CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

BOOK 2
From the lectures of Prosecutor Victoria C. Garcia

By: Dizon | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Faculty of Civil Law – University of Santo Tomas
Updated: 2017
Disclaimer: Errors/mistakes are solely due to the transcribers.
Please use with due diligence and caution.
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
TITLE ONE
CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND
THE LAW OF NATIONS (Articles 114 – 122)
ARTICLE 114 – TREASON
Treason is committed by any Filipino citizen or an alien
residing in the Philippines who levies war against the
Philippine Government or adheres to her enemies by giving
them aid and comfort.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is by birth, a Filipino Citizen or an alien
residing in the Philippines.
The offender can either be:
a. A Filipino citizen because a Filipino citizen
owes permanent allegiance to the Philippine
Government; or
b. A foreigner, even if he is temporarily residing
in the Philippines because during his
temporary stay in the Philippines, he also
owes temporary allegiance to the Philippines
since he is given protection by the Philippine
Government under its laws therefore it is but
incumbent upon him to have temporary
allegiance to the Philippine Government.
2. That there is a war in which the Philippines is involved.
 The second element is that there is a war in which
the Philippines is involved.
 In the case of Laura v. Misa, treason is a war
time offense. It can be committed only in times of
war. In times of peace, Treason remains to be
dormant crime, however, the moment when
emergency arises, the moment a war arises, it is
immediately put into effect as an act self-defense
and self-preservation for the Philippine
Government. Treason cannot be committed in
times of peace, because in times of peace, there are
no traitors.
 Who are these traitors?
 These enemies are troops of the enemy state
which is in war with the Philippines. Filipino
men like the MILF, NPAs, even if they are at
war with the Philippine government, they
cannot be considered as enemies because they
are still considered as Filipino citizens. So the
aliens refer to the citizens of the enemy state
which is at war with the Philippines.
3. That the offender either—
a) Levies war against the Philippine
government, or
b) Adheres to the enemies by giving them aid or
comfort.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 The third element refers to the mode of
committing treason. Treason may be committed
by either:
a. Levies war against the Philippine government,
requires the concurrence of two elements:
a) There must be an actual of assembly of men
b) It is for the purpose of executing or effecting a
treasonable design by force.
Levying of war means that the said offenders,
Filipino citizens who are said to be in
collaboration – they connived and conspired with
the enemy troops in order to hand over the
Philippine Government to the enemy troops.
Absent of that collaboration, it cannot be
considered as treason.
b. Adheres to the enemies by giving them aid or
comfort.
Adherence to the enemies — means that the
Filipino citizen or the offender intentionally,
intellectually and emotionally favors the enemy.
Therefore, adherence to the enemies is an internal
state of mind, it is mental state, you cannot see
adherence to the enemies.
 How now would you know that a person is
adhering to the enemy state?
 It is manifested by his acts of giving aid
or comfort to the enemy. That is why
these two must concur:
1. Adherence to the enemies
2. Giving them aid or comfort
 Mere adherence to the enemies,
without any act of giving aid or comfort
to the enemy will not bring along
treason, it is the act of giving aid or
comfort which is the manifestation of the
adherence to the enemies.
EXAMPLES OF ACTS OF ADHERING TO THE ENEMIES
BY GIVING AID OR COMFORT:
 By giving the enemies information, transportation,
arms, supplies, all of these will weaken the defense
of the Philippines and strengthen the enemy state.
 People v. Perez: The court said, "the act of
commandeering women or giving women to the
enemy troops in times of war, to satisfy the lust of
the enemy troops is not considered as a
treasonable act." Because according the Court,
whatever benefit is given to the enemy is merely
trivial in nature, imperceptible and it was not the
intent of the offender (unintentionally).
1|
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Two ways of proving treason under Article 114:
1. TESTIMONY OF TWO WITNESSES, AT LEAST,
TO THE SAME OVERT ACT, OTHERWISE
KNOWN AS THE "TWO-WITNESS RULE"
 There must be two witnesses who will prove only
on the commission by the offender of an overt act
showing that he adheres to the enemy. There must
be two persons who had seen the overt act.
Therefore, treason cannot be proven by mere
substantial evidence. There must be direct
evidence, a witness to this act of giving aid or
comfort to the enemy.
2. CONFESSION OF THE OFFENDER OR THE
ACCUSED MADE IN AN OPEN COURT
 Confession of guilt must be made before a court. It
must be judicial confession made in court. Extra-
judicial confession will not give rise to conviction
in case of the crime of treason.
Q: What if there is war which the Philippines is involved? X
was among those who committed treason against the
government. Now X in committing treason killed a public
officer of the government of the Philippines, in furtherance
of his act of treason. Will such act amounting to murder
give rise to a separate and distinct crime? Will you charge
him for two crimes based on treason and murder?
A: There is only one crime committed by him
and the crime committed is treason. Common
crimes such as Murder, physical injuries, homicide,
arson, if they are committed in furtherance to, in
connection with or incidentally to treason shall be
absorbed in the crime of treason because they are
atrocities for war and therefore, they are considered as
absorbed in the crime of treason. It cannot even be
complex, they are considered absorbed in the crime of
treason.
ARTICLE 115 – CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO
COMMIT TREASON
Conspiracy to commit treason – meeting of two or
more persons who come to an agreement to commit
treason and decide to commit it
Proposal to commit treason – a person has decided to
commit treason and proposes its execution to other person
or persons.
 The moment that other person whom the proposal was
given, raise to the commission of crime, we no longer
have proposal, but we have Conspiracy to commit
treason.
 Separate and distinct from treason
 Two-witness rule does not apply
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
ARTICLE 116 – MISPRISION OF TREASON
 Every person owing allegiance to the Government
of the Philippine Islands, without being a
foreigner, and having knowledge of any conspiracy
against them, conceals or does not disclose and
make known the same, as soon as possible to the
governor or fiscal of the province, or the mayor or
fiscal of the city which he resides, as the case may
be shall be punished as an accessory to the crime
of treason.
 TREASON can be committed both by Filipino
citizens and a foreigner temporarily residing in the
Philippines.
 MISPRISION OF TREASON can only be
committed by a Filipino citizen who owes
permanent allegiance to the Philippine
government. It cannot be committed by a
foreigner residing in the Philippines.
Q: What if A, B and C, conspired and agreed to commit
treason against the Philippine Government. After their
conspiracy and agreement, A went to X. A told his friend X
that he was in conspiracy with B and C to commit treason
against the Philippine Government. After A told him such
conspiracy with X, A left. X, despite knowledge of the
conspiracy to commit treason among A, B, and C, did not
disclose such information to the proper authorities. What
crime/crimes is/are committed by A, B, C, and X?
A: A, B, and C are liable for conspiracy to
commit treason. There is a meeting of two or more
persons come to an agreement to commit the crime of
treason and decide to commit it.There is proposal to
commit treason when a person has decided to commit
the crime of treason and proposes its execution to
some other person or persons. The moment that other
person whom the proposal was given, raise to the
commission of crime, we no longer have proposal, but
we have Conspiracy to commit treason. In the problem,
A, B, and C, conspired, agreed to commit the crime of
treason against the Philippine government, therefore
they are all liable for conspiracy to commit treason.
Q: X, who had knowledge of the conspiracy to commit
treason among A, B, and C, however, despite that
knowledge, he did not disclose it to the proper authorities.
What is the liability of X?
A: X is liable for misprision of treason – is
committed by any person who owes permanent
allegiance to the Philippine Government who fails to
disclose of knowledge to commit treason as soon as
possible to the proper authorities. In the problem, C,
despite having knowledge of the conspiracy to commit
treason among A, B, and C did not divulge it, did not
disclose it to the proper authorities, therefore, X is
liable for misprision of treason.
2|
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
ARTICLE 117 – ESPIONAGE
There are two ways of committing espionage under Article
117:
I. By entering, without authority therefor, a
warship, fort, or naval or military
establishment or reservation to obtain any
information, plans, photographs or other
data of a confidential nature, relative to the
defense of the Philippines
 The offender can be any person. He can be a
Filipino citizen or a foreigner, or he can be a
public officer or employee or a private
individual.
 When will the crime of espionage arise?
 Under the first mode, the crime of espionage
will arise moment the offender enters the
warship, fort or naval or military
establishment or reservation, without
authority if his intention is to obtain any
information, plans, photographs or other data
of a confidential nature, relative to the
defense of the Philippines.
 It is not necessary that for the crime to arise
that he is successful in obtaining the data. It is
not necessary that he indeed obtained the
data. The mere act of entering without
authority is sufficient if his intention is to
obtain the data of confidential manner
relative to the defense of the Philippines. The
law presumes that the moment he enters
without authority, his purpose is to obtain
confidential information. He may, however,
rebut this presumption.
II. By disclosing to the representative of a
foreign nation the contents of the articles,
data or information referred to in paragraph
No. 1 of art. 117, which he had in his
possession by reason of the public office he
holds.
 This mode of committing espionage can only
be committed by a public officer who has been
trusted, by reason of his public position, of
articles, data of confidential nature relative to
the defense of the Philippines.
 The crime of espionage will arise the moment
the offender divulges or discloses the data and
information to a representative of a foreign
nation.
 So even if he is in possession of the same, but
he does not divulge it to any representative of
a foreign nation, the crime will not arise.
 Espionage can be committed in BOTH times of peace
and in times of war.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
ARTICLE 118 –INCITING TO WAR OR GIVING
MOTIVES FOR REPRISALS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender performs unlawful or
unauthorized acts by the Philippine government.
2. That the said act provoke or give occasion for a war
involving or liable to involve the Philippines or
expose Filipino citizens to reprisals on their persons
and property while they are in a foreign country.
3. He is not legally authorized to do so.
Inciting to war connotes that there is yet no war. It is
committed in times of peace.
Case of CAPTAIN MENDOZA
Hostage drama in Luneta. There were Hong Kong
citizens who boarded the bus and here comes Captain
Mendoza who was no longer a member of the military,
he entered the bus, with different weapons and
grenades and even killed some Hong Kong citizens.
Captain Mendoza performed unlawful and
unauthorized acts which exposed overseas Filipino
workers in Hong Kong and China to reprisals on their
persons or property. In fact, there was news at that
time that Hong Kong or China would be engaging in
war with the Philippines. Hence, one of the crimes that
may be held against Captain Mendoza is inciting to war
or giving motives for reprisals.
ARTICLE 119 – VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY
ELEMENTS:
1. The crime is committed when there is a war but the
Philippines is not involved in the said war and;
2. The competent authority issued a regulation for the
purpose of enforcing neutrality among Filipino
citizens and ;
3. The offender violates such regulation imposed.
 Here, there is war but the Philippines is not involved in
the said war.
Q: There is a war between country X and country Y. Here
comes Pedro, a Filipino citizen, he was siding with country
X. Is he liable?
A: No, he is not liable of violation of neutrality
because in the problem, it did not say that the
competent authority (the President) issued a
proclamation or regulation imposing neutrality.
 The violation will only arise if there is a proclamation
or regulation imposing neutrality and a Filipino citizen
violates such declaration or regulation issued by a
competent authority. Therefore, absence of such
declaration of neutrality, the crime of violation of
neutrality does not arise.
3|
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
ARTICLE120 – CORRESPONDENCE WITH
HOSTILE COUNTRY
ELEMENTS:
1. That it is in time of war in which the Philippines is
involved.
2. That the offender makes correspondence with an
enemy country or any territory occupied by enemy
troops.
3. That the correspondence is either —
a.) Prohibited by the Philippine Government; or
b.) Carried out in ciphers or conventional signs; or
c.) Containing notice or information which might
be useful to the enemy
 Here, there is a war in which the Philippines is
involved.
 If there is a declaration issued by a competent
authority that there shall be no correspondence with
the enemy country, any kind of correspondence will
make the offender criminally liable but if there is no
declaration that prohibits the same, the crime will only
arise if the correspondence is carried out in ciphers or
conventional signs, or if it contains notice or
information that will be useful to the enemy.
Q: The Philippines is at war with the another country. Here
comes X, a Filipino citizen who he has a pen pal who is a
citizen of the country which is at war with the Philippines.
The competent authority or the President issued a
declaration of proclamation saying that there should be no
correspondence to the enemy state. But X missed his
penpal, and so, he wrote in a small piece of paper, "I love
you, I miss you, muamua!" Is X liable of the crime of
correspondence with the enemy?
A: X is liable because there was a declaration issued
by a competent authority that correspondence with the
hostile country is prohibited and if there is no
declaration, proclamation coming from the competent
authority prohibiting correspondence, the crime will
only arise if the said crime is carried on in ciphers or
conventional signs or containing notice or information
which might be useful to the enemy.
ARTICLE 121 – FLIGHT TO ENEMY'S COUNTRY
ELEMENTS:
1. That there is s war in which the Philippines is
involved.
2. That the offender must be owing allegiance to the
Philippine Government
3. That the offender attempts to flee or go to enemy's
country
4. That going to the enemy country is prohibited by a
competent authority
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 There must be a declaration or a proclamation issued
by a competent authority, that no Filipino shall flee to
the enemy's country and the offender violates such
proclamation.
 Mere attempt will readily rise to the crime. It is not
necessary that the offender has actually gone to the
country.
 The law says the offender owes allegiance to the
Philippines therefore it can be committed by a Filipino
citizen or a foreigner. The law does not require that he
owes permanent allegiance to the Government.
There are four crimes against the law of nations:
1. Piracy
2. Mutiny
3. Qualified Piracy
4. Qualified Mutiny
ARTICLE 122 – PIRACY
ELEMENTS:
1. The vessel is on the high seas or on Philippine
waters.
 The first element is where the vessel is located.
The vessel can either be on the high seas (in
international waters) or on Philippine waters
(this was brought about by the amendment of
RA 7659). Before the amendment of RA 7659,
Piracy under Article 122 can only be committed
when the vessel is on the high seas. But because
of this amendment brought about by RA 7659,
Piracy now under Article 122 can be committed
when the vessel is on Philippine waters.
2. The offenders are not members of the complement or
passengers of the vessel.
 The second element provides for the offenders.
The offenders must NOT be members of the
complement or passengers of the vessel.
Therefore, the offenders must be STRANGERS
to the vessel. They must be coming from the
outside, not from the inside.
3. The offenders either:
a. The offenders either attack or seize the vessel;
or
b. The offenders either seize in whole or in part
the cargo, the equipment, or the personal
belongings of the passengers or members of
the complement.
 Based on these elements, you will notice that piracy is
akin to robbery. It is in effect robbery. It is just called
piracy because the object of the thing is either the
vessel or the cargo or equipment of the said vessel.
4|
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
There is also the use of force or intimidation. There is
also the use of violence against persons. There is also
intent to gain. So it is akin, similar to robbery.
ARTICLE 122 –MUTINY
ELEMENTS:
1. The vessel is either on the high seas or on Philippine
waters
2. The offenders are members of the complement or
passengers of the vessel
3. The offenders raise a commotion or disturbance on
the board the ship against the lawful command of
the captain or the commander of the ship.
 In mutiny, there is no taking because in mutiny there is
no intent to gain. Mutiny is the rising of commotion, a
resistance against the lawful command, against the
lawful authority of the commander or captain of the
ship.
 Since in mutiny, there is no intent to gain, mutiny is
akin to sedition. The rising of commotion, an uprising,
an act of dissent against lawful authority.
PIRACY vs. MUTINY
PIRACY MUTINY
The offenders are
necessarily inside the vessel,
The offenders are strangers
they are either members of
to the vessel
the complement or
passengers of the vessel
There is no intent to gain
There is intent to gain because the essence of the
because it is similar to crime is to go against the
robbery lawful authority of the
commander of the ship.
Q: The vessel is on the sea going to Mindoro. So while the
ship is on its way to Mindoro, suddenly there comes a big
storm. The commander or the captain of the ship said that
they should first move towards the shore and let the storm
comes calm in order to ensure the safety of the passengers
of the vessel. The passengers of the vessel and members of
the complement didn’t want the decision of the said captain
of the ship and so they seize the captain of the ship and
manned the vessel until they reach Mindoro. What crime, if
any, is committed by these members of the complement
and passengers of the vessel?
A: They are liable of MUTINY. The vessel is on
Philippine waters. The offenders are members of the
complement and they go against the lawful authority of
the captain of the ship. Therefore they are liable of
mutiny.
Q: While a vessel is on Philippine waters, here comes a
second vessel. Four men from the second vessel boarded
the first vessel and at gunpoint, took the cargo and
equipment of the said vessel. Placed them in the second
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
vessel and off they went. What crime is committed by these
four men?
A: They are liable of PIRACY UNDER ARTICLE
122. The vessel is on Philippine waters, the offenders
are not members of the complement or passengers of
the ship. They seize the cargo and equipment of the
vessel. Therefore, it is piracy under Article 122.
Q: The vessel is on Philippine waters. While the vessel is on
Philippine waters, the members of the complement and
passengers of the said vessel in conspiracy with one another
took the cargo and equipment of the said vessel, and then
they boarded a second vessel and off they went. What crime
is committed by the members of the complement and
passengers of the said vessel?
A: The members of the complement and
passengers of the vessel committed ACTS OF
PIRACY because they seize in whole or in part the
cargo or equipment of the vessel but NOT PIRACY
UNDER ARTICLE 122 because in Article 122, it is a
requisite that the offenders must be strangers to the
vessel. Here, the offenders are members of the
complement and passengers of the vessel. So the crime
committed is PIRACY BUT UNDER PD 532.
ANTI-PIRACY AND ANTI-ROBBERY LAW OF 1974
(PD 532)
Under PD 532, piracy is committed by attacking or seizing
the vessel or seizing in whole or in part the cargo,
equipment or personal belongings of the members of the
complement or passengers of the vessel IRRESPECTIVE of
the value thereof, committed by means of force and
violence and committed by any person whether he may a
member of the complement or passenger of the vessel or
strangers to the vessel BUT the vessel is on Philippine
waters. Therefore, for PIRACY UNDER PD 532 to arise, it
necessary that the vessel is on Philippine waters.If the
vessel is on the high seas, immediately rule out PD
532.
HOW COULD YOU KNOW IF IT IS PIRACY UNDER
PD 532 OR PIRACY UNDER ARTICLE 122 OF RPC?
 If the vessel is on Philippine waters, your choice is
either Piracy under PD 532 or Piracy Article 122.
 Where lies the difference?
 Since Article 122 of RPC is the main law, we
have to reconcile it with PD 532. Or PD 532
must be reconciled with Article 122. Piracy
under PD 532, the offenders can be any
person. He can be a stranger. He can be
members of the complement.
 Therefore, where does PD 532 apply?
 It will apply when the offenders are
members of the complement or
5|
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
passengers of the vessel and the vessel
is on the Philippine waters.
Q: The vessel is on Philippine waters, suddenly men from
the outside committed acts of piracy. What crime is
committed?
A: Piracy under Article 122
Q: The vessel is on Philippine waters. Acts of piracy were
committed by the members of the complement or
passengers of the vessel. What crime is committed?
A: Piracy under PD 532
Q: What if the vessel is on the high seas? While the vessel is
on the high seas, there comes a second vessel. Four men
from the second vessel boarded the first vessel and at
gunpoint took the cargo and equipment of the first vessel.
What crime is committed by these four men?
A: Piracy under Article 122. The vessel is on the high
seas. The offenders are not members of the
complement or the passengers of the vessel. They seize
in whole or in part the cargo and equipment of the said
vessel.
Q: While the vessel is on the high seas, members of the
complement or passengers of the vessel in conspiracy with
one another took away the cargo and equipment of the
vessel. What crime is committed?
 It is not piracy under Article 122 because
here, the offenders are members of the
complement or passengers of the vessel. In
Article 122, it is required that the offenders
must be strangers to the vessel. It cannot be
piracy under PD 532 because the vessel must
be on Philippine waters. In our problem, the
vessel is on the high seas. So, what crime is
committed?
A: Again, piracy is akin to robbery. Since Piracy under
Article 122 and Piracy under PD 532 do not apply, the
crime committed is ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED
PLACE.
ARTICLE 123 – QUALIFIED PIRACY
 What are the circumstances which will qualify piracy?
 Under Article 122, the following circumstances
will qualify piracy:
1. Whenever the offender have seized a vessel by
boarding or firing upon the same; or
 It is necessary that the vessel itself
must be seized by boarding or firing
upon the same. Notwithstanding this
act of boarding or firing, if only the
cargo, equipment, or personal
belongings inside the vessel were
seized, it is not qualified piracy but
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
only a simply piracy because the law
specifies that it is the vessel that must
be seized to qualify piracy.
2. Whenever the offenders have aband0ned
their victims without means of saving
themselves; or
 There is intent to kill.
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by
murder, homicide, physical injuries, or rape.
 Whenever these four crimes
accompanied the act of piracy, it will
not bring about a separate and distinct
crime or a separate and distinct charge
of murder, homicide, physical injuries
or rape. These crimes are absorbed
because they are circumstances which
will qualify the penalty to death.
 These circumstances are separate and distinct from
each other. It is not necessary that all of them must be
present. The presence of one will qualify piracy. Notice
the conjunction OR. These are qualifying
circumstances which are prejudicial to the accused
therefore they must be strictly construed.
Q: What if the vessel is on Philippine waters, and there
comes a second vessel? Four men from the second vessel
boarded the first vessel and at gunpoint, they asked the
passengers to give to them all their valuables. One woman
didn’t want to give her wedding ring because it was so
precious to her and so one of the men forcibly took the
wedding ring from the finger such that the finger was
severed from it. What crime is committed?
A: QUALIFIED PIRACY because piracy was
accompanied by physical injuries.
Q: What if in the same problem, the woman didn’t want to
give the ring so one of the men slapped the woman on the
face three times and the face of the woman became
reddish? She suffered slight physical injuries. What about
the fact that the injury suffered was only slight?
A: It will not make a difference although the injury
suffered was only slight. In the third circumstance
which will qualify piracy, the word “physical injuries”
is used in its generic sense. Therefore, whatever be the
kind of physical injuries, whether serious or slight for
as long as it was accompanied by piracy, it will be
considered as qualified piracy.
Q: What if in the same problem, the woman didn’t want to
give the ring and one of the men touched the private parts
of the said woman and after touching the private parts of
the said woman with lust, he forcibly took the ring. What
crime is committed by the said men?
6|
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
A: All of them will be liable for piracy. However, the
man who touched the private part of the woman will be
liable for two crimes: piracy and acts of lasciviousness.
Acts of lasciviousness is not mentioned in Article 123.
Therefore, its presence will not qualify piracy. It will
bring about a separate and distinct charge of acts of
lasciviousness.
 So, only these four crimes (murder, homicide,
physical injuries and rape) will qualify piracy. If
other crime is committed and accompanied by
piracy and is not among these four crimes
mentioned in Article 123, it will bring about a
separate and distinct charge.
QUALIFIED MUTINY
 Insofar as mutiny is concerned, what are the
circumstances which will qualify mutiny?
 In Article 123, there is no specific mention of
qualified mutiny, however according to Reyes
and other legal luminaries, of the three
circumstances stated in Article 123,
paragraphs 2 and 3 are considered as
circumstances which will qualify mutiny. That
is:
1. whenever the offenders have abandoned
their victims without means of saving
themselves; or
2. whenever the crime is accompanied with
murder, homicide, physical injuries, or
rape
 According to Reyes and other legal
luminaries, only these two are considered
qualified in mutiny because in mutiny,
the offenders are necessarily, ordinarily
inside the vessel because they are
members of the complement or
passengers of the vessel.
Q: The vessel was on Philippine waters sailing toward
Mindoro. A water boat went near the vessel. Two armed
men fired at the vessel and thereafter climbed the same. At
gunpoint, they took some of the cargoes and personal
belongings of the passengers and members of the vessel
and off, they left. What crime had been committed by these
two armed men?
A: Piracy. First, the vessel is on Philippine waters.
Second, they are not members of the vessel neither are
they the passengers. Third, they seized whole or in part
the cargo and personal belongings of the passengers
inside the vessel. All the elements of piracy under
Article 122 are present.
It is not qualified piracy because even if there was
boarding and firing, it is not the vessel that was seized
but only the personal belongings of the passengers and
cargoes inside the vessel.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Q: In the same problem, these two men, X and Y, entered
the same vessel and at gunpoint, they were able to take the
personal belongings of the members of the complement
and the passengers of the vessel, another passenger inside
the vessel, W, took the commotion as an opportunity to
settle the grudge against a fellow passenger, B. While the
people were afraid of X and Y, W went to the cabin of B and
there he repeatedly stabbed to death B. All were arrested
and charged with Qualified Piracy. Is the charge correct?
A: The charge is wrong.
Insofar as X and Y are concerned, as in the previous
problem, they are liable for simple piracy.
With respect to W, he cannot be held liable for
qualified piracy. Only the first element is present. He is
an insider, not a stranger to the vessel, he also has no
intent to attack or seize the vessel or to take the cargo
or equipment or personal belongings of the passengers
or members of the complement, his intention was to
kill an enemy, to settle a grudge and therefore he
cannot be held liable for qualified piracy.
Q: In the same problem, X and Y were convicted of Piracy
and then W was acquitted because the crime charge is
qualified piracy and he cannot be held to be liable of such
crime and he cannot also be held liable for murder – a
crime different to what was charged. The prosecution filed
a motion for reconsideration saying that they should all be
held liable for qualified piracy because of the third
qualifying circumstance and the act of piracy was
accompanied with murder committed by W against B and
since murder was committed by reason or on the occasion
of the said piracy, therefore they should all be liable for
qualified piracy. Is the contention correct?
A: The contention is wrong. This is not a special
complex crime and therefore it is necessary that the
said murder, homicide, physical injuries, or rape must
