, does not exceed
one year.
No, because a straight penalty may
be imposed only up to a maximum
imprisonment of one (1) year. Here, it
is two years. Hence, there is a need
to impose an indeterminate
sentence, the minimum term of
which shall not be less than 6 months
while the maximum term shall not
exceed 3 years. (People v. Pena, 80
SCRA 589[1977]).
31. PENALTIES – CLASSIFICATION
26
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ

Q: (2007)What are the penalties that convicted offender is required to

may be served simultaneously? pay in money to the offended party
and to the Government. They are:
1. reparation of the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: damage caused;
The penalties that may be served 2. indemnification of
simultaneously are imprisonment/ consequential damages;
destierro and: 3. fine; and
1. Perpetual absolute 4. costs of the
disqualification; proceedings (Art. 38, RPC)
2. Perpetual special
disqualification; The first two liabilities (nos. 1
3. Temporary absolute and 2) are payable as civil
disqualification; indemnity to the private parties
4. Temporary special offended by the crime; while the
disqualification; last two (nos. 3 and 4) are payable
5. Suspension from public to the Government.
office, the right to vote and be
voted for, and the right to follow a
33. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL
profession or calling;
LIBERTY AND SECURITY
6. Fine; and any principal
penalty with its accessory penalties.
Q: (2005)Paz Masipag worked as a
housemaid and yaya of the one-
week old son of the spouses Martin
32. CIVIL LIABILITIES IN CRIMINAL
and Pops Kuripot. When Paz learned
CASES
that her 70 year-old mother was
seriously ill, she asked Martin for a
Q: (2005)Distinguish pecuniary
cash advance of PI,000.00 but Martin
penalties from pecuniary liabilities.
refused. One morning, Paz gagged
(2%)
the mouth of Martin's son with
SUGGESTED ANSWER: stockings; placed the child in a box;
Pecuniary penalties are those which sealed it with masking tape and
a convicted offender may be placed the box in the attic. Later in
required to pay in money to the the afternoon, she demanded
Government. These are: P5.000.00 as ransom for the release
1. fine; and of his son. Martin did not pay the
2. costs of the ransom.
proceedings. Subsequently, Paz disappeared.After
Pecuniary liabilities, on the a couple of days, Martin discovered
other hand, are those which a the box in the attic with his child

27
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
already dead. According to the
autopsy report, the child died of
asphyxiation barely three minutes
after the box was sealed.
What crime or crimes did Paz
commit? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Paz committed a special complex
crime of kidnapping for ransom with
homicide and the penalty shall be
only one death penalty.When any
individual, in any manner, unlawfully
deprives another of his liberty, the
crime is designated as kidnapping
and serious illegal detention under
Article 267, Revised Penal Code. The
penalty shall be death where the
crime was committed for the
purpose of extorting ransom. It is not
necessary that the ransom be
obtained by the offender: it is
enough that the crime of
kidnapping and serious illegal
detention be committed for the
purpose of demanding
ransom.Under the same Article of
the Code, the death penalty is also
prescribed if the victim of the
kidnapping dies as a result of the
detention. However, since Paz
committed only one felony, a
special complex crime of
kidnapping for ransom with
homicide, she should be sentenced
to only one death penalty.
34. CRIME AGAINST CHASTITY
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
Q: (2006) Dang was a beauty
queen in a university. Job, a rich
classmate, was so enamored with
her that he persistently wooed
and pursued her. Dang, being in
love with another man, rejected
him. This angered Job. Sometime
in September 2003, while Dang
and her sister Lyn were on their
way home, Job and his minor
friend Nonoy grabbed them and
pushed them inside a white van.
They brought them in an
abandoned warehouse where
they forced them to dance
naked. Thereafter, they brought
them to a hill in a nearby
barangay where they took turns
raping them. After satisfying their
lust, Job ordered Nonoy to push
Dang down a ravine, resulting in
her death. Lyn ran away but Job
and Nonoy chased her and
pushed her inside the van. Then
the duo drove away. Lyn was
never seen again.
1. What crime or crimes were
committed by Job and
Nonoy? 2.5%
2. What penalties should be
imposed on them? 2.5%
3. Will Nonoy’s minority
exculpate him? 2.5%
4. Is the non-recovery of Lyn’s
body material to the
criminal liability of Job and
Nonoy? 2.5%
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
28
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
1. Job and Nonoy each committed
two (2) counts of the special
complex crime of rape with
homicide under Art. 266-B for the
rapes respectively committed on
Dang and on Lyn. Their felonious
acts of grabbing and pushing the
victims inside their van and later
forcing them to dance naked may
only be appreciated as part of the
violence and lewd desires attending
the rape, and are therefore
absorbed by the rape.Although,
there is no indication that the same
culprits killed Lyn who was never
seen again, it is reasonable to
assume from what the culprits did to
Dang, and from the acts of violence
they employed on Lyn, that they are
SUGGESTED ANSWERable also for the
presumed death of Lyn whom the
culprits took with them by force and
was never seen again. Hence, the
rape committed against her is
attended by homicide giying rise to
the special complex crime of rape
with homicide also. It would be
different if Lyn was not subjected to
physical violence. (R.A.