be committed by the actual perpetrators of piracy.
These are not crimes by themselves but circumstances
which will qualify the penalty. Whenever any of these
four circumstances is present, they are absorbed
because they are qualifying circumstances. They are
not separate and distinct crime which will bring about
a special complex crime.
7|
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
ANTI-HIJACKING LAW (R.A. No. 6235 otherwise
known as An Act Prohibiting Certain Acts inimical
to Civil Aviation)
Under RA 6235, there are four prohibited acts.
1. By compelling the pilot of an aircraft of Philippine
registry to change its course or destination OR by
seizing or usurping control thereof while it is in
flight
2. By compelling an aircraft of foreign registry to
land in Philippine territory OR by seizing or
usurping control thereof while the same is in
Philippine territory
HOW COULD YOU DISTINGUISH THE FIRST ACT
FROM THE SECOND ACT?
 If the aircraft is of Philippine registry, the seizure
or usurpation to amount in violation of RA 6235,
requires that the aircraft must be in flight. An
aircraft is in flight the moment all its external
doors had been closed, following embarkation
until any of it external doors had been opened for
purposes of disembarkation.
 On the other hand, if the aircraft is of foreign
registry, the seizure or usurpation did not need
while it is in flight. For as long as the aircraft of
foreign registry is within the Philippine territory,
seizure or usurpation thereof will bring about
violation of RA 6235 even if all its doors are
opened; even if it is not in flight.
 Insofar as these two prohibited acts are concerned,
what are the circumstances which will qualify the
penalty?
 Under RA 6235, the following
circumstances will qualify the first two
acts:
a. By firing upon the pilot or the
member of the crew or passenger of
the aircraft; or
b. By exploding or attempting to
explode by mean of a bomb or
explosive for purposes of destroying
the aircraft; or
c. Whenever the crime is
accompanied by murder, homicide,
serious physical injuries, or rape
 NOTE: In case of piracy, the law uses the
word “physical injuries” in its generic
sense. Whatever be the kind of physical
injury that will accompany piracy, the
crime committed is qualified piracy.
But in case of hijacking under RA
6235, the law is specific; it must be
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
serious physical injuries. Therefore,
if the physical injuries that would
accompany the act of usurpation and
seizure of the aircraft would only be less
serious physical injuries or slight physical
injuries, the penalty is not qualified. The
penalty is qualified because from the
penalty of 12 to 20 years, it would
become 15 years to death.
3. By carrying or loading on board a PASSENGER
AIRCRAFT operating as a public utility in the
Philippines materials or substances which are
explosive, flammable, corrosive or poisonous
4. By shipping, carrying or loading on board a
CARGO AIRCRAFT operating as a public utility in
the Philippines materials or substances which are
explosive, flammable, corrosive or poisonous in a
manner not in accordance with the rules and
regulations of the Air Transportation Office
HOW WOULD YOU DISTINGUISH THE 3RD FROM
THE 4TH ACT?
 If the aircraft is a PASSENGER AIRCRAFT, the
mere act of carrying or loading explosive,
flammable, corrosive or poisonous substances will
immediately constitute a violation of RA 6235.
 If however the aircraft is a CARGO AIRCRAFT,
the loading of these poisonous substances,
flammable substances, is allowed because it is a
cargo aircraft. The crime will only arise if such act
of loading is not in accordance with the rules and
regulations of the Air Transportation Office.
HUMAN SECURITY ACT OF 2007
(R.A. No. 9372)
Q: What if there is a bus and the bus is parked at Luneta
Park and it was full of children. And here comes X, X had
different kinds of explosive all over his body. And at
gunpoint, entered the said bus and told the children to keep
quiet. Thereafter, there is a cartolina on the glass window of
the said bus. Written on the cartolina were his demands to
the government. His demands were first, that his brother, a
member of NPA and who is being incarcerated by the
military be released and his second demand, was that funds
be transferred to his account. So these were the demands
made by X against the government. Because of this, the
parents of the children arrived, the media arrived, all the
cabinet secretaries arrived. Only the president did not
arrive. So everybody was there. They were afraid that the
children might die so there was chaos in the entire
Philippines. It took the members of the military and police
12 hours to subdue X. So after 12 hours, they were able to
arrest X. What crime, if any, may be filed against X?
8|
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
A: X will be charged of the crime of terrorism
under RA 9372, the Human Security Act of 2007.
Under Section 3 of Ra 9372, terrorism is committed
when the offender commits any of the following acts
punishable under the RPC:
a. Piracy
b. Rebellion
c. Coup d’Etat
d. Murder
e. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention
f. Crimes involving Destruction
If the offender commits any of these acts
punishable under the RPC or any of the following
acts punishable under special penal laws:
1. Article 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in the
High Seas or in the Philippine Waters);
2. Article 134 (Rebellion or Insurrection);
3. Article 134-a (Coup d’Etat), including acts
committed by private persons;
4. Article 248 (Murder);
5. Article 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention);
6. Article 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction,
or under
1. Presidential Decree No. 1613 (The Law on Arson);
2. Republic Act No. 6969 (Toxic Substances and
Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control Act of
1990);
3. Republic Act No. 5207, (Atomic Energy
Regulatory and Liability Act of 1968);
4. Republic Act No. 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law);
5. Presidential Decree No. 532 (Anti-piracy and Anti-
highway Robbery Law of 1974); and,
6. Presidential Decree No. 1866, as amended (Decree
Codifying the Laws on Illegal and Unlawful
Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in, Acquisition
or Disposition of Firearms, Ammunitions or
Explosives)
If the offender commits any of these crimes under
the RPC and any of the crimes under special penal
laws, thereby sowing and creating a condition
widespread and extraordinary fear and panic
among the populace in order to coerce the
government to give in to an unlawful demand, he
is liable of terrorism and the penalty is 40 years
imprisonment without the benefit of parole under
the Indeterminate Sentence Law. So it is the
maximum penalty of 40 years. He has to serve it
totally. Even if he has already served the
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
minimum, he cannot be given the benefit of parole
under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. So it is
necessary that he must commit any of these
predicate crimes and after committing these
predicate crimes, where lies the difference?
Because his act that sowed and created fear and
panic among the populace coupled with an
unlawful demand against the government.
Q: So let us say that X was charged with terrorism based on
a valid complaint or information a case of terrorism was
filed against him before the RTC. However, after trial on
the merits, the judge acquitted him. According to the judge,
the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused
beyond reasonable doubt therefore acquittal for reasonable
doubt. Since he is acquitted of terrorism under RA 9372,
can he still be prosecuted for his predicate crime of
kidnapping and illegal detention because he detained the
children for more than 12 hours? Can he still be prosecuted
for Illegal and Unlawful Possession of Firearms,
Ammunitions or Explosives because he was full of firearms
and ammunitions and explosives?
A: No more.
Because of Section 49 of RA 9372. Under Section
49 of RA 9372, whenever a person has been charged of
terrorism, or any act punishable under RA 9372, based
on the valid complaint or information, sufficient
information and substance to bring about and
thereafter he is acquitted or the case is dismissed, he
can no longer be subsequently prosecuted for any other
felony or offense necessarily included in the crime
charged. The crime of kidnapping and serious illegal
detention is necessarily included in terrorism because
it is one of the predicate crimes. Likewise, violation of
PD 1866, as amended Illegal and Unlawful Possession
of Firearms is also necessarily included in terrorism
because it is one of the predicated crimes in terrorism.
Or any of these predicated crimes, he can no longer be
charged because they are necessarily included in
terrorism. This is known as the ABSORPTION
PRINCIPLE in terrorism.
Q: But what if in the same problem, while X was waiting for
his demands to be given by the government, he saw a girl
and with lewd design, he touched the private parts of the
seven-year old girl. Therefore he committed a violation of
RA 7610 the Anti-Child Abuse Law. He was acquitted of
terrorism. Can the state prosecute him for violation of RA
7610?
A: Yes, because it is not among the predicate
crimes. It is not a crime necessarily included in the
crime of terrorism.
9|
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
TITLE TWO
CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF
THE STATE (Articles 124 – 133)
The acts under TITLE TWO are made criminal because
they both appease the Bill of Rights. The rights stated under
the Constitution and the first of these is under ARTICLE
124, 125, and 126 – Arbitrary Detention.
BAR: THREE ACTS PUNISHED AS ARBITRARY
DETENTION:
1. Arbitrary Detention by detaining a person without
legal ground under Article 124
2. Arbitrary Detention by failing to deliver the detained
person to the proper judicial authorities within 12,
18 or 36 hours under Article 125
3. Arbitrary Detention by delaying the release of
prisoners despite the judicial or executive order to
do so under Article 126
ARTICLE 124 – ARBITRARY DETENTION BY
DETAINING A PERSON WITHOUT LEGAL
GROUND
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
 The offender is a public officer or employee.
But not all public officers or employees can
commit arbitrary detention. The public
officer of employee can commit arbitrary
detention are only those who have been
vested with authority to effect arrest
and detain a person or at least to cause
the detention of a person. Even if he is a
public officer and he detains another, but he
is not vested with authority to effect arrest or
detain another, although a public officer, he
was acting in hid private capacity, the crime
committed is either Article 267 – Illegal
Detention or Article 268 – Slight illegal
detention but it is not Arbitrary detention.
Public officers who have been vested with
authority to effects arrest and detain a person
are POLICE OFFICERS. On the other hand,
public officers vested with authority to cause
the detention of a person are MEMBERS OF
CONGRESS. They can order the detention of
a person who has been cited of contempt for
failing to accurate their proof, or we have
JUDGES they can order the summary
detention of persons cited in contempt of
court.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
2. That he detains a person.
 There is detention when the offended party is
placed in incarceration. When the offended
party is placed behind bars or when the
offended party is restrained of his person or
liberty.
 In order to amount arbitrary detention there
must be an act of restraint on the
person or liberty of the offended party.
Absent that intent, absent the actual restraint
on the person or liberty of the offended party
– It can be any other crime BUT NOT
ARBITRARY DETENTION. Therefore,
Supreme Court said that intent to detain must
be manifest, it must be evident. Absent that,
it can be any other crime but not arbitrary
detention.
3.
That the detention is without legal ground.
Detention is without legal grounds under Article
124:
1. When the said offended party was
arrested without a warrant of arrest.
2. When the said offended party was
arrested and his arrest and detention
does not fall under any of the
circumstances of a valid warrantless
arrest.
3. When he is not suffering from violent
insanity or any other ailment which
requires compulsory confinement.
Valid grounds for detention:
1. If the person was received and detained
by virtue of a warrant of arrest.
2. If a person was arrested and detained
under any of the circumstances for a
valid warrantless arrest
3. If a person was suffering violent insanity
or any illness which requires compulsory
confinement.
Q: So if a person, driving his vehicle entered a one way
street and in violation of the LTO rules and regulation, was
stopped by police officer, his license was taken and gave
him a ticket and was bought to the nearest PNP station and
was placed behind bars. He was detained. That was 8
o’clock in the morning then the arresting officer left. And
on the afternoon, the police officer returned to the police
station. Upon his arrival, he immediately released the
incarcerated person whom he detained for entering a one
way street. Is the said police officer liable for arbitrary
detention under Article 124?
A: YES, he is liable of ARBITRARY
DETENTION. He is a public officer vested with
authority to effect arrest and detain a person. If he
10 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
detained the person, the detention was without legal
ground. It is without legal ground because entering a
one way street and violating the traffic rules and
regulation is not a ground for incarceration. It is not a
ground for a person to be placed behind bars. If a
person committed a violation of traffic rules and
regulation like entering a one way street or beating the
red light, he should only be given a ticket. There should
not even be a confiscation of license. After that, he
should be allowed to leave but that is not a ground for
him to be placed under detention. Since the officer
detained the person without any legal ground HE IS
LIABLE FOR ARBITRARY DETENTION.
Q: What if X is suspected to be a snatcher and many
complaints was filed against him. One time, when the
police officers were conducting a patrol they saw X who was
perhaps waiting for a ride. When the police officers saw X
they immediately arrested X and brought him to the
nearest police station. They told X that he is to be
investigated for he is said to be a cellphone snatcher. So he
was brought to the investigation room however, the
investigation officer was not around so the arresting officer
told him that he needs to be investigated and that he can
leave but he must make sure to come back for purposes of
investigation otherwise if he does not come back the next
time they see him they will kill him. So because of that, X
would get out of the precinct but would immediately return.
Are the police officers liable for arbitrary detention?
A: NO, the police officers are not liable for
arbitrary detention. There is no intent to restrain
or detain the person or liberty of X, the offended party.
In order to amount to arbitrary detention it is
necessary that the intent of the public officer to
restrain the person or liberty of the offended party
must be manifest and it must be evident. In this case
however, it is not.
 Even if there is a threat on the part of the police
officer there is however no intent to detain X.
What are the crimes if any are the police officer
liable for?
 They committed GRAVE THREATS
because they threatened to kill X if he would
not come back. It is the grave threats that
made X come back in the police station.
ARTICLE 125 – ARBITRARY DETENTION BY
FAILING TO DELIVER THE DETAINED PERSON
TO THE PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES
WITHIN 12, 18 OR 36 HOURS
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender here is a public officer or employees
vested with authority to effect arrest and detain a
person.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
2. That offender has detained a person for some legal
ground
 The second element requires that the offender
arrests and detains a person for some legal
ground.
Legal grounds referred to under Article 125?
The legal ground being referred to in Article 125 is
not the fact that the said arrest was made by virtue
of a warrant of arrest because if the offended party
was arrested by the public officer by virtue of a
valid warrant of arrest he does not have the
obligation to deliver him to the proper judicial
authorities.
Valid instances in arresting a person – these refer
to circumstances of valid warrantless arrests
under Section 5 Rule 112 of the Rules of Court. It
requires that a peace officer or a private individual
may even without a warrant arrest a person under
the following circumstances:
a.) That in his presence the person to be
arrested has committed, is actually
committing, or is attempting to commit a
crime. This is otherwise known as
INFLAGRANTE DELICTO ARREST
b.) When a crime has in fact just been
committed, and the police officer has
probable cause to believe based on personal
knowledge of facts and circumstances that
the person to be arrested is the one who
committed the crime. This is otherwise
known as HOT PURSUIT ARREST.
c.) When the person to be arrested is a
prisoner who has escaped from a penal
establishment or a place where he is serving
final sentence or temporarily detained
while his case is pending, or has escaped
while being transferred from one penal
institution to another.
3. That the offender failed to deliver the person
arrested to the proper judicial authorities within 12,
18 or 36 hours.
The third element requires that that the
offender fails to deliver the person arrested to
the proper judicial authorities within 12, 18 or
36 hours.
Delivery does not mean that you really have to
deliver the physical body of the person arrested to
the court. It means constructive delivery or legal
delivery, meaning, the filing of the appropriate case
before the proper court. That is delivery to proper
judicial authorities - filing of the case before the
proper court.
11 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
The proper judicial authorities refers to courts of
justices or judges of the courts that has the power to
order the incarceration or detention of a person or
his temporary restrain upon posting of appropriate
complaint. The FISCAL does not belong to the
proper judicial authority because he belongs to the
executive branch. The Fiscal is under the
Department of Justice and not under the Supreme
Court. The head of the Fiscal is Secretary De Lima
and the President and not Chief Justice Sereno.
That’s why a Fiscal is not within the meaning of a
judicial authority. Second, fiscal may recommend
the bail but he does not have the power to fix the bail
and allow the accused to go on temporary liberty.
Only the judges are allowed to fix the bail and order
the temporary liberty of the accused until upon the
posting of the said bail (not mentioned in 2017
discussion).
The law says that a public officer must deliver the person
arrested to proper judicial authority within:
a) 12 hours, for crimes punishable by light penalties,
or their equivalent
b) 18 hours, for crimes punishable by correctional
penalties, or their equivalent
c) 36 hours, for crimes punishable by afflictive or
capital penalties, or their equivalent
Q: What if a person has been arrested In flagrante delicto
in possession of an unlicensed firearm. Possession of
unlicensed firearm is punished by a special penal law (P.D.
1866 as amended). Is the arresting officer required to
deliver the accused to the proper judicial authorities? Does
Article 125 apply even to violation of special penal laws?
A: Yes, because the law says “or their
equivalent”. 12 hours, for crimes punishable by light
penalties, or their equivalent. That means all their
equivalent refers to their equivalent even in cases of
violation of special penal laws. Therefore, even if the
crime committed or the crime for which the offender is
being arrested is based on violation of special penal
laws, the arresting police officer has the obligation to
deliver the person arrested to the proper judicial
authorities in consonance with Article 125 of the
Revised Penal Code.
Q: What if the police officers caught X in the actual act of
killing Y. So they saw X and Y fighting and they saw X
stabbed Y to death. Therefore, X is liable of homicide. They
arrested X and that was Saturday, 3 o’clock in the
afternoon. Sunday, there is no office. The following day,
Monday, happens to be declared a special non-working
holiday. Therefore, the police officers were able to deliver X
to the proper judicial officer only on Tuesday, 8 o’clock in
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
the morning. They were able to file the case in the Fiscal’s
office for purposes of proceedings Tuesday, 8 o’clock in the
morning, beyond 36 hours which was required by law. Are
the police officers liable for arbitrary detention?
A: NO, the police officers are not liable for
arbitrary detention. The Secretary of the
Department of Justice has made a legal opinion that
the said 12, 18 and 36 hours refers to WORKING
HOURS. These refer to the time when the courts are
open in order to receive the cases to be filed against
them. This does not include the crime wherein the
courts are closed and they did not receive the
complaint or information to be filed against the
accused.
ARTICLE 126 – ARBITRARY DETENTION BY
DELAYING THE RELEASE OF PRISONERS
DESPITE THE JUDICIAL OR EXECUTIVE ORDER
TO DO SO
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer or employee
2. That there is a judicial or executive order for the
release of the prisoner or detention prisoner, or that
there is a proceeding upon a petition for the
liberation of such person.
3. That the offender without good/valid reason delays:
(1) The service of the notice of such order to
the prisoner; or
(2) The performance of such judicial or
executive order for the release of the
prisoner; or
(3) The proceeding upon a petition for the
release of such person.
NOTE: What is punishable is the delay without valid
reason, the delay of the release of the prisoner despite the
judicial or executive order to do so.
 Example of judicial order for the release of a
prisoner let’s say that a person has been charged
in court and the public prosecutor failed to present
any evidence four consecutive times and no
witnesses has ever been presented since the
beginning. The judge will dismiss the case and
order the release of the accused from jail. This is
an example of a judicial order for the release of a
prisoner. Or let’s say the judge acquitted the
accused then he will order the release of the said
accused from jail.
 How about an example of an executive order for a
release of a prisoner? A person was arrested and
placed behind bars and proceeding was filed
before the fiscal’s office. The fiscal ordered the
release of the prisoner. This is an example of
executive order for the release the prisoner.
12 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Q: What if X has been charged of two crimes - Illegal sale of
dangerous drugs and illegal possession of dangerous drugs?
So, two crimes were filed against him. The illegal
possession of dangerous drugs was filed before the RTC
Branch 6 on the other hand; the illegal sale was filed before
RTC Branch 87. Two different courts were filed with. In the
illegal possession of dangerous drugs which was filed in
RTC Branch 6, no witnesses were ever presented and so the
judge immediately declared the dismissal of the case and he
ordered that X should already be released from jail.
However, the case for illegal sale of dangerous drugs under
RTC Branch 87 is still ongoing. The jail warden receives the
order coming from the judge RTC Branch 6 that X should
be released. The jail warden did not comply. Is the jail
warden liable for arbitrary detention under Article 126 -
Arbitrary Detention by delaying the release of prisoners
despite the judicial or executive order to do so?
A: NO, the jail warden is not liable for arbitrary
detention under Article 126 because there is still
another pending case against the said prisoner before
another court. Therefore, it is incumbent upon him not
to compel with the judge of Branch 6 since there is
another case in Branch 87 which is still ongoing. What
the law punishes is delay without valid reason for the
release of the prisoner.
Q: The police officers were patrolling the area one Friday
evening and saw X in the act of snatching the cellphone of
the victim. They chased X and was able to arrest X. They
returned the cellphone. Thereafter, X was placed behind
bars. The following day, the office of the public prosecutor
was closed. The police officers were not able to file the
complaint. Sunday, it was closed so was on Monday, a
national holiday. They only filed the case on Tuesday, 8
o’clock. After the inquest proceedings, the fiscal filed the
case but it was way beyond the maximum hours provided
for under Article 125. Are the police officers liable under
Article 125?
A: No. This is because the “12, 18, and 36 hours”
refers to working hours – when the office of the public
prosecutor and the courts are open to receive the
complaint or information to be filed against the
accused. Whenever the office or the courts are closed,
the period does not run.
Q: The woman was arrested by the police. She was begging
alms with her young son. She was later placed behind bars.
She asked the crime she committed. The police officers did
not answer. There was no investigation, no mug shots were
taken, no finger prints. After three hours, she was
thereafter released. By the assistance of a PAO counsel, she
filed a case for arbitrary detention under Article 124 against
the arresting police officer. Is he liable?
A: Yes. He is a public officer vested with authority to
effect arrest against another. He detained a person
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
because there was obvious intent to detain her. If the
intent was to file a case, they could have investigated
her. Here, there was no such thing. She was just placed
behind bars. There was also no valid ground for the
detention because the police officer did not inform her
of the crime she committed, for this the detention is
without valid ground. He is liable.
Q: Adding facts to the problem, the woman was placed
behind bars. The police said that it was unlawful to beg and
therefore she was detained. There was no investigation.
After an hour, she was released of the prison cell, brought
to the office of the arresting police officer and there had
carnal knowledge with her. The woman filed a case for rape
through arbitrary detention because arbitrary detention
was necessary to commit rape. Is the charge correct?
A: No. There was no arbitrary detention. The second
element is absent – there was no manifest intent to
detain. The obvious intent was to rape the said woman.
Therefore the arbitrary detention was merely
incidental and as such absorbed in the commission of
the crime of rape. Hence, the appropriate charge is
rape.
Q: X was charged with two crimes – illegal sale of
dangerous drugs which is a non-bailable offense raffled to
RTC Branch 83 and illegal possession of dangerous drugs, a
bailable offense and raffled to RTC Branch 84. Both ensued
into trial. In illegal possession, fiscal failed to present
witnesses so the judge provisionally dismissed the case and
ordered the release of X. The jail warden was in possession
of the order but did not release X. Is he liable under Article
126?
A: No. What the law punishes is the act of failing to
release a prisoner despite the judicial order to do so
without any valid or justifiable ground. The jail warden
had a valid reason for not releasing X. Although RTC
84 dismissed the case and ordered the release of X, X
was facing another case which is the non-bailable
offense of illegal sale of dangerous drugs. Therefore
there was a valid reason to keep him and therefore the
jail warden is not liable.
ARTICLE 127 – EXPULSION
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is public officers or employees
2. The public officer or employee acts either:
a.) By expelling a person from the Philippines
b.) By compelling a person to change his
residence
3. Offender is not authorized to do so by law
 What the law prohibits is that if this public officer
or employee expels him from the Philippines or
compels him to change his residence without
lawful authority to do so because there are persons
who have been authorized by law to deport a
13 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
person from the Philippines or to compel a person
to change his residence.
 For example, the President has the power to
deport or expel a person from the Philippines.
Another example is a foreigner who is known to be
a persona non grata; the President may order his
deportation to his home.
 The courts on the other hand, have the power to
compel a person to change his place of residence.
Let’s say the offender is a concubine and the
penalty to be imposed to a concubine is destierro.
Therefore, the concubine is prohibited from
entering a particular place based on the judgment
of the court. Now, the prohibited place from which
she is prohibited from entering is the place where
she lives. She cannot enter the said place
therefore; the court is empowered to compel her to
change her place of residence because she cannot
enter the place wherein her house is situated.
Q: X, a concubine, was sentenced to suffer the penalty for
destierro for being convicted of concubinage by a judge. She
was prohibited from entering an area which is within her
residence and therefore she was compelled to change her
residence. Is the judge liable for expulsion?
A: No. Although the first and second elements are
present, the third is absent. The judge had the
authority to compel a person to change his or her
address.
VIOLATION OF DOMICILE (ARTICLE 128, 129,
130)
 a public officer or employee entered into a dwelling
of another which is not armed with a search warrant
 different prohibited acts constituting violation of
domicile:
I. By entering any dwelling against the will of
the owner thereof; or
II. By searching papers or other effects found
therein without the previous consent of such
owner; or
III. By refusing to leave the premises, after having
surreptitiously entered.
ARTICLE 128 – VIOLATION OF DOMICILE
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer or employee
 The offender in the violation of domicile is a
public officer or employee acting under color
of authority.
 A public officer or employee is said to be
acting under color of authority if he has been
vested with the authority to implement a
search warrant, but when he entered in the
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
said dwelling, he is not armed with a judicial
order or search warrant. Therefore, he was
acting under color of authority.
 Even if he is a public officer or employee, but
he did not act under color of authority, is
liable only, not for violation of domicile, but is
either liable for qualified trespass to dwelling
or trespass to property because the public
officer or employee is acting under his private
capacity.
2. He was not authorized by a judicial order to enter
the dwelling and/or make a search therein for
papers or other effects
 The second element requires that
entering upon the dwelling of another
which is not authorized by a judicial
order. The judicial order refers to a
search warrant
3. He either:
a. Enters the dwelling of another against the will
of the latter; or
b. Searching for papers or other effects found
therein without the consent of the owner; or
c. After having surreptitiously entered the
dwelling, being discovered and asked to leave,
he refuses to leave.
Different modes of violation of domicile:
(These three modes are separate and distinct from each
other – do not look for all the three modes in a problem,
violation of one of them will bring about violation of
domicile.)
1. By entering any dwelling against the will of the
owner thereof; or
 There must a prohibition, an opposition from
entering. It can either be an implied or expressed
opposition from entering.
Examples:
Implied opposition – the door is closed. It can
be said that the owner is saying that “No one
can enter my house”
Expressed prohibition – when the owner is
inside the house and the officer knocks upon
the door and upon seeing the officer, the owner
closes the door. If there are sayings – “Do not
enter”, “No entry”
 It does not mean entering without the consent. An
entry without the consent is not an entry against
the will.
 When you say entry against the will, there must be
an opposition or a prohibition from entering the
dwelling.
14 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
2. By searching papers or other effects found
therein without the previous consent of the
owner; or
 The consent of the owner matters. Even if the
public officer or employee is allowed inside, the
fact that he is allowed inside does not mean that
he is allowed to conduct the search.
 He must ask first for the previous consent of the
owner before proceeding with the search. Without
the previous consent of the owner to conduct the
search, any search would be a violation of
domicile.
3. By refusing to leave the premises, after having
surreptitiously entered the dwelling
 It is his refusal to leave the premises that will
bring about the violation of domicile, NOT the
surreptitiously entering. But it is required that
entering must be done surreptitiously.
Surreptitious entering – means entering the
dwelling secretly or candidly. Therefore, it is
important that he must refuse to leave after being
discovered and asked to leave in order to amount
to violation of domicile.
 Mere surreptitious entering will not bring about
violation of domicile.
Q: Two police officers and a barangay chairman, at about
12 midnight forcibly opened the locked door of the house of
W and barged inside the house. They began searching. W,
who was fast asleep, awakened and saw these three men.
He asked what their business was but they ignored him and
continued with the search. W asked if they have a search
warrant. They could not produce any. They later found an
airgun which they took. What crime was committed?
A: They are liable for violation of Domicile
under Article 128 with the qualifying
circumstances of nighttime and any evidence
as constituting the evidence of the crime was
not returned immediately to the owner thereof.
They are liable first, they are all public officers, second,
they are not armed with a judicial order, third, the
entry was done against the will of the owner thereof
because the door was closed. They also conducted the
search without the consent of W, the owner. The entry
was done surreptitiously and they refused to leave
when they were ordered to do so. Therefore they are
liable for violation of domicile. Also, the act was done
at nighttime and the airgun was not part of the
evidence and yet, they took the same without returning
to W. These circumstances will qualify the imposable
penalty.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Q: The door of the house was open. A police officer without
being armed with a search warrant, entered the door of the
house and went up to the sala. The owner of the house saw
him and asked him to leave, and he left. Is he liable for
violation of domicile?
A: He is not liable for violation of domicile.
When the door of the house is open, there is no
prohibition, there is no opposition from entering
anybody may enter even without a search warrant.
Since there is no prohibition or opposition from
entering, violation of domicile cannot be committed
under the first act. Under the second act, it cannot be
committed because he did not conduct the search. The
third act also is not committed because the entering of
the house is not done surreptitiously.
Q: What if in the same problem, the door of the house was
open, a public officer with the intent to conduct a search
warrant entered the house, when he was in the sala, the
owner of the house saw him and told him to leave. He did
not leave; he just stayed there and sat on the sofa. Is he
liable for violation of domicile?
A: He is not liable for violation of domicile.
Under the first act, is entry against the will? – NO, the
door was open. Therefore, there was no opposition or
prohibition from entering. Under the second act, he
did not conduct a search. Under the third act, is the
entering done surreptitiously? – NO, because the door
of the house was open; therefore, he did not violate any
of the following acts amounting to violation of
domicile.
 But he did not leave the house, although the owner
of the house asked him to leave. Is he liable? Yes.
He is liable for unjust vexation (nangiinis lang
siya). Although he did not leave the house, he
cannot be liable for violation of domicile because
his act does not constitute the acts prohibited by
Article 128.
Q: The door of the house was closed, but it was not locked.
A police officer without a search warrant opened the door,
realizing it was not locked, entered the house and went up
to the sala intending to conduct the search. Before he could
conduct the search, the owner of the house saw him, and
told him to leave and he left. Is he liable for violation of
domicile?
A: Yes. He is laible for violation of domicile.
Even if he left the said place upon being told to do it,
he is already liable because his entry was against the
will of the owner. The door was closed although it was
not locked. Therefore, there was an implied opposition,
an implied prohibition from entering. When he entered
without a search warrant intending to conduct a search
is already a violation of domicile.
15 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Q: What if the police officer knocked on the door of the
house of X. X opened the door, upon seeing the public
officers, X allowed them to enter. The police officer told X
that they were looking for a stolen car stereo in the
neighborhood; we are going to conduct a search in your
house. X said, "No, you cannot conduct a search inside my
house.” The police officers agreed and left the house. Are
they liable for violation of domicile?
A: They are not liable. It is not entry against the
will. They did not conduct a search. The entry was not
done surreptitiously. It does not fall in any of the acts,
therefore, they are not liable for violation of domicile.
Q: In the same problem, when they told the owner that
they were conducting a search for the stolen car stereo, the
owner of the house said, “No, you cannot conduct a search.
There is nothing stolen inside my house.” but the police
officers proceeded with the search.
A: This time, they are liable for violation of
domicile because they made a search without the
previous consent of the owner – under the second act
of Art. 128
Q: What if in the same problem, the owner of the house
told the police officers, “No you cannot conduct a search,
there is nothing stolen inside my house.” The police officers
obliged, they were going to leave the house, obeying the
order of the owner. However, on their way out, before they
could go out, they saw near the door, a table and on top of
it, there were drug paraphernalia, contraband. And so, they
seized and confiscated the contraband and then thereafter
they leave the house. Are they liable for violation of
domicile? Are the evidences confiscated admissible against
the owner?
A: They are not liable of violation of domicile.
When they were told not to conduct the search, they
did not conduct the search and they were about to
leave, therefore, not liable for violation of domicile. But
they confiscated the drug paraphernalia that they saw.
Yes, the confiscated drug paraphernalia were
admissible against the owner because they were
contraband. They are illegal per se. And the police
officers saw them without conducting the search, they
saw them inadvertently. Even without conducting the
search, the police officers would see contraband,
narcotics, in their presence, in their plain view, they
are mandated by law to seize and confiscate the same
under the plain view doctrine. So in this case, these
drug paraphernalia where under the plain view and
therefore under the obligation to seize and confiscate
them and these are admissible as evidence against the
owner of the house.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Q: What if a police officer was conducting a surveillance of
X, a well-known drug pusher, so he was always within the
vicinity of the house of X. One time, it was the birthday of
X, the gate of the house was open, and the door of the
house was opened. The police officer disguised himself as
one of the guests and he entered the house together with
the flow of the guests. His intention was to conduct a
search. He was already about to conduct the search when
the owner of the house recognized him. The owner of the
house came up to him. “I know you, you are a police officer.
Get out of my house right now” and he left. Is he liable for
violation of domicile?
A: No, he is not liable for violation of domicile.
The entry was done surreptitiously, secretly, candidly,
he was in disguise. It was not against the will of the
owner because the gates and the door were open. He
did not conduct the search because the owner saw him
before he could do so. The entry was done
surreptitiously. He was discovered and ordered to
leave, and he left. Therefore, he is not liable for
violation of domicile
 However, upon being discovered and ordered to
leave and stayed in the house.
 Here, he is liable for violation of domicile.
Under Articles 129 and 130, there is still violation of
domicile despite the fact that the public officer or employee
is armed with a search warrant.
ARTICLE 129 – SEARCH WARRANTS
MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED AND ABUSE IN THE
SERVICE OF THOSE LEGALLY OBTAINED
COMMITTED THROUGH:
I. By procuring a search warrant without just
cause
 When a public officer or employee conducts
a search and the search warrant was an
illegally procured search warrant. It was
procured without just cause.
SEARCH WARRANT – is an order in writing, issued in
the name of the People of the Philippines, signed by a judge
and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search
for personal property described therein and to bring to
court the particular things to be seized.
Before a search warrant may be issued, the
following are the requisites to a valid search
warrant:
1.) It is required that it is for one specific offense.
2.) There must be probable cause
3.) The said probable cause was determined by the issuing
judge personally through searching questions and
answers in writing, under oath or affirmation as the
testimony given by applicant of the said search warrant
16 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
or any witnesses he may produce.
4.) The applicant of the search warrant and his witnesses
must testify only as to facts personally known to them
5.) The said search warrant must specifically state the
place to be searched and the thing to be seized.
 If any of these requisites is wanting, then the said
search warrant is illegally procured. It is procured
without just cause. A search conducted by virtue of a
search warrant illegally procured without just cause
is akin to a search without a search warrant.
Q: What if the police officer was armed with a search
warrant, he procured the search warrant illegally without
just cause. The police had an enemy, B, he then proceeded
to a judge to issue a search warrant testifying under oath,
the he is positive under his surveillance that B was in
possession of an unlicensed firearm inside his house. The
judge believed the police and issued a search warrant
against B. The police officer is now armed with a search
warrant, and went to the house of B and showed it to B. B,
upon reading the search warrant, knew it was maliciously
procured, it was procured without just cause. Should B
allow the police officer to conduct the search?
A: Yes. Even if the said search warrant was procured
without just cause, the police officer must be allowed to
enter and conduct the search, because of the so-called,
REGULARITY OF PERFORMANCE OF DUTY on the
part of the judge in issuing the said search warrant. He
is armed with a search warrant issued by the judge and
therefore, he must allow him to enter his house and to
conduct his search.
 What now would be the remedy of the owner of
the house?
The owner of the house has the following remedies:
1.) He can file a motion to quash the said
warrant
2.) He can file a motion to suppress the
evidence that have been confiscated
inside the house
3.) In addition to these motions, he can file a
case of violation of domicile against the
said public officer who conducted the
search. Violation of domicile under Art.
129 because he procured the said search
warrant without just cause.
 So in other words, the said police officers
must be allowed to enter and allowed to
conduct the search and the owner of the
house shall have the abovementioned
remedies thereafter.
II. By exceeding his authority or by using
unnecessary severity in executing a search
warrant legally procured
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 A search warrant is valid only for a period of 10
days from the date of its issuance appearing on
the search warrant.
The public officer is said to have exceeded his
authority in the search warrant when despite the
discrepancy or the variance between the facts alleged
in the search warrant and the actual facts on the place
to be searched, the peace officer still proceeded with
the search. The Supreme Court said that a search
warrant is always specifically worded because the
officers serving the search warrant are not allowed to
exercise discretion. They must follow what is stated
in the search warrant – the things to be seized, the
place to be searched, the time of the search. There
must be no deviation.
The public officer is said to have employed
excessive severity in the implementation of
the search warrant when in the conduct of search,
they deliberately caused damage on the property,
they deliberately caused harm or injury to any person
in the conduct of the said search.
In real life, the police officers have this document,
Affidavit of Orderly Search which they will later ask
the owner of the place searched to sign in order to
testify that the search was done in an orderly manner.
 A search warrant is only valid for ten days. If a
search warrant was dated Dec. 1. A police officer
received it on Dec 3. The search was conducted
Dec. 13. The said search warrant is already invalid.
When they conducted the said search on Dec. 13,
they already exceeded the authority in the said
search warrant. Therefore, they are liable of
violation of domicile under Article 129.
Q: What if the said search warrant says that they could
conduct the search, anytime of the day. They conducted the
search at night time.
A: They are liable of violation of domicile under
Article 129 because they exceeded the authority in the
said search warrant.
 A search warrant may only be conducted at day
time. It may only be implemented at day time.
EXCEPTION: When there is a specific order in
the search warrant stating that it can be conducted
at any time of the day or night. Absence of such
order in the said search warrant, a search warrant
can only be implemented at day time.
 According to the Rules of Court, peace officers are
allowed to break open the door or window of a
house if at the time of the service of the search
warrant, they are not allowed entry. But if the said
officers, upon service of the search warrant were
17 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
allowed to enter and despite such fact, they still
caused damage upon the property and hurt
members of the family, they are liable under
Article 129 for employing excessive severity.
Q: What if a search warrant was issued against X, the place
to be search is located at 123 Valentino St. They police went
there. The house was owned not by X, but by Y. So they
look for the house of X, the house of X was 321 Valentino
St. They presented a search warrant to X. X said, “you
cannot conduct a search inside my house. The address in
the search warrant is 123 Valentino St. and my address is
321 Valentine St. Nevertheless, the officers conducted the
search and they found the illegal items inside the house.
Are the police officers liable of violation of domicile? Are
the confiscated items admissible evidence against the
owner?
A: The officers are liable for the violation of domicile.
When they conducted the said search, on a house that
has a different address from that said search warrant,
they exceeded their authority in the said search
warrant. The search warrant is so worded, expressly, as
to the thing or place to be searched. The police officer
cannot exercise discretion. They have to follow what is
stated in the search warrant. The moment they did not
follow what is stated in the search warrant, then they
exceeded the authority. In that case, when there is
variance between what is stated in the search warrant
and the actual facts of the case to be searched, the have
to go back to the judge that issued the said search
warrant and they have to ask or move for the
amendment of the said search warrant.
Q: What if the third punishable act under Art. 129
amounting to the violation of domicile, when the public
officer or employee exercised excessive severity in the
implementation of the said search warrant? What if a
search warrant is issued against X, the police officers went
to the house of X, upon reaching the house of X, they
showed the warrant to X and he allowed them to enter. The
search warrant said that they could search for dangerous
drugs, particularly, shabu. In searching for shabu, they
turned upside down and deliberately destroyed each and
every furniture and appliance inside the house of X. When
the wife of X saw this, she told the police officers to stop,
but she was slapped twice. She then suffered less serious
physical injuries. In deliberately destroying the furniture
and appliances of X, the public officers committed
malicious mischief. In slapping the wife, they committed
less serious physical injuries. What crime/crimes would
you file against the police officers?
A: You have to file 3 cases:
1. Violation of domicile – because they exercised
excessive severity in the implementation of the
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
said search warrant. They need not destroy the
property. They need not slap the wife. All of these
are excess of the search warrant. Therefore they
should be filed in violation of Art. 129, violation of
domicile, for exercising excessive severity.
2. Malicious mischief – for destroying the furniture
and appliances
3. Less serious physical injuries – for slapping the
wife
 Are you going to file all 3 cases or is it absorbed and
must be file within the court?
 Violation of domicile cannot absorb malicious
mischief or less serious physical injuries.
 Although in reality, these two are merely the
manifestations of the excess in the
implementation of the said search warrant,
they cannot be absorbed, they cannot be
complex. Under Art. 129, he expressly prohibits
such absorption and such complexity of crimes.
 Under Article 129, the liability for violation of
domicile shall be in addition to the liability
attaching to the offender for commission of any
other crime. Therefore, if aside from violation
of domicile, Another crime is committed by the
police officers, they had to be charged with all
these cases. Art. 129 prohibits the complexing
of a crime. It also prohibits the absorption of
this crime, therefore all 3 cases must be filed
against the said police officers.
ARTICLE 130 – SEARCHING DOMICILE
WITHOUT WITNESSES
Committed by conducting a search in the absence
of the owner of the house, or any member of his
family, or two witnesses residing in the same
locality
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He is armed with a search warrant illegally procured
3. He searches the domicile, papers, or other
belongings of any person
4. The owner or any member of his family or two
witnesses residing in the same locality are not
present
Q: A search warrant was issued against X and the police
officers went to the house of X. They showed the search
warrant to X and they were allowed inside to conduct the
search. In conducting the search, the search was witnessed
by 2 barangay tanods who came with them, who arrived
with them in the house of X. in the conduct of the search,
18 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
they told the owner of the house, X, that his wife and his
two children to remain in the sala while they conduct the
search inside the bedroom of X. In conducting the search in
the bedroom of X, the search was witnessed by 2 barangay
tanods and they found 2 plastic sachets of shabu
underneath the pillow inside the bedroom of X. Are the
police officers liable of violation of domicile under Article
130? Are the evidence seized admissible against the owner?
A: The police officers are liable of violation of domicile
under Article 130.
 Article 130 provides for a hierarchy of witnesses
who must be present in the conduct of the search.
The law says it must witnessed by the owner of the
house, it is only in the absence of the owner of the
house that it must be witnessed by any member of
his family. It is only in the absence of the owner of
the house or any member of his family that there
must be 2 witnesses residing from the same
locality.
In the problem, the owner of the house was there, the
members of his family were there but, they were not
allowed to witness the said search. Therefore, the said
search was conducted in violation of Article 130 and
any evidence confiscated will be inadmissible against
the owner of the house for being fruits of poisonous
tree under the exclusionary rule in Political Law
Galvante v. Casimiro
The Supreme Court says that there is no such crime as
illegal search. So, what is prohibited only the searching
of the dwelling under Article 129. But, in case of search
under vehicle or any other places, there is no such
thing as illegal search. The remedy is to file an action
for damages, a civil action for damages.
ARTICLE 131 – PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION
AND DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer or employee
2. The offender committed any of the following acts:
I. By prohibiting or by interrupting, dissolving,
without legal ground, the holding of a
peaceful meeting, or by dissolving the same.
(any peaceful meeting)
II. By hindering any person from joining any
lawful association or from attending any of its
meetings.
III. By prohibiting or hindering any person from
addressing, either alone or together with
others, any petition to the authorities for the
correction of abuses or redress of grievances.
 For the crime to arise, it is necessary that the meeting
that was prevented, interrupted or dissolved must be a
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
peaceful meeting and it must be for any lawful
purpose. If the meeting is not a peaceful meeting or if
the meeting is not for lawful purpose, a public officer
or employee has all the rights to prevent, interrupt or
dissolve the said meeting.
 This is in the exercise of the freedom of speech,
freedom of expression and freedom of assembly.
However, these 3 freedoms are not absolute. The
Supreme Court has enjoined the power of the State to
regulate these meetings through permits.
 Before any of these peaceful meetings for a lawful
purpose may be held in a public place, there must be a
permit coming from the local authority of the place.
The permit is only to regulate the said meeting and not
to prohibit it. Regulate as to the time, place and to the
date, so that the public would not be in inconvenience.
ARTICLE 132 – INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS
WORSHIP
ELEMENTS:
1. This is committed by an offender who is again a
public officer or employee.
2. Then there is a religious ceremony or manifestations
of any religion that is about to take place or are going
on.
3. That the offender prevents or disturbs the said
religious worship or religious ceremony.
QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE:
 If the offender makes us of violence or threats in
committing the crime, such use of violence or threats
would not constitute a separate and distinct charge.
Rather it is considered as an aggravating or
qualifying circumstance which would mean an
imposition of a higher penalty.
Q: So what if there is a barrio fiesta and the priest is about
to celebrate the mass. Here comes X and he went to the
priest and point the gun to the priest. Then the priest was
about to celebrate the mass. At first the priest did not mind
him. But X intentionally pointed the gun to the head of the
priest and said, “I will kill you if you will celebrate the
mass!” So the priest did not celebrate the mass and all the
faithful went out of the church. What crime if any is
committed by X?
A: X is liable for interruption of religious
worship under Article 132. What about the fact
that he pointed a gun at the head of the priest? Would
it constitute a separate and distinct crime of grave
threats? It will not. The fact that threats were
employed in the commission of the crime would only
mean the penalty will be imposed in its maximum
period. It would be considered an aggravating
circumstance in committing the crime of interruption
19 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
of religious worship. BUT, IT WILL NOT BRING
ABOUT A SEPARATE AND DISTINCT CHARGE FOR
GRAVE THREATS OR EVEN UNDER LIGHT
THREATS.
ARTICLE 133 – OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS
FEELINGS
ELEMENTS:
1. Committed by a public officer or employee or a
private individual.
 The first element provides for the offender.
The offender may be a public officer or
employee or a private individual. This is the
only crime under Title Two where the
offender can be a private individual. From
Article 124 to Article 132 under Title Two, the
offender can ONLY be a public officer or
employee. The only exception is Article 133,
offending the religious feelings wherein the
offender can either be a public officer or
employee or a private individual. The reason
is, whoever may be the offender, a public
officer or employee or a private individual,
there will be the same offense made on the
feelings of the faithful.
2. That the acts must be notoriously offensive to the
feelings of the faithful.
 The second element requires that the offender
performs acts notoriously offensive to the
feelings of the faithful. Acts notoriously
offensive to the feelings of the faithful are
those acts directed against their religious
dogma, ritual, faith of the religion, or mocks,
ridicule, or scoffs of the said dogma, ritual,
faith or he attempts to damage the object of
veneration of a certain religion. The law says
“notoriously offensive”, according to Reyes, it
means that it is offensive to all kinds of
religion. If the same thing would be done to
any religion they will also be offended.
3. The said offender performs acts (1) in a place
devoted to religious worship, or (2) during the
celebration of any religious ceremony.
 The third element requires that the said acts
notoriously offensive to the feelings of the
faithful can be committed only (1) in a place
devoted to religious worship, or (2) during the
celebration of any religious ceremony. The
law uses the word “or” therefore, if the act is
done in a place devoted to religious worship,
it is not necessary that there be a religious
ceremony ongoing. Because it can either be
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
with or without a religious ceremony for as
long as the place is devoted for religious
worship.
Q: So what if X (A private individual) entered a catholic
church after that the tabernacle was opened and he took
out the chalice and inside the chalice was the host which
was being received by Catholics during communion. He
poured the host in the floor then he destroyed them, spit on
them and stepped on them. Is he liable under Article 133?
A: YES. The act he performed is notoriously
offensive to the feelings of the Catholics. If the
same act is done to the object of veneration of the
Buddhists or if the same act is done to the object of
veneration of the Muslims, they will also be offended.
Therefore, it is notoriously offensive to the feelings of
the faithful because even if it is applied to other
religions they would be offended too. And it was done
in a place devoted to religious worship because it is
done inside the church even if no religious ceremony is
ongoing.
Q: What if inside the PICC there was this art exhibit
ongoing and one artist, this was a controversy before right?
There was this picture of Jesus Christ and on the picture of
Jesus Christ he put a representation of a penis on his face.
Is the said artist liable under Article 133 offending the
religious feelings?
A: NO. He cannot be liable for offending
religious feelings under Article 133. Because the
PICC is not a place devoted for religious worship and
the art exhibit is not a celebration of a religious
ceremony. Therefore, since the last element is not
present even if it offends religious feelings, he cannot
be held liable under Article 133 for the absence of the
3rd element.
Q: X, in a religious ceremony, called Father Y, the modern
Padre Damaso. Is X liable for offending religious feelings?
A: First element is present since X is a private
individual and third element, it was done during a
religious ceremony. The second is absent. The act of
calling Father Y as the modern Padre Damaso is not an
attack on the practice, ritual, or dogma against the
Catholic religion. Neither was there damage on the
object of veneration of Catholic religion.
Q: There was a procession for the feast day of the patron
saint of a municipality. The images of the saints were
paraded and followed by devotees. At the end, some of
them were praying the rosary and singing the religious
hymn. When they were in front of the house of W, a non-
believer, W increased the volume of his stereo to the
20 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