7659)Although the penalty for the
crime of rape with homicide was
death at the time the accused
committed them, and the law (Rep.
Act No. 9346) prohibiting the
imposition of the death penalty took
effect only this year (2006), said new
law should be given retroactive
effect because it is favorable to the
culprits who are not habitual
delinquents and there being no
provision of law to the contrary.
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
Hence, reclusion perpetua for each
count of rape with homicide.The
accessory penalty under Art. 40 of
the Revised Penal Code will not
follow because RA 9346.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2. Because of obvious conspiracy,
each of the culprits should be
punished not only for the rape he
committed but also for the rape
committed by the other; hence, for
as many counts of rape committed
by him plus those committed by the
other culprit against each of the
victims.Although the penalty for the
crime of rape with homicide was
death at the time the accused
committed them, and the law (Rep.
Act No. 9346) prohibiting the
imposition of the death penalty took
effect only this year (2006), said new
law should be given retroactive
effect because it is favorable to the
culprits who are not habitual
delinquents and there being no
provision of law to the contrary.
Hence, reclusion perpetua for each
count of rape with homicide.The
accessory penalty under Art. 40 of
the Revised Penal Code will not
follow because RA 9346, Sec. 2 does
not so provide: it is the accessory
penalty for reclusion perpetua that
shall now adhere to the principal
penalty.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
3. Nonoy’s minority will exculpate
him under Rep. Act 9344, referred to
as the “Juvenile Justice and Welfare
29
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ

Act of 2006”, if he was 15 years old or

less: otherwise he will be criminally
and civilly liable considering that he
acted with discernment when he
also raped the victims. At most, his
minority will be appreciated as
privileged mitigating circumstance.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
4. No. The corpus delicti or fact of
commission of the crime is clear.
Even the death of Lyn may be
established from the acts of the
culprits, without the need of the
body of Lyn being presented.
35. CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
Q: (2005)In an interview aired on
television, Cindee uttered
defamatory statements against Erika,
a successful and reputable
businesswoman.
What crime or crimes did Cindee
commit? Explain. (3%)
36. ANTI-CHILD ABUSE LAW
Q: (2006)Aling Maria received an
urgent telephone call from Junior,
her eldest son, asking for P2,000.00 to
complete his semestral tuition fees
preparatory to his final exams in
Commerce. Distressed and
disturbed, she borrowed money from
her compadreMang Juan with the
assurance to pay him within 2
months. Two months lapsed but Aling
Maria failed to settle her obligation.
Mang Juan told Aling Maria that she
does not have to pay the loan if she
will allow her youngest 10-year old
daughter Annie to work as a
housemaid in his house for 2 months
at PI,000.00 a month. Despite Aling
Maria’s objection, Mang Juan
insisted and brought Annie to his
house to work as a maid.
1. Was a crime committed by Mang
Juan when he brought Annie to his
house as maid lor the purpose of
repaying her mother's loan? 2.5%

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2. If Aling Maria herself was made to
Cindee committed libel.
work as a housemaid in Mang Juan’s
Defamation made in a television
household to pay her loan, did he
program is penalized as libel under
commit a crime? 2.5%
Art. 355 of the Revised Penal
Code.Televison falls under “similar
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
means" in the enumeration as “radio
(1) Yes, MangJnan violated of Rep.
phonograph, theatrical exhibition,
Act No. 7610 on child abuse and
cinematographic exhibition, or any
exploitation, as amended by Rep.
similar means" in said Article.
Act 7658 prohibiting employment of
[People v. Casten, et al.t CJL G.R.
children below 15 years of age, in
No. 07924 - CR., Dec. 13, 1974)
relation to the crime of Exploitation
30
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
of Child Labor under Art. 273,
Revised Penal Code. Annie is only 10
years old and under the pretext of
reimbursing himself of a debt owed
by Annie’s mother, Mang Juan took
Annie to his house to work as a maid
despite her mother's objection.
Annie could not have given consent
to the exploitation since she was only
ten (10) year’s old and thus could
not give any valid consent.
(2)If it was against her will that Aling
Maria was made to work as a
housemaid in Mang Juan’s
household to pay her debt to him,
the latter would be committing a
crime under Art. 274 of the Revised
Penal Code, which punishes any
person who shall compel a debtor to
work for him as a household servant
against her will just to enforce
payment of a debt.
37. COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS
DRUGS ACT
Q: (2006)After receiving a reliable
information that Dante Ong, a
notorious drug smuggler, was arriving
on PAL Flight No. PR181, PNP Chief
Inspector Samuel Gamboa formed a
group of anti-drug agents. When
Ong arrived at the airport, the group
arrested him and seized his attache
case. Upon inspection inside the
Immigration holding area, the
attache case yielded 5 plastic bags
of heroin weighing 500 grams. Chief
Inspector Gamboa took the attache
case and boarded him in an
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
unmarked car driven by P03
PepitoLorbes. On the way to Camp
Crame and upon nearing White
Plains comer Edsa. Chief Inspector
Gamboa ordered P03 Lorbes to stop
the car. They brought out the drugs
from the case in the trunk and got 3
plastic sacks of heroin. They then told
Ong to alight from the car. Ong left
with the 2 remaining plastic sacks of
heroin. Chief Inspector Gamboa
advised him to keep silent and gc
home which the latter did. Unknown
to them, an NBI team of agents had
been following them and witnessed
the transaction. They arrested Chief
Inspector Gamboa and P03 Lorbes.
Meanwhile, another NBI team
followed Ong and likewise arrested
him. All of them were later charged
What are their respective
criminal liabilities? 5%
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Chief Inspector Samuel Gamboa
and P03 PepitoLorbes incur criminal
liability under Art. 11, Sec. 4 last par.,
R.A. No. 9165, otherwise known as
the “Comprehensive Dangerous
Drugs Act of 2002”. They acted as
“protector/coddler” to the unlawful
bringing into the Philippines of the
dangerous drugs. A “protector/
coddler” refers to any person who
uses his power or position in, inter
alia, facilitating the escape of any
person whom he knows or believes,
has violated the Dangerous Drugs
Law, in order to prevent the arrest,
prosecution and conviction of the
31
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
violator.The two police officers are
criminally liable for violation of Sec.
27,R.A. 91165 of the same law for
misappropriation and failure to
account for the confiscated or
seized dangerous drugs.On the other
hand, Dante Ong is criminally liable
for the illegal importation or bringing
into the Philippines of the dangerous
drugs. (Article 11, Sec. 4, RA 9165)
38. INDETERMINATE SENTENCE
LAW
Q: (2005)Harold was convicted of a
crime defined and penalized by a
special penal law where the
imposable penalty is from 6 months,
as minimum, to 3 years, as maximum.
State with reasons whether the court
may correctly impose the following
penalties:
a. a straight penalty of 10 months;
b. 6 months, as minimum, to 11
months, as maximum;
c.a straight penalty of 2 years. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) The court may validly impose a
straight penalty of 10 months
imprisonment because the penalty
prescribed by law is imprisonment of
6 months to 3 years, and the
Indeterminate Sentence Law does
not apply when the penalty imposed
is imprisonment which does not
exceed one year.
b) A prison term of 6 months as
minimum, to 11 months, as maximum
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
may not be imposed by the court
because the Indeterminate
Sentence Law does not apply when
the penalty imposed as maximum of
the sentence is imprisonment which
does not exceed one (1) year.
Obviously the Indeterminate
Sentence Law has been applied
where the sentence imposed reflects
a minimum and a maximum.
c) The court may not validly impose
a straight penalty of two years
because the Indeterminate
Sentence Law requires the court to
set a minimum and a maximum of
the sentence where the
imprisonment to be imposed already
exceeds one (1) year, unless the
offender is disqualified from the
benefits of the said Law.
39. PROBATION LAW
Q: (2005)Maganda was charged
with violation of Bouncing Checks
Law (BP 22) punishable by
imprisonment of not less than 30
days but not more than 1 year or a
fine of not less than but not more
than double the amount of the
check, which fine shall not exceed
P200.000.00, or both. The court
convicted her of the crime and
sentenced her to pay a fine of
P50.000.00 with subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency,
and to pay the private complainant
the amount of the check. Maganda
was unable to pay the fine but filed
a petition for probation. The court
granted the petition subject to the
condition, among others, that she
32
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
should not change her residence
without the court’s prior approval.
a) What is the proper period of
probation?
b) Supposing before the Order
of Discharge was issued by the
court but after the lapse of the
period of probation, Maganda
transferred residence without prior
approval of the court. May the
court revoke the Order of Probation
and order her to serve the subsidiaiy
imprisonment? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) The period of probation shall not
be less than the total number of
days of subsidiary imprisonment or
more than twice the said number of
days as computed at the rate
established under the Revised Penal
Code, which is one (1) day
imprisonment for every P8.00 fine
but not to exceed six (6) months.