loudest such that one cannot hear the prayers anymore. Is

W liable?
A: Yes. First element, he is a private individual. Third
element, it was a religious ceremony. The second element,
however, is absent. The act of W cannot be said to be an act
of ridicule, mock on the practice of the ritual or dogma of
the religion. Neither was there an attempt to cause damage
on the object of veneration. It is merely an act of annoying
those who are participating in the said procession. The
crime committed is not offending religious feelings. It was
only an unjust vexation according to the Supreme Court.

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 21 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

TITLE THREE Philippines for the purpose of seizing or diminishing

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER state power.
(Articles 134 – 160)  The essence of COUP D’ETAT is a swift attack
directed against the duly constituted authorities, with
ARTICLE 134 - REBELLION OR INSURRECTION or without civilians.
ELEMENTS:
1. That there must be (a) public uprising, and (b) REBELLION COUP D’ETAT
taking arms against the Government Essence – an armed public Essence – swift attack
2. That the purpose of the uprising or movement is Uprising against the against the duly constituted
either – Government authorities
a. to remove from the allegiance to said Crime of the Masses, it It can be committed with or
Government or its laws: involves a multitude of without the participation of
(1) the territory of the Philippines or any people. The Supreme Court the public because it says,
part thereof; or said that it is akin to a civil with or without civilian
(2) any body of land, naval or other war. Public participation is support, provided it has
armed forces; or essential. been committed by any
b. to deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, member of the military, the
wholly or partially, of any their powers or police or those holding
prerogatives. public office or
 The essence or the gravamen of REBELLION is the employment.
armed public uprising against the Philippine Purpose – Overthrow the Purpose – only to
Government coupled with the taking up of arms. Government of the diminish state power, to
 In case of Rebellion, it can be committed by any Philippines and replace it destabilize the government,
person, or with a participation of the public. with the Government of the not entirely to overthrow
Rebels the government.
THE LEADERS – Any person who Can only be committed by Can be committed not only
(a) promotes means of force and violence by means of force and
(b) maintains or violence but also by means
(c) heads a rebellion or insurrection of intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth
THE PARTICIPANTS – Any person who
(a) participates THE LEADERS - Any person who
(b) executes the commands of others in rebellion or (a) leads
insurrection (b) directs or
(c) command others to undertake a coup d’etat
ARTICLE 134-A – COUP D’ETAT
ELEMENTS: THE PARTICIPANTS – Any member of the
1. That the offender is a person or persons belonging to Government who
the military or police or holding any public office or (a) participates
employment; (b) executes the commands of others in undertaking a
2. That it is committed by means of a swift attack coup d’etat
accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth; Any person who is not in the Government service
3. That the attack is directed against duly constituted who
authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, or any (a) Participates
military camp or installation, communication (b) Supports
networks, public utilities or other facilities needed (c) Finances
for the exercise and continued possession of power; (d) abets or
4. That the purpose of the attack is to seize or diminish (e) aids in the undertaking of a coup d’etat
state power.
 Committed by any person or persons belonging to the THEORY OF ABSORPTION IN REBELLION AND
military or police or holding any public office or COUP ’DETAT
employment, with or without civilian support, carried  What if common crimes are committed in the course
out singly or simultaneously anywhere in the of Rebellion?

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 22 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 Common crimes committed in furtherance of,
incident to or in connection with Rebellion coup
d’etat are considered as ABSORBED in the crime
of Rebellion – known as the THEORY OF
ABSORPTION IN REBELLION.
 Whenever in the course of committing rebellion,
murder, homicide, arson, physical injuries, other
common crimes are committed, and these
common crimes are in furtherance to, incident to,
in connection with Rebellion is considered as
absorbed in the crime of Rebellion. Therefore,
only one charge of Rebellion should be charged
against the said offender.
 The Supreme Court said that before these
common crimes may be absorbed by Rebellion or
coup d’etat, there must be evidence showing in
what manner the commission of these common
crimes would be promoted or foster the ideals of
the rebels.
Q: There was this rebellion going on in the country. X was
among the participants and he burned several houses in a
certain barangay and in one house five members of the
family died. X was arrested and charged with Rebellion,
Multiple murder, and Arson. Are the charges correct?
A: The charges are wrong. X shall only be charged
of Rebellion because the commission of arson and
murder are absorbed since the same were committed
in furtherance of rebellion. In participating therein, he
had to commit these crimes.
Enrile v. Judge Amin
Senator Juan Ponce Enrile was charged with the Following
crimes:
1. charged with Rebellion
2. charged with Multiple Murder
3. Multiple frustrated murder
4. Violation of PD 1829 – obstruction of Justice
because he harbored or concealed then Colonel
Gregorio Honasan.
The Supreme Court said only one charge and it should be
rebellion. The violation of PD 1829, the multiple murder
and multiple frustrated murder are absorbed in Rebellion
under the theory of absorption in Rebellion. The Supreme
Court further said that although violation of PD 1829 is a
violation of a special penal law, still if it is committed in
furtherance of Rebellion, such violation of special penal law
can still be absorbed in the crime of Rebellion.
Q: What if a police officer was on his way to the office,
suddenly here comes a member of the NPA, he saw the
police officer and shot him. What crime is committed? is it
Rebellion or murder?
 Rebellion can only be absorbed common crime
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
such as murder, if the commission of the crimes
was done in furtherance of Rebellion. Therefore, it
is necessary that there must be evidence shown in
what way the said killing has promoted, fostered
the idea of the Rebels. Absent any connection with
the commission of the common crime and the
furtherance of rebellion, the appropriate charge is
only murder, homicide, arson or physical injuries
as the case may be.
A: In the case, the proper charged would be
murder. There was no evidence showing in what way
the said NPA has promoted the ideas of the Rebels in
killing of the said police officer. Absent of that
evidence, it would be a charge of murder and not
rebellion.
Rebellion is a continuing crime. Therefore, these NPA
who rebelled against the Government, to overthrow the
Government, that one time uprising is sufficient, they
are already considered as rebels because it is a
continuing offense.
Gonzales v. Abaya
Senator Trillanes and company were charged with 2 crimes,
coup d’etat in the RTC of Makati and the violation of
articles of war, particularly acts of unbecoming of an officer
and a gentleman filed before the military court. While the
case was pending in the RTC of Makati, the lawyer filed a
petition, a motion, saying that the violation of the articles of
war should be absorbed by the case filed before the RTC of
Makati. Can Coup d’etat absorb the violations of article of
war?
 The Supreme Court ruled in the NEGATIVE.
According to the Supreme Court, for the theory
of absorption to apply, it is necessary that both
cases must be heard or may be heard before the
same civilian court. In this case, the coup d’etat
must be heard in a civilian court, RTC of
Makati, whereas the violations of the articles of
war can be heard only before a military court.
Therefore, one cannot absorb the other. Second
reasoning given by the Supreme Court, for the
theory to absorption to apply, it is necessary
that both crimes are punished by the same
penal statute. Third reasoning, violation of the
articles of war is sui generis. It is a kind of its
own. Nothing compares to it. Therefore, it
cannot be absorbed by any other crime.
ARTICLE 136 – CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO
COMMIT COUP D’ETAT, REBELLION OR
INSURRECTION
 There is CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT
REBELLION when two or more persons come into
an agreement concerning the commission of
23 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
rebellion (to rise publicly and take arms against the
Government to any of the purposes of rebellion) and
decide to commit it.
 There is PROPOSAL TO COMMIT
REBELLION when a person who decides to
commit rebellion proposes its execution to another
person it is necessary that the other person would
not agree, if that person agree, then it is already
conspiracy to commit rebellion
 Conspiracy is a bilateral act which involves two or
more persons, whereas proposal is a unilateral act
only one person decides to commit the crime and he
proposes its execution to another person.
 There is a conspiracy to commit coup d’etat the same
way of committing it. Also the proposal to commit
coup d’etat.
ARTICLE 138 – INCITING TO REBELLION OR
INSURRECTION
ELEMENTS:
1. It is committed by any person who does not take up
arms or is not in open hostility with the Government
2. he incites others to uprise for any of the purposes of
rebellion (incite others to the execution of any of the
acts of rebellion)
3. by means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, banners or other representations tending
to the same end.
 There is NO SUCH CRIME AS INCITING TO COUP
D’ETAT.
ARTICLE 139 – SEDITION
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender rise (1) publicly, and (2)
tumultuously;
2. That they employ force, intimidation or other means
outside of legal methods;
3. That the offenders employ any of those means to
attain any of the following objectives:
a. To prevent the promulgation or execution of
any law or the holding of any popular election
b. To prevent the National Government, or any
provincial or municipal government, or any
public officer thereof from freely exercising its
or his functions, or prevents the execution of
any administrative order;
c. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the
person or property of any public officer or
employee;
d. To commit, for any political or social end, any
act of hate or revenge against private persons
or any social class; and
e. To despoil, for any political or social end, any
person, municipality or province or the
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
National Government of all its property or
any part thereof
 There is a public uprising again but no taking up
of arms but it is done tumultuously by means of
force, intimidation or any other means outside the
legal methods.
 Based on the objects of sedition, the purposes of
sedition can either be political in nature or social in
nature.
 The purpose of sedition is not to overthrow the
government but to go against what the
government wants to implement. To go against a
new law, an administrative order or public officer
or employee.
 It is a disturbance, a commotion against the lawful
command of the authority.
 The rallies that you see everyday, the rallies
against a new law to be implemented, they are
considered as ordinary protest or rallies, but the
moment they are carried outside of legal methods,
by means of force and violence, they will become
to be a seditious act.
Sedition is like any other rally, it only becomes
seditious because there is the public uprising, done
tumultuously, by means of force, violation or any other
means outside of the legal method.
REBELLION SEDITION
Both have a public uprising, a participation of a multitude
of people.
Public uprising must be Public uprising is not
coupled with taking up of required to be coupled with
arms taking up of arms. It
suffices that it is carried
out by unlawful or illegal
methods.
Objective – Political in Objective – can either be
nature, to overthrow the Political or social in nature.
Government and to replace it The offenders have no
with the Government of the intention to replace the
Rebels government but they
intend to go against what
the government wants to
enforce, implement, or they
go against a certain public
officer or employee
ARTICLE 141 – CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT
SEDITION
 There is a crime of conspiracy to commit sedition
but not proposal to commit sedition. A proposal
to commit sedition is not a punishable act
under the RPC.
24 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
ARTICLE 142 – INCITING TO SEDITION
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is not a participant (does not take
direct part) in the crime of sedition
2. He incites others to uprise for any of the purposes
of sedition
3. By means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, cartoon, banners, or other
representation tending to the same end.
 Inciting to Rebellion or Inciting to Sedition can
only be committed by a person who is not a
participant in the Rebellion or the Sedition,
because if he is a participant in the Rebellion or
Sedition, the appropriate charge is Rebellion or
Sedition as the case may be. Not merely inciting to
Rebellion or Sedition.
 Inciting to Sedition is committed not only by
inciting others for any of the purposes of sedition.
Different acts of inciting to sedition:
I. Inciting others to the accomplishment of any
of the acts which constitute sedition by means
of speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, etc.
II. Uttering seditious words or speeches which
tend to disturb the public peace
III. Writing, publishing or circulating scurrilous
libels against the Government, or any of the
duly constituted authorities thereof, which
tend to disturb the public peace.
USE OF UNLICENSED FIREARM (PD 1866 as
amended by RA 8294, as amended further by
RA 10591)
RA 10591: SECTION 28 – If the violation of this act is in
furtherance of , or incident to, or in connection with the
crime of rebellion or insurrection or attempted coup d’état,
such violation shall be absorbed as an element of the crime
of Rebellion or Insurrection, or Attempted Coup d’état.
Q: There was a public uprising carried out by means of
violence or intimidation. The participants therein were
against the enforcement of a new law. Among them was X.
He was arrested and when he was frisked, a loose firearm
was found in his possession. So X was charged with two
crimes – Sedition and Illegal Possession of Loose Firearms.
X contended that the use of the loose firearm should be
absorbed. Is the contention correct?
A: No. Under Section 28 or RA 10591, if the offender
used a loose firearm incident to, in furtherance of, or in
connection with Rebellion or Insurrection, or
Attempted Coup d’etat, the use of said firearm shall be
absorbed by said crimes. Sedition had already been
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
deleted as among the crimes that will absorb the use of
a loose firearm. Therefore if a person is found in
possession of a loose firearm during a seditious rally,
you can apply either the first paragraph or third
paragraph of Section 28.
First paragraph: If the use of said firearm is
inherent in sedition, it will be a special aggravating
circumstance.
Third paragraph: If the use is not inherent, it will
constitute a separate and distinct crime.
In the problem, the use of loose firearm is not inherent
in the crime of sedition and therefore, there should be
two charges – Sedition and Illegal Possession of Loose
Firearms.
Q: What if X is a participant in Rebellion? While he was
participating, he was arrested and frisked. A loose firearm
was found in his possession. He was charged with two cases
– Rebellion and Illegal Possession of Loose Firearm. Are
the charges correct?
A: The charges are wrong. The loose firearm shall
be absorbed by rebellion because the use of loose
firearm is always in furtherance of, incident to, or in
connection with rebellion because rebellion is
committed through public uprising with taking up of
arms and such use shall always be considered as an
element of rebellion. The appropriate charge shall only
be Rebellion.
ARTICLE 143 – ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE
MEETING OF THE ASSEMBLY AND SIMILAR
BODIES
ELEMENTS:
1. There is a there is a projected or actual meeting of
the Congress or constitutional committees or
provincial board or city or municipal council or
board; and
2. The offender, by means of force or fraud, prevents
such meeting
 The offender here is any person: he may be a
private individual, public officer or employee
 It is necessary that the offender prevents the
meeting of the Congress or any of its committees,
or constitutional committees or any provincial city
or municipal board.
Q: So what if there is a meeting of the Sangguniang
Panlungsod. It was being presided by the Vice Mayor as the
presiding officer of the city council. During the session of
the SangguniangPanlungsod, here comes the mayor
together with some police officers. They entered the session
of and disturbed and prevented the said meeting by force.
What crime, if any, was committed?
25 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
A: It is the violation of Article 143 – ACTS TENDING
TO PREVENT THE MEETING OF CONGRESS AND
SIMILAR BODIES.
ARTICLE 144 – DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDINGS
ELEMENTS:
1. There is a meeting of Congress or of any of its
committees or subcommittees, constitutional
commissions or committees or divisions thereof, or
of any provincial board or city or municipal council
or board
2. The offender either:
a. disturbs any of such proceedings; or
b. he behaves while in the presence of such
proceedings in such a manner as to interrupt
the proceedings or impair the respect due it.
 So here, it is necessary that the offender, who was
present in the meeting, either he disturbs the said
proceeding, or while being there, he performed an
act which impair the respect due to them or which
interrupted the said proceeding
Q: The FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL was on the
committee level. It was votation time. On the right side of
the said place or meeting, there were some observers or
people who were coming from the media. On the left side,
there were ordinary people who do not agree on the
freedom of information bill. It was time to vote for the
passage of Freedom of Information bill, the members of the
committee were voting when suddenly some members of
the media immediately pulled out a placard and shouted:
“YES TO FREEDOM TO INFORMATION BILL!” Are they
liable of any crime?
A: YES. They are liable of disturbance of
proceedings under Article 14 because while in the
presence of the said meeting, they behaved in such a
manner as to interrupt the proceedings, or impair the
respect due it.
ARTICLE 145 – VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY
IMMUNITY
Punishes violation of parliamentary immunity
TWO ACTS PUNISHED IN VIOLATION OF
PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY:
I. Penalty: Prision Mayor – committed by any person
who by means of force, intimidation, fraud or threat, or
any other means and by said means, he tried to prevent
any member of the Congress either from attending any
meeting of the Congress or its committees or
subcommittees, constitutional commissions or
committees or divisions thereof , from expressing his
opinions or casting his vote
 can be committed by anyone (private
individual, public officer or employee)
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
II. Penalty: Prision Correccional – can only be
committed by a public officer or employee who shall,
while the Congress is in regular or special session,
arrest or search any member thereof, except in case
such member has committed a crime punishable under
this Code by a penalty higher than prision mayor.
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender should be only a public officer or
employee and not any individual because any
individual cannot make a search or arrest a
member of the Congress.
2. The offender arrests or searches the member of
Congress
3. At the time of the arrest, the member of
Congress, the Congress must be in its regular or
special session.
4. The said member of Congress has committed a
crime which is not higher than Prision Mayor.
The case against Sen. Lacson was fortunately dismissed by
the Court of Appeals. But let us say, it is not dismissed by
the Court of Appeals, he was being charged of double
murder – Dacer-Corbito double-murder slay. He went into
hiding. Let us say that he made his appearance. Can he be
arrested even if the Congress is in regular or special
session? YES. Because the crime committed by him is
punishable by a crime committer higher than prision
mayor. It is punishable by reclusion perpetua. Therefore,
had it not been dismissed by Congress and he apparently
appeared and the Congress is in regular or special session,
he could be arrested.
Q: What if a Congressman is charged with the crime of libel
before the RTC. The RTC issued a warrant of arrest against
the Congressman. The police officers armed with a warrant
of arrest went inside the walls of Congress and they
arrested the said Congressman. Are the police officers liable
under this Article?
A: YES, they are liable for violation of
parliamentary immunity under the second.
Because at the time the Congress is in its regular
session and they arrested the said Congressman, Libel
under Article 355 is punishable only by Prision
Correcional in its minimum and medium period,
therefore it is below Prision Mayor, hence, the
Congressman cannot be arrested while the Congress is
in its regular or special session.
Q: What if Congressman A is charged with the crime of
attempted homicide. The fiscal found probable cause, the
case was filed in court. The court agrees with the fiscal and
a warrant of arrest was issued against Congressman A. The
warrant of arrest was issued by the judge on December 24,
the police officers had possession of the said warrant of
26 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
arrest on December 25, on Christmas Day. While
Congressman was inside his house, the police officers
arrived and arrested the said Congressman for having been
charged of the crime of Attempted Homicide. The penalty
for Attempted Homicide is Prision Correcional because
under Article 249, the penalty for Homicide is Reclusion
Temporal and the attempted is two degrees lower, one
degree is Prision Mayor, two degrees lower is Prision
Correcional, therefore, the penalty to be imposed in this
Attempted Homicide is Prision Correcional. So the police
officers armed with a warrant of arrest went inside the
house of the Congressman and arrested him on Christmas
Day, December 25, are the police officers liable for violating
parliamentary immunity under Article 145?
A: YES, they are liable for violation of
Parliamentary Immunity. Because during
Christmas break or during Holy week break or any
other kind of break, Congress is still in its regular
session. Because as stated in Political Law, in
Constitution, when does Congress start? 4th Monday of
July, that is when the President states his SONA. When
does Congress ends? 30 days before the start of
Congress. Therefore, during Christmas break or during
Holy week break or any other break, the Congress is
still in its regular session. Any arrest of a member of
Congress during this time, if the said member of
Congress has not committed a crime where a penalty is
higher than Prision Mayor, shall be punished as
violation parliamentary immunity under Article 145.
ARTICLE 146 – ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY
TWO KINDS OF ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY:
I. Any meeting attended by armed persons for the
purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable
under the RPC.
ELEMENTS:
1. That there be a meeting, a gathering or group of
persons, whether in fixed place or moving
2. The meeting is attended by armed persons; and
3. The purpose of the meeting is to commit any of
the crimes punishable under the Code
 In this case of illegal assembly, it is only necessary
that there be a meeting, the meeting must be
attended by armed persons, under the first mode.
In here, when it says “armed persons”, it is not
required that all those persons present in the
meeting must be with arms. It suffices that one,
two or more, or some of them would be with arms
during the meeting.
 When we say “arms,” it does not only mean
firearms, it refers to any things, knives, stones,
anything which can cause violence or injury to
another person.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 It is necessary however, that the purpose of the
meeting is unlawful – that is to commit any of the
crimes punishable under the RPC.
II. Any meeting in which the audience, whether armed or
not, is incited to the commission of the crime of
treason, rebellion or insurrection, sedition or assault
upon a person in authority or his agents
ELEMENTS:
1. There is a meeting, a gathering or group of
persons, whether in a fixed place or moving
2. The audience, whether armed or not, is incited
to the commission of the crime of treason,
rebellion, or insurrection, sedition or direct
assault.
 The said gathering of men or men, may or may not
be armed. It is not required that they be armed.
The crime will arise when the audience were
incited to commit treason, rebellion, or
insurrection, sedition or assault upon a person in
authority or his agents)
 Under the second mode of committing illegal
assembly, again there is a meeting, and there is no
requisite that those in attendance must be armed,
therefore, they may or may not be with arms. But
it is requires for the crime to arise that the
audience must be incited to commit treason,
rebellion, or insurrection, sedition or assault upon
a person in authority or his agents. Otherwise, the
crime will not arise.
In case of illegal assembly, the organizers or leader of the
meeting will be criminally liable, as well as the persons
merely present in the said meeting.
 Under Article 146, first paragraph, last
sentence – it is provided that persons who are
merely present at the meeting shall be punished by
Arresto Mayor, unless they are armed, the penalty
shall be Prision Correcional, therefore, whether you
are armed or not, you can be held criminally liable
for illegal assembly, it will only differ in the penalty.
o If you are armed - Prision Correcional
o Not armed - Arresto Mayor (lower)
Q: The two heads of a telecommunication company, X and
Y, met with ten former military men. X and Y proposed to
the soldiers to go out on the streets to uprise for the
purpose of preventing a new law imposing taxes on text
messages. These ten former soldiers agreed. X and Y
promised that they will provide them and others with
firearms. Suddenly the police arrived then arrested them.
What case or cases may be filed against X and Y and ten
former military men?
A: First, Conspiracy to commit sedition. There is
conspiracy because X and Y proposed to the military
27 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

men to uprise publicly to prevent a new law and these commission of bank robbery, and after they have come to
soldiers agreed. When they agreed, there is conspiracy. the agreement, here comes the police, the police got a tip
 Why not inciting to sedition? Because the from an informer, the police arrived and they were all
agreement was done in secrecy, not publicly arrested. What crime or crimes if any should they be
through proclamation, speeches, writings so it charged of?
cannot be inciting to sedition. A: They could not be charged of any crime.
The difference between proposal and inciting: There is no such thing as conspiracy to commit
In proposal, it is done in secrecy. Inciting is robbery. Because in robbery, robbery is only a mode of
done publicly through emblems, speeches, committing the crime, it is not a crime by itself, unlike
etc. in case of treason, rebellion, there is such a crime of
Second, they are liable for Illegal Assembly of conspiracy to commit treason, conspiracy to commit
the second kind. The meeting was attended by these rebellion, and they are punished by such acts. There is
ten soldiers who are all incited to commit sedition. no such crime as conspiracy to commit robbery. So
Even if they are unarmed during the meeting, since here, conspiracy is a mere preparatory act which is not
they were incited to commit sedition, they are liable. yet punishable by law. For them to be punished, it is
necessary that they must at least perform an overt act
ARTICLE 147 – ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS directly connected to bank robbery. So here, they just
TWO KINDS: merely conspired to commit robbery without the
I. Associations totally or partially organized for the performance of any overt act directly connected to
purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable robbery. Hence, they are not criminally liable. What
under the Code. they did is only a preparatory act not directly
II. Associations totally or partially organized for some connected to robbery.
purpose contrary to public morals. Q: Why not illegal assembly?
A: Because in the problem, it is not mentioned that the
 In case of illegal associations, it is necessary that there persons were armed. Also, the crime of bank robbery is
be a formation of a group, not merely a meeting and in not among the crimes mentioned in the second act.
the said association, not only the members of the Q: Why not illegal association?
association should be penalized, but also the founders, A: Because what they did was only a mere meeting, it
directors and president of the said association or was not an organization or association.
organization should be held criminally liable. Therefore, they are not liable of any crime.
 “PUBLIC MORALS” means anything that will go
against public interest. Q: In the same problem, A, B, and C gathered 20 men – 10
were armed and the other 10 were not armed. Again, they
ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY ILLEGAL ASSOCIATION conspired and agreed to commit simultaneous bank
PURPOSE – of the robbery all over Metro Manila. After their agreement, here
PURPOSE – will always
association may be for comes the police officers who arrested them. Of what crime
be a violation under the
purpose of committing or crimes may the police officer file against them?
RPC. Even under the
crimes violating the RPC or A: They should be charged of illegal assembly
second mode – inciting to
even in violation of special under the first act. They have the gathering of men
commit treason, rebellion,
penal laws, provided that it is and their purpose is to commit a crime punishable
or insurrection, sedition or
in violation of special penal under the RPC which is robbery and it is attended by
assault upon a person in
law, it must be against public armed persons, even if only 10 were with arms, still it
authority or his agents
morals is considered as illegal assembly. Because the law does
Necessary that there is an Not necessary that there be not require a number as to the persons who should be
actual meeting or assembly an actual meeting armed. So, all of them should be held criminally liable.
Meeting and the Act of forming or organizing
attendance at such and membership in the A, B and C, as leaders or organizers of the said
meeting are the acts association are the acts meeting, are liable for illegal assembly. Those persons
punished punished who are armed, the penalty is higher than those who
are not armed.
Q: So what if A, B and C gathered 20 persons and proposed Prision Correcional – if they are armed
to them the idea of committing simultaneous bank robbery Arresto Mayor – if they are not armed
all over Metro Manila, so they will commit robbery in 4
banks simultaneously. So these 20 men agreed to the said