(P.D. 968, Sec. 14[b] (establishing a
Probation System) in correlation with
Art. 39, RPC)
b) Yes, the court may revoke the
Order of Probation and order the
convicted accused to serve the
subsidiary imprisonment, because
she violated the condition of her
probation before the Order of
Discharge was issued by the court.
The conditions of probation are not
co-terminous with the period of
probation; such conditions continue
even after the period of probation
had ended and thus requires faithful
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
compliance or fulfillment, for as long
as the court which placed the
convict on probation has not issued
the Order of Discharge that would
release her from probation. {Bala v.
Martinez, 181 SCRA 459
40. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE
Q: (1998)Wilson and Anthony are
political rivals in their barangay and
both candidates for barangay
chairman. Both of them were invited
in a public forum for the voters to
learn about their platforms for the
barangay. During the forum,
Anthony smirked and gave a
mocking laugh while Wilson was
delivering his speech. This did not go
unnoticed, and Wilson got infuriated
with Anthony. After his speech
ended, Wilson approached Anthony
and shot the latter in the head
causing his death. During Wilson’s
trial he argued that the mitigating
circumstance of sufficient
provocation must be applied in his
case. Is the argument of Wilson
correct?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Wilson’s argument is incorrect. For
provocation to be established, it
must be sufficient to excite a person
to commit a crime and must be
proportionate to its gravity. What
Anthony did was just smirk and laugh
mockingly. While Anthony’s acts may
be considered offensive, it is grossly
disproportionate to Wilson’s act of
33
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
drawing and firing a gun and killing
Anthony.
41. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC
ORDER
Q: (2002)A, a lady professor, was
giving an examination. She noticed
8, one of the students, cheating. She
called the student’s attention and
confiscated his examination
booklet, causing embarrassment to
him. The following day, while the
class was going on, the student, B,
approached A and, without any
warning, slapped her. B would have
inflicted further injuries on A had not
C, another student, come to A’s
rescue and prevented B from
continuing his attack. B turned his ire
on C and ounched the latter. What
crime or crimes, if any, did 8
commit? Why? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B committed two (2) counts of
direct assault: one for slapping the
professor, A, who was then
conducting classes and thus
exercising authority; and another
one for the violence on the student
C, who came to the aid of the said
professor. By express provision of
Article 152, in relation to Article 148
of the Revised Penal Code,
teachers and professors of public or
duly recognized private schools,
colleges and universities in the
actual performance of their
professional duties or on the
occasion of such performance are
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
deemed persons in authority for
purposes of the crimes of direct
assault and of resistance and
disobedience in Articles 148 and
151 of said Code. And any person
who comes to the aid of persons in
authority shall be deemed an agent
of a person in authority.
Accordingly, the attack on C is, in
the eyes of the law, an attack on an
agent of a person in authority, not
just an attack on a student.
42. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
Q: (2002)Aldrin and Jimmy are both
parents in MuntingLupa Elementary
School and are running to be the
President of the Parent-Teacher
Association. The contest between
them got personal with a heated
argument between them occurring
one afternoon while fetching their
children from school. Aldrin who has
an arsenal of explosives in his home,
decided to use it on Jimmy. He set
Jimmy’s house on fire with his
explosive causing the death of
Jimmy. What Crime was committed?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Aldrin is guilty of Murder because the
mean he employed of committing
the crime was thru explosive. Under
Article 248, Par. 12, When the
felonious act of killing is attended
with inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a
vessel, derailment or assault upon a
railroad, fall of an airship, or by any
34
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
other means involving great waste
and ruin, the crime is Murder.
43. CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
Q: (2001)A and B are neighbors in
Barangay Nuevo I, Silang, Cavite. A
is a barangay Kagawad and known
to be a bully, while B is reputed to be
gay but noted for his industry and
economic savvy which allowed him
to amass wealth in leaps and
bounds, including registered and
unregistered lands in several
barangays. Resenting B’s riches and
relying on his political influence, A
decided to harass and intimidate B
into sharing with him some of his
lands, considering that the latter was
single and living alone. One night. A
broke into B's house, forced him to
bring out some titles and after
picking out a title covering 200
square meters in their barangay,
compelled B to type out a Deed of
Sale conveying the said lot to him for
PI.00 and other valuable
considerations. All the while, A
carried a paltik caliber .45 in full view
of B, who signed the deed out of
fear. When A later on tried to register
the deed, B summoned enough
courage and had A arrested and
charged in court after preliminary
investigation.
What charge or charges should be
filed against A? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The charge for Robbery under Article
298 of the Revised Penal Code
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
should be filed against A. Said Article
provides that any person who, with
Intent to defraud another, by means
of violence or intimidation, shall
compel him to sign, execute and
deliver any public instrument or
document shall be held guilty of
robbery.The paltik caliber .45 firearm
carried by A was obviously intended
to intimidate B and thus, used in the
commission of the robbery. If it could
be established that A had no license
or permit to possess and carry such
firearm, it should be taken only as
special aggravating circumstance to
the crime of robbery, not subject of
a separate prosecution.
44. ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT
PRACTICES
Q: (2000)A month after the arraignment
of Brad Kit Commissioner of the Housing
and Land Use Regulatory Board, who
was charged with violation of Section 3
(h) of Republic Act 3019 (Anti-Graft
and Corrupt Practices Act) before
the Sandiganbayan, the Office of
the Special Prosecutor filed a Motion
to Suspend Accused Pendente Lite
pursuant to Section 13 of the Anti-
Graft Law. The Court granted the
motion and suspended accused
Brad Kit for a period of 90 days.
Accused assailed the constitutional
validity of the suspension order on
the ground that it partakes of a
penalty before judgment of
conviction is reached and is thus
violative of his constitutional right to
be presumed innocent. He also
35
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ

claimed that this provision of the law

on suspension pendente lite applies
only to electiye officials and not to
appointed ones like him. Rule with
reasons. (5%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The suspension order does not
partake of a penalty and is thus not
violative of Brad Kit's constitutional
right to be presumed innocent.
Under the law, the accused public
officers shall be suspended from
office while the criminal prosecution
is pending in court (Sec. 13, R.A.
3019). Such preventive suspension is
mandatory to prevent the accused
from hampering the normal course
of the investigation (Rios vs.
Sandiganbayan,279SCRA 581J1997):
Bunye vs. Escareal 226 SCRA 332
[19931).Neither is there merit in Brad
Kit's claim that the provision on
suspension pendente lite applies
only to elective officials and not to
appointed ones like him. It applies to
all public officials indicted upon a
valid information under R. A. No.
3019, whether they be appointive or
elective officials; or permanent or
temporary employees, or pertaining
to the career or non-career service
(Segovia vs. Sandiganbayan, 288
SCRA 328 [1998]).

36
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
B. UNUSUALLY ASKED QUESTIONS
1. GRADUATION OF PENALTIES
Q: (2013)Roman and Wendy are
neighbors. On Valentine's Day,
without prior notice, Roman visited
Wendy at her condo to invite her to
dinner, but Wendy turned him down
and abruptly left, leaving her condo
door unlocked. Roman attempted
to follow, but appeared to have
second thoughts; he simply went
back to Wendy's condo, let himself
in, and waited for her return. On
Wendy's arrival later that evening,
Roman grabbed her from behind
and, with a knife in hand, forced her
to undress. Wendy had no choice
but to comply. Roman then tied
Wendy's hands to her bed and
sexually assaulted her five (5) times
that night.
Roman was charged with,
and was convicted of, five (5)
counts of rape, but the judge did not
impose the penalty of reclusion
perpetuafor each count. Instead,
the judge sentenced Roman to 40
years of imprisonment on the basis of
the three-fold rule.
Was the judge correct? (7%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The judge is not correct. The Three
Fold Rule applies to service of
sentence, not on the imposition of
penalty. The computation under the
three-fold rule is for the prison
authorities to make. The court must
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
impose all penalties for all the crimes
the accused have been found guilty
of. The court must impose a penalty
for each rape. The proper penalty,
therefore, is reclusion perpetua for
each count of rape.
2. ANTI-PLUNDER ACT
Q: (2014)City Engr. A, is the city
engineer and the Chairman of the
Bids and Awards Committee (BAC)
of the City of Kawawa. In 2009, the
City ofKawawa, through an
ordinance, allotted the amount of
P100 million for the construction of a
road leading to the poblacion. City
Engr. A instead, diverted the
construction of the road leading to
his farm. Investigation further showed
that he accepted money in the
amount of P10 million each from
three (3) contending bidders, who
eventually lost in the bidding.