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 28 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Q: What if A, B and C gathered 1000 men and women.
Their intention was to incite the people to uprise against
the government to overthrow the present administration.
These 1000 men and women arrived in the said designated
place. These 1000 men and women were arranging the
chairs when suddenly here comes the police officers who
got a tip about the said meeting. The police officers
immediately arrested A, B and C and the 1000 men and
women. What crime or crimes if any may these 1000 men
and women be charged of?
A: They have not committed any crime. It cannot
be under the first act of illegal assembly because the
said 1000 men and women were not armed. It cannot
be under the second act of illegal assembly, because for
one to be liable under this act, note that even if not all
of them need not to be armed, it is required that the
audience must be incited to commit treason, rebellion,
or insurrection, sedition or assault upon a person in
authority or his agents. Here the intention of A, B and
C is to incite them to commit rebellion, BUT there was
no statement in the problem that they were indeed
incited to commit rebellion. In fact, they were just
arranging the chairs, the meeting was only about to
begin. Therefore, they have not yet committed any
crime.
Q: What if the jueteng lords of Southern Tagalog gathered,
they gathered in Batangas. So their purpose was to define
ways and means to propagate jueteng considering that the
government would not want to legalize jueteng, their
decision was define ways and means to propagate jueteng
by using minors, those 15 years of age or below as kubrador
in the case of jueteng, so that was the purpose of their
meeting. In the said meeting, they elected their would-be
president, vice president, treasurer, etc. So they formed an
organization, an association and they said that at the end of
the month, they would meet and define ways and means to
propagate jueteng. The police officers arrived and they were
all arrested. But they are not with arms, it is not mentioned
that any of them were with arms.
A:The crime committed is illegal association
under Article 147. It is an association totally and
partially organized for some purpose contrary to public
morals. Jueteng is in violation of PD 1602, illegal
gambling as amended and it is against public morals
because it has not yet been legalized by law.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
ARTICLE 148 – DIRECT ASSAULT
TWO FORMS:
I. Without public uprising, by employing FORCE or
INTIMIDATION for the attainment of any of the
purposes enumerated defining the crimes of rebellion
and sedition.
 The intention of the offender is to commit any of
the purposes of rebellion or sedition.
PURPOSES OF REBELLION:
1. To remove from the allegiance to the
Government or its laws:
(a) the territory of the Philippines or
any part thereof; or
(b) any body of land, naval, or other
armed forces; or
2. To deprive the Chief Executive or Congress,
wholly or partially, of any of their powers or
prerogatives.
PURPOSES OF SEDITION:
1. To PREVENT the promulgation or
execution of any law or the holding of any
popular election;
2. To PREVENT the National Government, or
any provincial or municipal government or
any public officer thereof from freely
exercising its or his functions, or PREVENT
the execution of any administrative order;
3. To INFLICT any act of hate or revenge
upon the person or property of any public
officer or employee;
4. To COMMIT, for any political or social end,
any act of hate or revenge against private
persons or any social class;
5. To DESPOIL, for any political or social
end, any person, municipality, province, or
the National Government of all its property
or any part thereof
NOTE: The law says that there is no public uprising,
therefore whenever there is actual commission of rebellion
or sedition, direct assault can never be committed because
the element of direct assault in whatever form is that there
be no public uprising, on the other hand, a necessary
element in the crime of sedition or rebellion is there be
public uprising.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender employs force or intimidation
2. AIM of the offender is to attain any of the purposes
of the crime of rebellion or any of the objects of the
crime of sedition
3. There is no public uprising
29 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
II. Without public uprising, by ATTACKING, by
EMPLOYING FORCE, or by SERIOUSLY
INTIMIDATING or SERIOUSLY RESISTING any
person in authority or any of his agents, while in the
performance of official duties, or on the occasion of
such performance.
 Most popular form of direct assault
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender
a. Makes an attack,
b. Employs force,
c. Makes a serious intimidation, or
d. Makes a serious resistance
 If the offended party is a person in
authority, the attack or the employment
of force need not be serious because
under Article 148, the mere act of laying
of hands in the person in authority is
already qualified direct assault.
Therefore, the mere act of pushing a
person in authority is already qualified
direct assault because the offender
already laid hands upon a person in
authority. Hence, it need not be serious.
However, if the offended party is a
mere agent of a person in authority,
it is necessary that the employment of
force must be serious. The reason is that
in order to show defiance of law against a
mere agent of person in authority, it is
necessary that the attack or force
employed must be serious in nature.
 If what has been done is intimidation or
resistance, to amount to direct assault, it
must always be serious whether the
offended party is a person in authority or
a mere agent of a person in authority.
2. The second element requires that the assault is
against a person in authority or an agent of a
person in authority
Persons in authority (Art 152)
1. Any person directly vested with
jurisdiction, whether as an individual or
as a member of some court or
government-owned and controlled
corporation, board or commission
2. A barangay captain and a barangay
chairman
3. Teachers, professors, or persons charged
with the supervision of public or duly
recognized private schools, colleges or
institutions
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
4. Lawyers while engaged in their
professional duties or while in the act of
their professional duties
Agent of a person in authority (Art 152(2))
 A person who, by direct provision of law,
by election or by appointment by
competent authority, is charged with the
maintenance of public order and the
protection and security of life and
property (e.g. police officer, councilors).
Likewise, it is stated that any person who
comes to the aid of a person in authority
is deemed an agent of person in
authority.
3. The third element provides that at the time of the
assault, the person in authority is engaged in the
performance of his official duties or the attack was
on occasion of such performance of official duty.
 Direct assault can be committed whether the
public officer or employee.
 Direct assault can be committed whether the
public officer or agent of a person in authority
is in the engaged in the performance of his
official duties or on occasion of such
performance.
 If a person in authority or his agent is
engaged in the performance of his official
duty at the time of the assault, regardless of
the motive of the offender, direct assault will
always arise. Whether there is a personal
vendetta, whether it is a public reason or
whatever reason, there is always direct
assault. There is defiance of authority because
the person in authority or his agent is actually
engaged in the performance of official duty
 But if the person in authority or his agent is
not engaged in the performance of his official
duty at the time of the assault, motive on the
part of offender becomes material. You have
to determine the motive on the part of the
offender. If the motive on the part of the
offender is a personal vendetta, the crime
committed is murder, homicide, serious
physical injuries or less serious physical
injuries, as the case may be. But if the motive
is by reason of the authorities’ past
performance of his official duty, the crime
committed is still direct assault.
 The phrase “on occasion of such
performance” means that the said assault was
by reason of the past performance of official
30 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
duty. So “on occasion” means it is by reason
of the past performance of official duty.
4. The fourth element provides that the offender
knows him to be a person in authority or an agent
of a person in authority. So it is that the offender
knows him to be a person in authority because
otherwise, he cannot be said that he defied the
law, he defied the authority. In the first place, he
didn’t know that the person he is attacking is a
person in authority or an agent of a person in
authority.
5. The fifth element requires that there be no public
uprising.
QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT
There are three circumstances which will qualify direct
assault:
1. When the assault is committed by means of a
weapon;
 WEAPON - firearms, knives or any other
items which will inflict injury.
2. When the offender is a public officer or employee;
 So when a public officer or employee attacks
a person in authority, it is always qualified
direct assault.
3. When the offender lays hands upon a person in
authority
 Will only lie if the laying of hands is upon a
person in authority.
Any of these three circumstances will qualify direct assault.
NOTE: The first two qualifying circumstance affects both a
person in authority or agent of a person in authority.
However, the third qualifying circumstance (laying hands
upon a person in authority) will only lie if the offended
party is a person in authority. Mere laying of hands to an
agent of person in authority is not qualified. It will only
qualify if the laying of hands is upon a person in authority.
COMPLEX CRIME OF DIRECT ASSAULT:
 Whenever the crime of direct assault is committed,
and there is a resulting felony (e.g. death, physical
injuries), you always complex it.
 Under Article 48, you should always complex it
because from a single act, two or more grave or less
grave felonies had resulted. Under Article 48, Book I,
you have to complex it. So it could be:
o Direct assault with Murder
o Direct assault with Homicide
o Direct assault with Serious Physical Injuries
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
o Direct assault with Less Serious Physical
Injuries
 But if the resulting felony is only SLIGHT
PHYSICAL INJURIES, you cannot complex it. It is
prohibited under Article 48 because:
1. It is only a light felony. Under Article 48,
you can only complex two or more grave or
less grave felonies but not a light felony.
2. Slight physical injury or light felony is
already absorbed in direct assault
because whenever you assault somebody,
definitely, somehow, any injury would happen
to him. That is why it is already absorbed in
direct assault.
Q: What if the city mayor attended the flag ceremony. It
was a mandate. So there was this flag ceremony attended by
the city mayor. After the flag ceremony, the mayor went to
the platform and was making an announcement to the city
hall employees. Suddenly here comes X. X went near the
mayor and shot the mayor on the head. The mayor died.
What crime is committed by X?
A: QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT WITH
MURDER. The city mayor was engaged in the
performance of his official duty at the time of the
assault therefore it is direct assault. Because the city
mayor was engaged in the performance of his official
duty regardless of the motive of X, even if it is by
mayor’s past performance of official duty or by reason
of personal vendetta, regardless of the motive of X, the
offender, since the mayor is engaged in the
performance of his official duty, it is direct assault.
Now, the mayor died. Therefore there is a resulting
felony of murder because obviously there was
treachery; therefore, it is direct assault with murder.
Now, the offender made use of a weapon, he made use
of a pistol gun, a firearm which is a qualifying
circumstance, therefore, the crime committed is
QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT WITH MURDER.
(EXAM TIP: the corresponding explanation must be
complete—what is the qualifying circumstance, what is
direct assault, what is a complex crime)
Q: What if the city mayor has just attended a Sunday mass.
He and his wife and children were getting out of the church
when suddenly here comes X. X, onboard the motorcycle
went straight to the city mayor and fired at the head of the
city mayor. The city mayor died. It was found that X was a
former employee of the city hall, who was dismissed by the
city mayor because he engaged in an anomalous
transaction. What crime is committed by X?
31 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
A: QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT WITH
MURDER. The city mayor was not engaged in the
performance of his official duty. Since the city mayor
was not engaged in the performance of his official duty,
he is a person in authority; you have to know the
reason, the motive of the offender. The offender was a
city hall employee who was dismissed by the city
mayor, therefore the motive was by reason of the past
performance of the said person in authority. So it is by
reason of the past performance of his official duty, the
attack, the firing was done on occasion of such
performance of official duty therefore the crime
committed is direct assault. The mayor died.
Obviously there was treachery therefore it is direct
assault with murder. The offender made use of a
firearm, which is a qualifying circumstance in direct
assault therefore it is QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT
WITH MURDER.
Q: What if in the same problem, here comes X, the mayor
was coming out of the church, X shot the city mayor. Now X
happened to be a former gardener who was dismissed from
the service of the household because he performed a
wrongful act while gardening. Therefore his reason was a
personal vendetta. What crime is committed by X?
A: X committed a crime of MURDER. Obviously,
there was treachery on the part of X.
It is not direct assault because the mayor was not
engaged in the performance of his official duty and the
reason behind the assault was personal vendetta.
Therefore it cannot be said that the attack was on
occasion of such performance of official duty.
Q: What if the judge has just rendered judgment. After
rendering the judgment, after finding the accused guilty
beyond reasonable doubt, the accused got mad. He jumped
on the judge and he boxed the judge several times. The
court interpreter, the person nearest to the judge, came to
the aid of the judge. This angered the accused. The accused
got mad at the court interpreter and he boxed the court
interpreter as well. Thereafter the security guards arrived
and took away the said accused. The judge suffered serious
physical injuries whereas the court interpreter suffered
slight physical injuries. What crime or crimes is/are
committed by the accused, first against the judge, and
second against the court interpreter?
A: As against the judge, the accused is liable of
the crime of QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT
WITH SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES. The
judge is a person in authority under Article 152. He
was engaged in the performance of his official duty at
the time of the assault therefore the crime committed
is direct assault. It has a resulting felony, serious
physical injuries; therefore it should be direct assault
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
with serious physical injuries. The accused in boxing
the judge, laid hands upon a person in authority
therefore it is QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT WITH
SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES.
As against the court interpreter, the accused is
liable of the crime of DIRECT ASSAULT. At the
time the court interpreter came to the aid of a person
in authority, who was the victim of direct assault. Note
under Article 152, any person who comes to the aid of a
person in authority is deemed an agent of a person in
authority therefore, when the court interpreter came to
the aid of the said judge, who was a person in
authority, he became an agent of a person in authority.
And under Article 148, any attack on an agent of a
person in authority is direct assault. Therefore the
crime committed is direct assault. The said interpreter
suffered slight physical injury. You cannot complex it
because it is only a light felony. Therefore it is only
direct assault not complex. The said accused laid hands
upon the court interpreter, would you qualify it? No,
because he is mere agent of person in authority.
Therefore the crime committed is only direct assault.
ARTICLE 149 – INDIRECT ASSAULT
 Indirect assault can be committed only when a direct
assault is also committed
ELEMENTS:
1. An AGENT of a person in authority is the victim of
any of the forms of direct assault defined in Article
148.
2. A person comes to the aid of such agent
3. Offender makes use of force or intimidation upon
such person coming to the aid of the agent.
Q: What if a police officer was manning the traffic and it
was a heavy traffic so the vehicles were stuck. What if one
of the owners of the vehicles got mad at the police officer
and he went straight to the police officer, who at the time
has no pistol, and boxed the police officer. While he was
boxing a police officer a pedestrian saw the incident .the
pedestrian came to the aid of the police officer. This
angered the owner of the vehicle so he, too, boxed the said
pedestrian. The said pedestrian suffered slight physical
injuries while the police officer suffered less serious
physical injuries. What crime or crimes is/are committed
by the said owner of the vehicle against:
a. The police officer
b. The pedestrian?
A: a. AS AGAINST THE POLICE OFFICER,
DIRECT ASSAULT WITH LESS SERIOUS
PHYSICAL INJURIES. The said owner of the
vehicle boxed the said police officer. The police officer
is an agent of a person in authority under Article 152
32 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
because he was charged with the maintenance of public
order. The police officer is in the actual performance of
his official duty at the time of the assault therefore the
crime committed is direct assault. There is also a
resulting felony which is less serious physical injuries,
a less grave felony; therefore we have to complex it,
direct assault with less serious physical injuries. The
offender laid hands upon the police officer, however,
laying of hands will not qualify because he is a mere
agent of person in authority; therefore the crime
committed against the police officer is direct assault
with less serious physical injuries.
(NOTE: an MMDA officer is also an agent of a person
in authority because he is charged with the
maintenance of public order and the protection and
security of life and property)
b. AS AGAINST THE PEDESTRIAN, INDIRECT
ASSAULT under Art 149. An agent of a person in
authority was the victim of direct assault. A person
came to his aid who is the pedestrian. When the
pedestrian came to the aid of this agent of person in
authority, he did not become an agent of a person in
authority under Art 152 because under Art 152, a
person would only become an agent of a person in
authority if he came to the aid of a person in authority.
Here, the pedestrian merely came to the aid of an agent
of a person in authority who is the police officer.
Therefore, when the pedestrian came to the aid of the
police officer, he did not become also an agent of a
person in authority; as such, the crime committed is
INDIRECT ASSAULT. When the pedestrian came to
the aid of the police officer, force and intimidation
were employed against him so the crime committed by
the owner of the vehicle against the pedestrian is
indirect assault.
 Are you going to complex it to the crime of
slight physical injuries?
 No, because it is absorbed and it is only
a light felony.
Under Article 149, INDIRECT ASSAULT is committed
if a person in authority or an agent of a person in
authority is the victim of direct assault. Any person
who came to his aid and that person was employed with
force or intimidation by the offender.
 Why is it in the given problem, when the person
under attacked is a person in authority and when
someone came to his aid, and that someone was also
attacked, the crime committed is direct assault
against that someone. But when the victim of direct
assault is a mere agent of a person in authority, and
someone came to his aid, and that someone was also
attacked, the crime is indirect assault.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 The reason is that the Congress amended Article
152 without correspondingly amending Article
149.
 Based on the amendment made by Congress in
Article 152, it is stated that any person who
comes to the aid of a person in authority is
deemed an agent of person in authority. And if
an agent of a person in authority is attacked,
such attack is under Article 148 which is direct
assault and not indirect assault under Article
149.
 But if the victim of the said direct assault is a
mere agent of a person in authority, and
someone who comes to his aid will not become
an agent of a person in authority; therefore
when he is also attacked, it will only be indirect
assault under Article 149.
 In Statcon, when there are two provisions which are
contrary, you reconcile. So to reconcile, Article 149 or
indirect assault will only apply if the victim of direct
assault is a mere agent of person in authority and
someone came to his aid, and that someone was also
employed with force and intimidation.
ARTICLE 150 – DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS
ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY, ITS
COMMITTEES OR SUBCOMMITTTES, BY THE
CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS, ITS
COMMITTEES, SUBCOMITTEES OR DIVISIONS
ACTS PUNISHED:
I. By refusing, without legal excuse, to obey summons
issued by the Congress or any of its extensions or any
of its standing committees or subcommittees, by the
Constitutional Commissions, its committees,
subcommittees or any other body which has the power
to issue summons.
 Under the first act, for the crime to arise, it is
necessary that the offender’s refusal to obey the
summons is without any legal excuse. If there is
a valid reason, a legal excuse, why the offender
didn’t attend the said committee hearing of the
congress or why he failed to comply with the
said summons or any of the acts under Art. 150,
the crime will not arise.
II. By refusing to be sworn or placed under affirmation
while being before such legislative or constitutional
body or official.
 The public official or the person was required to
appear in the said meeting and obey the
summons, however, the moment he appeared in
the said meeting, he does not want to be sworn
to and he refused to be placed under affirmation
before such legislative or constitutional body,
Art. 150 is still violated.
33 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
III. By refusing to answer any legal inquiry or to produce
any books, papers, documents, or records in his
possession, when required by them to do so in the
exercise of their functions.
 If, however, the reason for not answering or not
producing the books is that if he answers or
produces book, he will incriminate himself in
the commission of the crime, then he has the
right not to answer and not to produce the
books.
IV. By refusing another from attending as a witness in
such legislative or constitutional body.
 Under the fourth act punished, the said offender
did not fail to attend in the summons; he
restrained another from attending as a witness.
He prevented another person in attending as a
witness in such legislative or constitutional body
hearing.
V. By inducing disobedience to a summons or refusal to
be sworn by any such body or official.
 NOTE that Congress where it be the House of
Representatives or the Senate has the power to
issue summons because they have the power to
investigate that is inquiry in aid of legislation.
Whatever be the findings in the said
investigating body, it will be used in the making
of a bill, a proposal. NOTE that they don’t have
the power to file a case so whatever be the
product of their investigation, they will give it
either to the Ombudsman or to the DOJ. It is up
to the DOJ or to the Ombudsman to file a case
because the purpose of the Senate or the HOR is
only inquiry in aid of legislation.
Q: What if there is this committee hearing, an investigation
about anomalous transactions entered into by a former
officials of the DENR. While the said official received the
summons, he failed to appear because he was at St. Lukes.
He was confined because he was suffering from
hypertension. Can he be held liable under Art. 150?
A: He cannot be held liable because he has a legal
excuse to attend or to obey the summons issued by the
Congress. The moment that there is a legal excuse, the
crime will not arise BUT if his measure is without any
legal excuse NOTE that aside from violation of Art.
150, he can also be held liable or cited for contempt by
the said committee of Congress and usually when cited
for contempt, he is placed in detention in the Senate
Blue Ribbon Committee.
Q: He obeyed the summons, he appeared, he allowed
himself to be sworn in however, the moment that the
Senators asked him questions, and he refused to answer the
questions. He said: I invoke my right against self-
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
incrimination. When he was solely required to produce the
books which were confirmed to be in his possession; He
didn’t want to produce the said books because according to
him, the production of these books would incriminate
himself. Can he be held liable under Art. 150?
A: He cannot. If the answer to any of the
questions or if the conduction of the same will
incriminate the person in the said crime; he has
the right not to do so. Under the Constitution, No
person can be compelled to be a witness against
himself and asking him, requiring him, ordering
him to produce the books or to answer any
questions which would incriminate himself is akin
to making him a witness against himself and it is
unconstitutional.
ARTICLE 151 – RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE
TO A PERSON IN AUTHORITY OR THE AGENTS
OF SUCH PERSON
TWO ACTS:
I. RESISTANCE AND SERIOUS DISOBEDIENCE (PAR 1)
ELEMENTS:
1. The person in authority or his agent
a. is engaged in the performance of official
duty; or
b. gives a lawful order to the offender
2. Offender resists or seriously disobey such
person in authority or his agent
3. That such resistance or disobedience will not
amount to
a. direct assault (Art 148),
b. indirect assault (Art 149); or
c. disobedience to summons issued by
Congress
II. SIMPLE DISOBEDIENCE (PAR 2)
ELEMENTS:
1. An AGENT of a person in authority
a. is engaged in the performance of official
duty; or
b. gives a lawful order to the offender
2. The offender disobeys such order of the agent
3. Such disobedience is not serious in nature
Q: What if the mayor has a project, a cleaning act operation
in order to prevent dengue. So they were cleaning up the
canals. While the mayor was cleaning up the canals
together with other city hall employees, here comes Mang
Pedro who had taken beer and was a little tipsy. So the went
there and was shouting and making noise, disturbing the
people who were busy cleaning up the canals. And so the
police officer cleaning told Mang Pedro to go home because
he was disturbing the cleaning up operation. Mang Pedro,
instead of going home, merely sat nearby the canal being
34 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
cleaned by the people. What crime, if any, did Mang Pedro
commit?
A: Mang Pedro committed SIMPLE
DISOBEDIENCE UNDER ARTICLE 151 par 2.
Article 151, second paragraph, simple disobedience is
committed when an agent of a person in authority is
engaged in the performance of official duty or gives a
lawful order to the offender, that the offender disobeys
and such disobedience is not of serious nature. In the
problem, it was the police officer, an agent of a person
in authority, who gave the order to Mang Pedro and
Mang Pedro disobeyed him but such disobedience was
not serious in nature because he merely sat nearby the
canal; therefore there was no showing that such
disobedience is serious in nature so the crime
committed is simple disobedience.
Q: Is there direct assault with robbery? Let’s say that the
city mayor was assaulted and thereafter he took the watch
of the mayor.
A: No, there is no such crime. The crime
committed is not direct assault with robbery. It is
already robbery with any resulting felony, if there is
one.
 What if the original motive was to assault the city
mayor?
 If the original motive is to assault the city
mayor and not to commit robbery, but the
offender took the watch, there will be two
crimes because the offender already
performed two acts.
 If there are two separate and distinct crimes,
there shall be two information that will be
filed to the court. If it is a complex crime, only
one information is filed before the court.
 If the intention is to rob, and in the occasion of
the said robbery, homicide, serious physical
injuries, rape, intentional mutilation, arson
was committed, the crime committed under
Article 294 is robbery with homicide, robbery
with intentional mutilation, robbery with
rape, robbery with arson or robbery with
serious physical injuries.
 If the original intention was to assault the city
mayor and thereafter he committed robbery,
there will be two acts. Because his intention
was to assault and thereafter he committed
the second act of taking away the personal
property of the city mayor.
 In case of DIRECT ASSAULT WITH MURDER
or HOMICIDE, it is considered a complex
crime under Article 48 because based on the
single act performed, two or more grave or
less grave offense was committed. Because
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
with the single act of boxing, the offender
committed direct assault and serious/less
serious physical injuries.
ARTICLE 152 – PERSONS IN AUTHORITHY AND
AGENTS OF PERSONS IN AUTHORITY
Q: Who are persons in authority?
A: The following are the persons in authority:
1. Municipal Mayors
2. Division Superintendent of schools
3. Public and private school teachers
4. Teacher-nurse
5. President of the sanitary division
6. Provincial Fiscal
7. Judges
8. Lawyers in actual performance of duties
9. Sangguniang Bayan member
10. Barangay Chairman
Q: Who is an agent of a person in authority?
A: Those who are in charged with:
 The maintenance of public order; and
 The protection and security of life and property
ARTICLE 153 – TUMULTS AND OTHER
DISTURBANCES
ACTS PUNISHED:
I. Causing any serious disturbances in a public place,
office or establishment;
 For the said disturbance to be considered as a
violation of Art 153; it is necessary that the said
offender deliberately intended to disturb the
said meeting or public place. It was a planned
intentional act.
II. Interrupting or disturbing performances, functions or
gatherings, or peaceful meetings, if the act is not
included in Arts. 131 and 132;
 There is a qualification – that the interruption
or disturbance of public gatherings, functions,
and peaceful meetings must not fall as a
violation under Art 131 (Prohibition,
interruption, or dissolution of peaceful
meetings) or Art 132 (Interruption of religious
worship).
III. Making any outcry tending to incite rebellion or
sedition in any meeting, association, or public place.
IV. Displaying placards or emblems which provoke a
disturbance of public order in such place;
 The third and fourth acts, whether this making of an
outcry or the displaying of placards or emblems, it is
necessary that such act of displaying placards or
emblems must be an unconscious outburst of emotion.
It must not be intentionally calculated to incite people
35 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
to rebel or to commit sedition because otherwise, the
crime would be inciting to rebellion or inciting to
sedition.
V. Burying with pomp the body of a person who has been
legally executed.