Audit report likewise showed that
service vehicles valued at P2 million
could not be accounted for
although reports showed that these
were lent to City Engr. A’s authorized
drivers but the same were never
returned. Further, there were
funds under City Engr. A’s custody
amounting to P10 million which were
found to be missing and could not
be accounted for. In another
project, he was instrumental in
awarding a contract for the
construction of a city school building
costing P10 million to a close relative,
although the lowest bid was P8
37
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
million. Investigation also revealed
that CityEngr. A has a net worth of
more than P50 million, which was
way beyond his legitimate
income.(8%)
(A) If you are the
Ombudsman, what charge or
charges will you file against City
Engr. A?
(B) Suppose the discovered
net worth of City Engr. A is less than
P50 million, will your SUGGESTED
ANSWER still be the same?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) If I am the Ombudsman, I
would file a case of Plunder under
RA 7080 against City Engineer A.
Engr. A is a public officer who
amassed, accumulated or acquired
ill-gotten wealth through a out to be a high-end brothel.
combination of overt or criminal acts
of misuse, misappropriation,
conversion, or malversation of public
funds, receiving kickbacks from
persons in connection with a
government contract or project by
reason of his of office or position,
and illegally or fraudulently
conveying or disposing of assets
belonging to the national
government, in the aggregate
amount or total value of at least P50
million.
(B)Yes, my answerwill still be the
same. City Engr. A’s net worth being
less than P50 million is not
determinative of his liability. What is
the material is the fact that he
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
acquired, amassed and
accumulated ill-gotten wealth of
more than P50million. The basis of
plunder is the combination of
criminal acts or series of acts that
accumulated at least P50million. The
predicate crimes are already
absorbed in the crime of plunder.
3. ANTI-TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS
ACT
Q: (2014)Lokoadvertised on the
internet that he was looking for
commercial models for a TV
advertisement. Ganda, a 16-year-
old beauty, applied for the project.
Lokooffered her a contract, which
Gandasigned. She was asked to
report to an address which turned
Gandabecame one of its most
featured attraction.
What is Loko’s liability, if any?
What effect would Ganda’s minority
have on Loko’s liability? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Loko is liable of the crime of
Trafficking in Persons under RA 9208.
He recruited, offered and hired
Ganda by means of fraud or
deception for the purpose of
exploitation or prostitution. By means
of deceit, i.e., in the guise of making
her a commercial model, Loko
recruited Ganda for the purpose of
prostitution.Ganda’s minority is a
qualifying circumstance. Under
38
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ

Section 6, RA 9208, when the Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. 3019),

trafficked person is a child, the crime and Obstruction of Justice under
committed is Qualified Trafficking in Section 1(b) of PD 1829.
Persons, penalized by life
imprisonment. Direct bribery was committed by
Patrick when, for a consideration of
P500.000.00, he committed a
4. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE violation ofPD 1829 by destroying
the drugs which were evidence
Q: (2005)During a PNP buy-bust entrusted to him in his official
operation, Cao Shih was arrested for capacity.Indirect bribery is not
selling 20 grams of committed, because he received
methamphetamine hydrochloride the P500,000.00 as a consideration
(shabu) to a poseur-buyer. Cao Shih, for destroying the evidence against
through an intermediary, paid the offender, which was under his
Patrick, the Evidence Custodian of official custody as a public officer.
the PNP Forensic Chemistry Section, The money was not delivered to him
the Evidence Custodian of the PNP simply as a gift or present by reason
Forensic Chemistry Section, the of his public office.Patrick also
amount of P500.000.00 in violated Section 3(e), R.A. 3019
consideration for the destruction by causing undue injury to the
Patrick of the drug. Patrick managed government through evident bad
to destroy the drug. faith, giving unwarranted benefit to
the offender by destroying
State with reasons whether evidence of a crime.Obstruction of
Patrick committed the following justice under Section 1 (b) of P.D.
crimes: 1829 is committed by destroying
evidence intended to be used in
a) Direct bribery; official proceedings in criminal case.
b) Indirect bribery;
c) Section 3(e) of RA
3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt 5. ANTI-TORTURE ACT
Practices Act);
d) Obstruction of Justice Q: (2012)AA was arrested for
under PD 1829; (7%) committing a bailable offense and
detained in solitary confinement. He
SUGGESTED ANSWER: was able to post bail after two (2)
Patrick committed the crimes of weeks of detention. During the
direct bribery under Article 210 of period of detention, he was not
the Revised Penal Code, Violation of given any food. Such deprivation
Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and caused him physical discomfort.
39
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
What crime, if any, was committed in
connection with the solitary
confinement and food deprivation
of AA? Explain your SUGGESTED
ANSWER.
(5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The crime committed is Violation of
RA 9745, The Anti-Torture Act. Food
deprivation and confinement in
solitary cell are considered as
physical and psychological torture
under Section 4(2) of RA 9745.
6. ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF
FIREARMS
Q: (2004)PH killed OJ, his political
rival in the election campaign for
Mayor of their town. The Information
against PH alleged that he used an
unlicensed firearm in the killing of the
victim, and this was proved beyond
reasonable doubt by the
prosecution. The trial court
convicted PH of two crimes: murder
and illegal possession of firearms.
Is the conviction correct? Reason
briefly. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the conviction of PH for two
crimes, murder and illegal possession
of firearm is not correct. Under the
new law on illegal possession of
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
firearms and explosives, Rep. Act No.
8294, a person may only be
criminally liable for illegal possession
of firearm if no other crime is
committed therewith; if a homicide
or murder is committed with the use
of an unlicensed firearm, such use
shall be considered as an
aggravating circumstance.PH
therefore may only be convicted of
murder and the use of an unlicensed
firearm in its commission may only be
appreciated as a special
aggravating circumstance, provided
that such use is alleged specifically in
the information for Murder.
C. OBJECTIVE QUESTIONS
1. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE
Q: (2012) a)What is a privileged
mitigating circumstance? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A privileged mitigating circumstance
is that which if present or attendant
in the commission of a felony shall
affect the imposition of penalty as to
degree.
b) Distinguish a privileged mitigating
circumstance from an ordinary
mitigating circumstance as to
reduction of penalty and offsetting
against aggravating circumstance/s.
(5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
40
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ

The distinctions between ordinary wound near the shoulder, X is liable

and privileged mitigating of Attempted Homicide. X’s act of
circumstances are as follows: shooting Y is an overt act directly
connected to homicide, however,
1. As to offsetting: An ordinary he was not able to perform all the
mitigating circumstance can be acts of execution to bring about
offset by a generic aggravating homicide by reason some cause or
circumstance WHEREAS a privileged accident other than his spontaneous
mitigating circumstance cannot be desistance, i.e., the wound inflicted is
offset by any aggravating non fatal. If Y sustained a fatal
circumstance. wound on the chest that could have
2. As to reduction of penalty: caused his death were it not for the
An ordinary mitigating circumstance, immediate medical operation
if not offset by an aggravating performed on him, the crime
circumstance, has the effect of committed is Frustrated Homicide. It
lowering the imposable penalty to its is frustrated because when X
minimum period WHEREAS a inflicted a fatal gunshot wound on Y,
privileged mitigating circumstance X has already performed all the acts
has the effect of lowering the of execution to bring about
imposable penalty by one to two homicide, however, homicide is not
degrees. produce by reason of a cause
independent of the will of the
2. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS perpetrator, i.e., an immediate
medical operation done on the
Q: (2012)Explain and illustrate the victim.
stages of execution of the crime of If Y died, X is liable of homicide
homicide, taking into account the because X has already performed
nature of the offense, the essential the acts/elements necessary for the
element of each of the stages of accomplishment of homicide.
execution and the manner of
committing such intentional felony 3. INDETERMINATE SENTENCE
as distinguished from felony LAW
committed through reckless
imprudence. (5%) Q: (2012)What is the fundamental
principle in applying and interpreting
SUGGESTED ANSWER: criminal laws, including the
Illustration of an intentional felony, Indeterminate Sentence Law?
homicide and its 3 stages: (5%)
attempted, frustrated and
consummated.X, with intent to kill, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
shot Y. If Y sustained a non fatal
41
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
The fundamental principle in
applying criminal laws is the Doctrine
of Pro Reo which provides that penal
laws shall always be construed
liberally in favor of the accused. In
dubio pro reo, i.e., when in doubt,
rule for the accused. This is in
consonance with the constitutional
guarantee that an accused is
presumed innocent until proven
guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
How is the Indeterminate Sentence
Law applied in imposing a
sentence? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Under the Indeterminate Sentence
Law, there are two formulae for
determining the indeterminate
penalty to be imposed on the
convict – that for felonies under the
RPC and that for crimes defined by
special penal laws.
If the crime is penalized by the RPC,
the maximum term of the sentence
shall be that penalty provided for by
law after appreciating all the
attending circumstances surrounding
the commission of the crime, while
the minimum term of the sentence
shall be one degree lower than the
maximum, the range of the minimum
left to the sound discretion of the
court.