 When you say legally executed; it means that the
said person has committed a heinous crime. The
penalty prescribed by law is death and so he was
killed by means of lethal injection but at present
because of Republic Act No. 9346, we have no
more death penalty. Death Penalty is prohibited
to be imposed.
 But in burying with pomp the body of the
person who has been legally executed; the said
person must be legally executed because the
said person has committed a heinous crime yet
when he was buried he was buried with such
extravagance as if as he is a hero, as if as the
government has committed a crime in legally
executing him therefore it causes sympathy
arising on the part of the people hence, it was a
disturbance of public order.
WHEN TUMULTUOUS
 If any of these prohibited acts constituting
violation of Art 153 is committed by more than 3
persons who are provided with arms or any means
of violence it is said to be tumultuous in nature
therefore there must be at least four persons who
are armed or provided with means of violence for
it to be considered as tumultuous.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ARTICLES 153, 131, & 132
Article 153 – TUMULTS ANS OTHER DISTURBANCES
OF PUBLIC ORDER
Article 131 – PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION AND
DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS
Article 132 – INTERRUPTING OF RELIGIOUS
WORSHIP
 Articles 131 and 132 can only be committed by a
Public Officer. It cannot be committed by a private
individual whereas under Art 153, it can be
committed both by a Public Officer and a private
individual.
 What if the offender is a public officer and he disturbs
a peaceful meeting. How would you distinguish if it is a
violation of Art 153 or a violation of Art 131 or 132?
 First, PARTICIPATION: in Art 131 or 132, the
public officer must not be a participant in the
meeting that he disturb or interrupted. He must
be an outsider, a stranger in the said meeting.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
On the other hand, in Art 153, the said Public
Officer must be a participant, one in attendance
in the said meeting.
 Second, PURPOSE: in Art 131, the mere
intention of the public officer is to prevent a
person from freely exercising his freedom of
speech and expression whereas in Art 153, the
intention of the offender is to disturb public peace
and tranquility.
Q: What if since RH Bill was enacted into law, there was a
huge rally at the EDSA Shrine which was initiated by the
members of the CBCP. They were against this law and they
encouraged the people to file a case before the Supreme
Court questioning the constitutionality of the said law. At
first, the head of the CBCP spoke then after him another
person, a private individual spoke, the head of the
organization spoke and he kept on attacking and attacking
the President. He said that the President bribed the
members of the Congress in order to pass this bill so he
kept on attacking and attacking the President. One of the
police officers, who was assigned to maintain the peace and
order in the place, heard the attacks against the President.
This Police Officer was indebted to the President he owed
his position to the President. He went straight to the person
talking against the President and told him to stop. When he
didn’t stop, the Police Officer fired shots in the air and the
people scampered away and the peaceful
meeting/gathering was dissolved/ interrupted. What crime
was committed by the Police Officer?
A: The crime committed by the Police Officer is
not Art 153 but Art 131.Because the distinctions lie
in this case. First, the said Public Officer, a Police
Officer is not a participant in the said meeting. He is a
stranger, an outsider in the said meeting. Second, his
only purpose is to prevent the said person in freely
exercising his freedom of speech and expression, it is
his right to express his anger against the President yet
the said person prevented him in exercising such
freedom of Speech and expression therefore the Police
Officer is liable under Art 131 and not under Art 153.
For him to be liable under Art 153, let’s say that he is a
public officer, he is a participant in the said meeting
and while participating in the said meeting, he
interrupted the said meeting in order for him to cause
a disturbance of the said meeting. The crime is Art 153.
Q: There was this peaceful gathering, let’s say a public
meeting, a peaceful meeting about the increase of fares of
the MRT and the LRT. One of the participants therein, one
of the persons therein went to the platform and took the
mic and then he incite the people, induced the people to go
36 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
to the streets, uprise, rebel against the government, to
overthrow the government. What crime was committed?
A: The crime committed was inciting to
rebellion.
Q: What if, he was among the participants. The head of the
meeting, the Public Officer was discussing about the
increase of fares of the MRT and LRT. This person could no
longer control his emotions. Suddenly he stood up and he
said: “buwisit na gobyerno na ito naiinis na ako. Dapat na
tayong mag rebelled sa gobyerno walang ginawa kundi
increase ng taxes”. They go and rebel against the
government. What crime was committed?
A: Tumults and other disturbances of public
order. It is just an unconscious outburst of emotions
not an intentionally calculated to incite people to rebel
against the government.
ARTICLE 154 – UNLAWFUL USE OF MEANS OF
PUBLICATION AND UNLAWFUL UTTERANCES
ACTS PUNISHED:
I. By publishing or causing to be published by means of
printing lithography or any other means of publication,
as news any false news which may endanger the public
order, or cause damage to the interest or credit of the
State.
 The offender knew that the news that he will
publish is a false one and despite such
knowledge, he published the same if the news
would endanger public order or cause damage
to the interest or credit of the state.
II. By encouraging disobedience to the law or to the
constituted authorities or by praising, justifying or
extolling any act punished by law, by the same means
or by words, utterances or speeches.
III. By maliciously publishing or causing to be published
any official resolution or document without proper
authority, or before they have been published officially.
 NOTE that in the third act there is the word
Malicious. The offender must maliciously
publish or cause to be published any official
resolution. If the publication of the official
resolution without official authority or the
publication was not done maliciously, there was
no intent to cause damage, it was not done
maliciously. Art 154 is not violated. It is
necessary that the said publication must be
done maliciously under the third act.
IV. By printing, publishing, or distributing (or causing the
same) books, pamphlets, periodicals, or leaflets which
do not bear the real printer’s name or which are
classified as anonymous.
 It is necessary that any publication has
contained the real printer’s name. It must have
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
been anonymous. The publisher, the printer, the
author, must be stated even at the bottom.
Q: What if the Philippine Daily Inquirer has as its headline:
“KC Concepcion said Piolo Pascual is gay.” So that is the
headline of the Philippine Daily Inquirer. It was posted. KC
never categorically stated that Piolo is gay, she only
impliedly stated it but she never categorically stated it. So
the Daily Inquirer published a false news and PioloPascual
filed a case in violation of Art 154 against the Philippine
Daily Inquirer. The Philippine Daily Inquirer knew that it is
a false news yet they still published it as news.
A: Art. 154 is not violated because whether or not
Piolo is gay it will not endanger public order. It will not
cause damage to the credit or interest of the state.
Q: What if the headline of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
said: “Tomorrow, Megamall will be bombed from a very
reliable source.” That was the headline of the Philippine
Daily Inquirer. The Philippine Daily Inquirer later on
learned that it was false nevertheless; since it was already
there they still published it and distributed it. Can they be
held liable under Art 154?
A: Yes because the said news will endanger
public order. It can cause damage to the credit or
interest of the state. Imagine Megamall will be bomb,
no person will go to the said place, tourists will not go
to the said place therefore it will endanger public order
and can cause damage to the interest of the state when
the said newspaper published it despite knowing that it
was false news. Art 154 is violated.
Q: What if members of the CBCP, they are against the RH
Law. They made leaflets, pamphlets and distributed it to all
persons in the church, in market.. Therein is stated: Anyone
who would obey or comply with the RH Bill which is a
Catholic will be ex-communicated. Can they be held liable
of Art 154?
A: Yes because they encouraged disobedience
to the law. It has been enacted into law and by
encouraging the people that they would be ex-
communicated if you will obey it, then you can be held
liable for unlawful use of means of publication.
Q: A new law had been enacted by Congress and signed by
the President. A non-governmental organization was
against such law. The members prepared leaflets and
pamphlets that encourage the people to disobey the law.
The members of the NGO went to public places – outside
the churches, in public parks, markets and would distribute
these leaflets to the people. The members of NGO were
arrested. What crime may be filed against them? Is it
inciting to sedition or unlawful use of means of
publication?
37 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
A: Unlawful use of means of publication, under
Article 154 second act (by encouraging
disobedience to the law or the constituted authorities).
When they distributed these pamphlets or leaflets, they
encourage disobedience to the law. It is not inciting to
sedition because they did not encourage the people to
uprise publicly.
ARTICLE 155 – ALARMS AND SCANDALS
ACTS PUNISHED:
I. Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or other
explosives within any town or public place calculated
to cause (which produces) alarm or danger.
Discharging of firearms may result to different
crimes depending on the intent of the offender.
1. If a firearm is discharged in a public place
intending to cause alarm and danger –
Violation of Article 155 or Alarms and
Scandals
2. If the firearm is discharged in a public place
with the intention to kill a person even if the
person is not hit – Attempted homicide
3. If the discharge of the firearm is aimed at a
particular person but there is no intent to kill
– Violation of Article 254 or Discharge of
Firearms
II. Instigating or taking an active part in any charivari or
other disorderly meeting offensive to another or
prejudicial to public tranquility.
Charivari includes a medley of discordant voices,
a mock serenade of discordant noises (not music
but noises) made on kettles, tins, horns, etc.
designed to annoy and insult.
III. Disturbing the public peace while wandering about at
night or while engaged in any other nocturnal
amusement.
IV. Causing any disturbance or scandal in public places
while intoxicated or otherwise, provided Art 153 is not
applicable
*Note: As of now, those who are guilty of committing the
crime of Alarms and Scandals may apply for Probation (for
imprisonment of 6 years or below). Those involving crimes
against national security cannot apply.
Q: In a public park, there were so many people here comes
X. X went in the middle of the park and fired shots in the
air. The people were so afraid they scampered away. What
crime is committed?
A: Alarms and Scandals under Art 155. His act
can cause damage to public peace and tranquility.
Q: What if in the same problem, in a public park, there
were so many people and here comes X. X saw his enemy Y.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
He took out his firearm, aiming his firearm at Y without
any intent to kill because he knew Y would not be killed and
he discharged the firearm. What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is illegal discharged of
firearms under Art. 254 RPC.
Q: What if in the same public place, X saw his enemy Y. He
pulled out his firearm with intent to kill, he aimed his
firearm at Y, discharged the firearm but Y was not killed.
What crime was committed?
A: Attempted murder or Homicide as the case
may be.
 In case of alarms and scandals, the only intention
of the offender is to cause damage to public peace
and tranquility that is to cause alarm and danger.
That is his intention.
 In Illegal Discharge of Firearms under Art 1254 his
intention is to threaten the said person or any
other persons. He aimed the firearm and
discharges the firearm pointing at a particular
person absent: intent to kill. There was no intent
to kill, it is illegal discharge of firearm.
But given in the same problem, he knows his
enemy, pointed the firearm at his enemy but with
intent to kill. He discharged the firearm but his
enemy was not killed. It is attempted homicide or
murder as the case may be. Since there is an intent
to kill on the part of the offender even if the victim
was not killed it is still in the attempted stage.
Q: What if in the same problem, it was in a public place, X
went to the said place, he saw his enemy Y. He went near Y,
took out his gun and poked the gun at Y but did not
discharge the said gun. What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is other light threats.
NOTE that under other light threats the offender
merely poked the firearm at the victim without
discharging or firing the firearm. If the firearm has
been discharged, 3 crimes may be committed
depending on the intent. It can be alarms and scandals,
illegal discharge of firearms or attempted homicide or
murder as the case may be.
Q: You have a neighbor, it was his birthday. They rented a
videoke and kept on singing along till 12mn. The guests
already left, the birthday celebrant was the only one left, it’s
already 1:30am and he’s still singing at the top of his voice
with the use of the mic. His neighbors cannot sleep because
of his ugly voice. Everyone in the neighborhood could hear
him and cannot sleep. Can he be held liable under Art 155
alarms and scandals?
38 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
A: Yes. He can be held liable under alarms and
scandals because his only intention that night is to
cause a disturbance of public peace and order.
Q: Let’s say a person was intoxicated. He was drunk. He
was on his way home. He was singing at the top of his voice.
Is he liable for alarms and scandals?
A: No because it is normal to sing at the top of his
voice.
Q: What if he saw this lead pipe (tubo) and upon seeing
this lead pipe, he would bang all the gates that he would
pass by. Is he liable for alarms and scandals?
A: Yes because his acts caused damage to public peace
and tranquility.
Q: X, the offender, was playing billiards in a billiard hall.
He lost in the game so he became mad. He started saying
bad words against all the persons in the hall. There was a
commotion. The police arrived and arrested him. What case
may be filed against him, Article 153 or Article 155?
A: Article 155, the last act (by causing any
disturbance or scandal or public places whether
intoxicated or not provided Article 153 is not
applicable). X caused a commotion or disturbance in a
public billiard hall, a public place. Article 153 will not
apply because it was not a planned disturbance and it
was not serious in nature. X did not go there in order
to deliberately cause a disturbance. Likewise, the
disturbance causes is not serious in nature and
therefore the crime committed is the last act of Article
155.
ARTICLE 156 – DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM
JAIL
ELEMENTS:
1. That there is a person confined in a jail or penal
establishment.
2. That the offender removes therefrom such persons,
or assisted in the escape of such person.
 Who is the offender?
 The offender is any person. He can be a private
individual or a public officer or employee provided
that he is not the custodian of the said prisoner
because if the offender who helped in the escape of
the prisoner from jail is the custodian of the said
prisoner, the crime is under Article 223 –
Infidelity in the custody of prisoners by
connivance or consenting with the escape, or
Article 224 – Infidelity in the custody of prisoner
by evasion through negligence because of the
element of breach of trust and confidence reposed
on him by the government.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 Who is the prisoner being referred to in delivering
persons from jail? He can either be:
1. A detention prisoner is a prisoner who is
behind bars but the case against him is
ongoing either because the crime he
committed is a non-bailable offense and
evidence of guilt is strong or the crime he
committed is a bailable offense but he does
not have the enough funds to put up the
required bail. The prisoners at the provincial
jail, city jail, municipal jail, they are merely
detention prisoners. They are not yet convicts.
They are only accused, suspects therefore they
are presumed innocent unless and until
proven that they’re guilty of the crime
charged. They are merely detention prisoners.
2. A prisoner that is convicted by final
judgment is one who has been convicted by
the lower court and who did not appeal his
conviction within the period to perfect an
appeal then the judgment becomes final and
executory. He has to serve the sentence. Or he
has been convicted then he appealed to the
higher court within the period to perfect an
appeal and the said higher court affirmed the
said conviction. The conviction will now
become final and executory so he is now a
prisoner convicted by final judgment.
Generally, they are those who are serving
sentence in Muntinlupa.
PENALTY IS QUALIFIED:
1. If violence or intimidation has been used in the
commission of the crime; or
2. Bribery is used in delivering prisoners from jail.
Q: Let’s say A is a prisoner convicted by final judgment. He
is serving his sentence in Muntinlupa. B his friend visited
him. B was a rich man. He planned A’s escape on his
birthday. He did this by talking to the jail warden
custodian. B the friend gave the jail warden custodian
P500,000.00. He gave bribe to the jail warden custodian to
allow A his friend to escape at that night. He also went to
the guard at the entrance gate of the New Bilibid Prison and
gave the guard P100,000.00, also to allow his friend to
leave at that night. That night, A escaped and left the penal
institution. He went to the house of another friend who
harbored him and concealed him despite the fact that he
was an escapee from a penal institution. What are the
crimes committed by A (the prisoner), B (the friend), jail
warden custodian, the guard of the penal institution, and
the friend who harbored him?
39 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
A: A is liable of evasion of service of sentence under
Art 157. He is a prisoner convicted by final judgment
therefore he is liable for evasion of service of sentence.
Q: What if he is not serving his sentence in Muntinlupa.
Let’s say he is just a detention prisoner. Can he be held
liable for evasion of service of sentence?
A: No. Evasion of service of sentence can only be
committed by a prisoner convicted by final judgment.
 In the given problem, A is convicted by final
judgment therefore A is liable for evasion
of service of sentence under Art 157.
 B the friend is liable under Art 156
Delivering prisoners from jail qualified
by the giving of bribe therefore his penalty
will be qualified because he gave bribe money
inorder to help in the escape of his friend. He
will not be liable for another crime of
corruption of public official because the giving
of bribe is considered clearly as a qualifying or
as an aggravating circumstance in delivering
prisoners from jail.
 The jail warden custodian who received
the bribed money and allowed A’s escape is
liable under Art 223 infidelity in the
custody of prisoners. Aside from that, he
is also liable for direct bribery because in
case of infidelity in the custody of prisoners,
the giving and receiving of bribe is not a
qualifying or aggravating circumstance
therefore the jail warden custodian will be
liable for 2 crimes; Infidelity in the custody of
prisoners and direct bribery for having
received the bribed money in the amount of
P500,000.00.
 The guard at the entrance gate of the penal
institution will be liable for delivering
prisoners from jail. He is not the
custodian and he helped in the
escape/removal of the prisoner from jail.
Therefore, he is liable for delivering prisoners
from jail. The fact that he received bribed
money will not make him liable of direct
bribery because in delivering prisoners from
jail, it is only a qualifying circumstance which
will only increase the imposable penalty.
 The friend who harbored and concealed him
will be liable under PD 1829 that is
obstruction of justice. It is committed by
any person who willfully or deliberately
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
obstructs or impedes the investigation or the
apprehension of a criminal.
 Why not an accessory?
o Because I did not mention in the problem
the crime committed by the prisoner. For
an accessory to the crime, it is necessary
that the crime committed by the prisoner
must be treason, parricide, murder,
attempt to take the life of the chief
executive or is known to be habitually
guilty of some other crime. I did not
mention the crime committed by the
prisoner. Therefore his liability is under
PD 1829 Obstruction of Justice.
ARTICLE 157 – EVASION OF SERVICE OF
SENTENCE
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a convict by final judgment.
2. That he is serving his sentence which consists in
deprivation of liberty.
3. That he evades the service of his sentence by
escaping during the term of his sentence.
 Who is the offender?
 A prisoner convicted by final judgment.
 It cannot be committed by a mere detention
prisoner because he has no sentence to evade
because he is not yet convicted. Article 157
will not apply to him.
PENALTY IS QUALIFIED if such evasion or escape
takes place:
1. By means of unlawful entry
2. By breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs or
floors;
3. By using picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit,
violence or intimidation; or
4. Done through connivance with other convicts or
employees of the penal institution.
Q: You often read in the newspapers, heard over the radios,
watch on TV, 5 prisoners escaped from the Caloocan city
jail, 10 prisoners escaped from Palawan Provincial Jail. Did
they commit evasion of service of sentence?
A: No. These persons did not commit evasion of
service of sentence under art 157 because they are
merely detention prisoners. For evasion of sentence to
arise, the prisoner who has escaped must be a prisoner
convicted by final judgment.
Under Art 157, the said prisoner the said prisoner
must be serving which involves deprivation of
liberty and he escapes during the service of his
sentence by evading the service of sentence.
40 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
The law says, it is a prisoner serving his sentence
which involves deprivation of liberty. It is
necessary that the sentence imposed on him must
involve deprivation of liberty either it is behind
bars or he has been convicted of a crime wherein
the penalty is destierro. Even if the penalty
prescribed is destierro, the moment he enters the
place wherein he is prohibited from entering in
the judgment of the court, he also committed
evasion of service of sentence.
 Destierro under Art 27; Destierro is also
a penalty which involves deprivation of
liberty although partial not complete
deprivation of liberty because the
offender or the convict is not allowed to
enter a place designated in the judgment
of the court. The moment he enters the
said place, he commits evasion of service
of sentence.
Q: X is a prisoner convicted of a final judgment. Y is a
frequent visitor of X. Because of his frequent visits to X, Y
has already befriended the custodian of X and as such, the
custodian no longer be strict with Y in bodily searching him
when he visits. One time, Y visited X and the custodian did
not perform bodily search on him. Y was able to get inside
and smuggled two knives – one for X and one for Y. They
pointed the knives at the throat of the custodian and
because of this X was able to escape. What are the crimes
committed by X, Y, and the custodian?
A: X, a prisoner convicted of final judgment is
liable for evasion of service of sentence under
Article 157 qualified by intimidation. He is a
prisoner convicted by final judgment, his sentence
involves deprivation of liberty, and he evaded service
of sentence by escaping during the term of his
sentence. His penalty is qualified by intimidation
because in order to escape, he pointed the knife at the
custodian.
Y is liable for delivering prisoners from jail
under Article 156 qualified by intimidation.
There is a person confined in a penal institution, X. Y
assisted in the escape, he removes X from the penal
institution. Since the said removal was done by
intimidation for pointing a knife at the custodian
therefore the penalty is qualified.
The custodian is liable for infidelity in the
custody of prisoner by evasion through
negligence under Article 224. The custodian was
negligent in his duty. It was his duty to frisk and bodily
search any visitor. Failure to do so would amount to
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
deliberate non-performance of his duty, not a mere
laxaity.
ARTICLE 158 – EVASION OF SERVICE OF
SENTENCE ON THE OCCASION OF DISORDERS,
CONFLAGRATIONS, EARTHQUAKES, OR OTHER
CALAMITIES
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a convict by final judgment who
is confined in a penal institution.
2. That there is a disorder resulting from –
a. Conflagration
b. Earthquake
c. Explosion
d. Similar catastrophe
e. Mutiny in which he has not participated
3. That the offender evades the service of his sentence
by leaving the penal institution where he is
confined, on the occasion of such disorder or during
the mutiny.
4. That the offender fails to give himself up to the
authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of
a proclamation by the Chief Executive announcing
the passing away of such calamity.
 It is required under Article 158 that the prisoner is
serving his sentence in a penal institution. In Article
157, all the law requires is that the prisoner convicted
of final judgment must be serving a sentence which
involves deprivation of liberty. Therefore, a person
sentenced with Destierro can commit violation of
evasion of service of sentence under Article 157 but not
158 because the law requires that he must be behind
bars.
 In this kind of evasion of service of sentence under Art
158, the crime will arise not upon the act of leaving the
penal institution but upon the convict’s failure to
return/to give himself to the proper authorities within
48 hours. That is only when the crime will arise.
Q: X was convicted of final judgment and was serving his
sentence in a penal institution. There was a strong
earthquake. He left the penal institution and stayed at his
mother’s home. After two days, he saw on television the
president announcing the passing away of earthquake.
Despite such knowledge, he did not return. What is the
crime committed?
A: X will be charged of violation of Article 158
or evasion of service of sentence in times of
disorder.
In case of conviction, the penalty that will be
imposed on him will be equivalent to 1/5 of the
41 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
remainder of his original sentence but in no case to
exceed six months.
Q: What if there was this earthquake, X was a prisoner
convicted by final judgment. Everything was shaking and
because of the earthquake, X escaped the penal institution.
He went to the house of his mother. That night while
watching the television, he saw the president
announced/declared that the calamity had already
ceased/passed away. Within 48hrs, he returned. What is
the effect on his criminal liability?
A: If the said convict escaped and returned to the
proper authorities within 48hrs, there shall be a credit
or a deduction from his sentence. There is 1/5
deduction/credit from his sentence. Under Art
98 this is special time allowance for loyalty. He was too
loyal to the government that even if he already left the
penal institution he still returned; such kind of loyalty
must be rewarded.
Q: What if 48 hrs had lapsed, still he did not return. What
is the effect of his criminal liability?
A: There will be an additional penalty imposed
on him which is 1/5 on the basis of the remainder of
his sentence but note that it shall not exceed six
months.
Q: There was this earthquake, everything was shaking. He
just hid under the table. He did not leave the penal
institution. He was so loyal to the government that he did
not even think to leave. Will he be given credit?
A: Yes. RA 10592: based on this amendment, if the
prisoner, in times of disaster or calamity, stayed in the
prison, he did not leave, there is a greater deduction,
he is given 2/5 deduction from the term of his
sentence because he is more loyal because he did not
leave the penal institution despite the disorder or
calamity.
Q: What if the prisoner is a mere detention prisoner? There
was an earthquake and all the detention prisoners in the
city jail left. Two days after leaving, X heard that the
president announced that the earthquake had lapsed. The
President then announced that the prisoners must give
themselves up. X followed. Within 48 hours, he returned.
What is the effect on his criminal liability?
A: Article 98 in relation to Article 158 had already
been amended by RA 10592. Based on this
amendment, if a prisoner undergoing a preventive
imprisonment, left the penal institution in times of
calamities and returned within 48 hours, he will have
the same benefit. 1/5 deduction from the term of his
sentence in case he is convicted.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Q: What if he did not leave? What is the effect?
A: Likewise, by the amendment of RA 10592, such
detention prisoner shall be given a deduction of 2/5
from the term of his sentence in case he is convicted.
 This benefit of Special Allowance for loyalty will apply
not only to a prisoner convicted by final judgment but
also to a mere detention prisoner. They will have the
same deduction. 1/5 if they left and returned. 2/5 if
they did not leave.
 Remember that Article 158 will only apply to a prisoner
convicted by final judgment and not to a detention
prisoner because only the benefit will apply to him.
Insofar as evasion of service of sentence is concerned,
it shall only be applied against a prisoner convicted by
final judgment.
Q: X is merely a detention prisoner in a penal institution.
There was a calamity so he left. But despite the lapse of 48
hours since the proclamation of the president of the passing
away of such calamity, he failed to return. The police found
him two years later and arrested him. Can he be charged
under Article 158?
A: No because he is not yet a prisoner convicted by
final judgment. The benefit only applies but the
violation of Article 158 will not apply.
ARTICLE 159 – EVASION OF SERVICE OF
SENTENCE BY VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL
PARDON
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender was a convict
2. He was granted a conditional pardon by the Chief
Executive
3. He violated any of the conditions of such pardon
TWO KINDS OF PARDON:
1. Absolute Pardon which totally extinguishes the
criminal liability
2. Conditional Pardon which partially extinguishes
criminal liability.
 Conditional Pardon is said to only partially
extinguish criminal liability because the said
pardon is subject to strict terms and
conditions. Therefore, there must be an
acceptance in the part of the prisoner granted
pardon. The moment he accepts the
conditional pardon, it means it is incumbent
upon him to comply to all of the strict
conditions. The moment he violate any of the
terms and conditions he commits evasion of
service of sentence because it shows that he
just accepted the conditional pardon so as to
free himself from taking place behind bars.
42 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