If the crime is penalized by special
laws,the minimum of the
indeterminate penalty should not be
less than the minimum of the penalty
prescribed by the law and the
maximum of the indeterminate
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
penalty should not be beyond or
should not exceed that of the
maximum of the penalty prescribed
by the special law. (Section 1,
Indeterminate Sentence Law)
4. DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL LAW
Q: (2003) Distinguish, in their
respective concepts and legal
implications, between crimes mala in
se and crimes mala prohibita.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In concept:
Crimes mala in se are those where
the acts or omissions penalized are
inherently bad, evil, or wrong that
they are almost universally
condemned.Crimes mala prohibita
are those where the acts penalized
are not inherently bad, evil, or wrong
but prohibited by law for public
good, public welfare or interest and
whoever violates the prohibition are
penalized.In legal implications:In
crimes mala in se, good faith or lack
of criminal intent/ negligence is a
defense, while in crimes mala
prohibita, good faith or lack of
criminal intent or malice is not a
defense; it is enough that the
prohibition was voluntarily
violated.Also, criminal liability is
generally incurred in crimes mala in
se even when the crime is only
attempted or frustrated, while in
crimes mala prohibita, criminal
liability is generally incurred only
when the crime is
consummated.Also in crimes mala in
42
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
se, mitigating and aggravating
circumstances are appreciated in
imposing the penalties, while in
crimes mala prohibita, such
circumstances are not appreciated
unless the special law has adopted
the scheme or scale of penalties
under the Revised Penal Code.
5. CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC
OFFICERS
Q: (1999)What constitutes the crime
of malversationof public funds or
property? (2%)
How is malversationdistinguished
from estafa?
A Municipal Treasurer, accountable
for public funds or property,
encashed with public funds private
checks drawn in favor of his wife. The
checks bounced, the drawer not
having enough cash in the drawee
bank. The Municipal Treasurer, in
encashing private checks from
public funds, violated regulations of
his office.Notwithstanding restitution
of the amount of the checks, can
the Municipal Treasurer nevertheless
be criminally liable? What crime did
he commit? Explain. (2%).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Malversation of public funds or
property is committed by any
public officer who, by reason of
the duties of his office, is
accountable for public funds or
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
property, shall take or
misappropriate or shall consent, or
through abandonment or
negligence, shall permit any other
person to take such public funds
or property, wholly or partially, or
shall otherwise be guilty of the
mlsappro-* priation or
malversation of such funds or
property. (Art. 217, RPC)
Malversation differs from estafa in
that malversationIs committed by
an accountable public officer in-
volving public funds or property
under his custody and
accountability; while estafa is
committed by non-ac- countable
public officer or private individual
involving funds or property for
which he is not accountable to
the government.
Tes, notwithstanding the restitution
of the amount of the check, the
Municipal Treasurer will be
criminally liable as restitution does
not negate criminal liability
although it may be considered as
a mitigating circumstance similar
or analogous to voluntary
surrender. (People vs. Velasquez,
73 Phil 98). He will be criminally
liable for malversation. However,
if the restitution was made
immediately, under vehement
protest against an imputation of
malversation and without leaving
the office, he may not be
criminally liable.
6. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
43
 CRIMINAL LAW FAQ
Q: (1999)Define murder. What are
the elements of the crime? (3%)
The accused, not intending to kill the
victim, treacherously shot the victim
while the victim was turning his back
to him. He aimed at and hit the
victim only on the leg. The victim,
however, died because of loss of
blood. Can the accused be liable
for homicide or murder, considering
that treachery was clearly involved
but there was no attempt to kill?
Explain your answer. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a
person which otherwise would
constitute only homicide, had it not
been attended by any of the
following circumstances:
1. With treachery or taking
advantage of superior strength, or
with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the
defense or of means or persons to
insure or afford impunity;
2. In consideration of a price, reward
or promise;
3. By means or on the occasion of
inundation, fire, poison, explosion,
shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,
derailment or assault upon a
railroad, fall of an airship, or by
means of motor vehicles, or with the
use of any other means involving
great waste and ruin;
San Beda College Alabang School of Law
Centralized Bar Operations 2018
4. On occasion of an earthquake,
eruption of a volcano, destructive
cyclone, epidemic or other public
calamity;
5.With evident premeditation;
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and
inhumanly augmenting the suffering
of the victim, or outraging or scoffing
at his person or corpse.
The elements of murder are: (1) that
a person was unlawfully killed; (2)
that such a killing was attended by
any of the above-mentioned
circumstances; (3) that the killing is
not parricide nor infanticide; and (4)
that the accused killed the victim.
The accused is liable for the death
of the victim even though he merely
aimed and fired at the latter's leg,
“not intending to kill the victim",
considering that the gunshot was
felonious and was the proximate
cause of death. An offender is liable
for all the direct, natural, and logical
consequences of his felonious act
although different from what he
intended.However, since specific
intent to kill is absent, the crime for
said death is only homicide and not
murder (People vs. Pugay and
Samson, 167 SCRA 439)
44