 Is violation of conditional pardon a substantive

offense or not?
 It depends. If you will look at Art 159, there
are 2 situations.
 Under Art 159, if the penalty remitted by the
grant of pardon does not exceed 6yrs, the
moment he violates any of the conditional
pardon, there is a new penalty imposed upon
him that is prision correccional minimum 6
months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months. A
new penalty is imposed on him therefore in
this case, violation of the conditional pardon
is a substantive offense because a new penalty
is imposed on him.
 BUT on the second part of Art 159, if the
penalty remitted is more than 6 years; no new
penalty is imposed on him for having violated
the terms of the pardon. He is only required
to serve the remainder of the sentence. In this
case, violation of the conditional pardon is not
a substantive offense because there is no new
penalty imposed for the commission of the
crime.

ARTICLE 160 – COMMISSION OF ANOTHER

CRIME DURING SERVICE OF PENALTY IMPOSED
FOR ANOTHER PREVIOUS OFFENSE
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender was already convicted by final
judgment of one offense.
2. He committed a new felony before beginning to
serve such sentence or while serving the same.

 Who is a quasi-recidivist?
 A quasi-recidivist is any person who shall commit
a felony after having been convicted by final
judgment before serving his sentence or while
serving his sentence.

 Under Article 160 it is stated that the maximum

penalty prescribed by law shall be imposed therefore it
is a special aggravating circumstance.
 Article 160 is a misplaced article because book 2 is
about felonies and Article 160 is a special aggravating
circumstance.

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 43 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
TITLE FOUR
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST
(Articles 161 – 189)
ARTICLE 161 – COUNTERFEITING THE GREAT
SEAL OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, FORGING THE
SIGNATURE OR STAMP OF THE CHIEF
EXECUTIVE
ACTS PUNISHED:
I. Forging the Great Seal of the Government of the
Philippines.
II. Forging the signature of the President.
III. Forging the stamp of the President.
 Art 161 punishes the person who forges the great seal
of the Philippines, signature of the chief executive and
forging the stamp of the chief executive.
 Art 161 is the crime when the person is the one who
committed the forgery, but if the offender is not the
one who forges the great seal, signature but he knows
that the document contain a forge stamp, signature of
the President and despite such knowledge that it was a
forgery he makes use of the same, liability is under 162.
ARTICLE 162 – USING FORGED SIGNATURE OR
COUNTERFEIT SEAL OR STAMP (Art 162)
ELEMENTS:
1. That the Great Seal of the Republic was
counterfeited or the signature or stamp of the Chief
Executive was forged by another person.
2. That the offender knew of the counterfeiting or
forgery.
3. That he used the counterfeit seal or forged signature
or stamp.
 Art 162 punishes the person who, despite knowledge of
the forged signature, stamp, or great seal of the
Republic of the Philippines still he makes use of the
same document.
Q: In an official document, the signature of the President
was forged by A then it was given to B. B knew that it was a
forgery nevertheless he made use of the same. What crime
was committed?
A: A committed a crime under 161. And B
committed a crime under 162.
ARTICLE 163 – MAKING AND IMPORTING AND
UTTERING FALSE COINS
ELEMENTS:
1. That there be false or counterfeited coins
2. That the offender either made, imported or uttered
such coins.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
3. That in case of uttering such false or counterfeited
coins, he connived with the counterfeiters or
importers
PUNISHABLE ACTS:
I. Counterfeiting (imitation of false coins) is
committed by any person who shall imitate a genuine
and authentic coin making it appear that it is a true,
genuine, and authentic coin. The offender copies the
peculiar design of the coin and makes a spurious one
out of it.
 The coins which may be the subject of
counterfeiting may be any coin so long as it is
authentic and genuine. It can be a coin of
present circulation, a vintage coin, a coin of
foreign currency.
II. Importing false coins is committed by any person
who shall bring into the Philippine ports any false and
counterfeited coins. It is not necessary for the offender
to be liable that he shall circulate the false coins
because there is a third act of uttering false coins.
III. Uttering false coins is committed by any person
who shall circulate, give away to another, pass from
one person to another any counterfeited or false coins.
Q: A is in possession of a coin which was of legal tender
during the time of Marcos in 1972. It was a proven genuine
coin. He copied the said coin and made a spurious one out
of it. Is he liable under Art 163?
A: Yes he is liable for making and importing and
uttering false coins under Article 163.
Q: What if while he was in possession of the said coin; he
took out a part of the metal content of the said coin. Can he
be liable for Mutilation of coins under Art 164?
A: No, he cannot because in Art 164 or mutilation of
coins, it is necessary that the coin subject of mutilation
must be of legal tender. It must be in present currency
because otherwise, it cannot be said that the public has
been deceived.
ARTICLE 164 – MUTILATION OF COINS
ACTS PUNISHED:
I. Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with the further
requirement that there be intent to damage or to
defraud another.
II. Importing or uttering such mutilated coins, with the
further requirement that there must be connivance
with the mutilator or importer in case of uttering.
Mutilation is the act of taking off a part of the metal
content by filing it or substituting it for another metal of
inferior quality. The offender gathers the metal dust that he
44 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
has taken off from the said coin. While the offender took
out a part of the metal coin, he is in effect diminishing the
intrinsic value of the said coin therefore who would be
given the said coin would be deceived of the this crime
hence a crime in violation of public interest is committed.
 The crime would only apply if the coin mutilated is
one which is in present circulation or currency. It
does not apply if the coin is an old coin or coin of
foreign currency. This is because if the coin is old
and vintage or of foreign currency, even if a part of
metal was scrapped off, the public will not be
deceived because it is not used as a medium of
exchange.
Q: There were 3 children/adults. They were playing kara-
krus. So they toss the coin, however before doing that, they
would scratch the coin on the steel therefore the metal
content of the coin is diminished. Can they be held liable
under Art 164?
A: No. because there was no intent to gather the metal
dust of the said coin.
 Can they be held liable of any crime?
 Yes. They can be held liable under PD
247
 PD 247 punishes any person who willfully or
knowingly defaces, mutilates, tears, burns or destroys
any currency notes or coins issued by the
BangkoSentralngPilipinas.
 In case of violation of PD 247 it is not required that
there is intent to mutilate on the part of the offender. It
is not required that the offender has the intent to
gather the metal dust of the coin although these are
required under Art 164.
Q: In a P 1000.00 bill, a person put his cell phone no. on it.
Is he liable under PD 247?
A: Yes he is liable under PD 247.
 But PD 247 is akin to a dead law because no one has
been prosecuted by it.
ARTICLE 165 – SELLING OF FALSE OR
MUTILATED COIN, WITHOUT CONNIVANCE
ACTS PUNISHED:
I. Possession of coin, counterfeited or mutilated by
another person, with intent to utter the same, knowing
that it is false or mutilated.
ELEMENTS:
1. Possession,
2. With intent to utter, and
3. Knowledge
 Under the first act, the offender is in
possession of the false, mutilated,
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
counterfeited coin. It is another person who
counterfeited the coin. The offender is only in
possession of it but in order for him to be held
liable; he must have the knowledge that the
coin is counterfeited or mutilated and despite
having such knowledge; he has the intent to
utter, circulate, pass away, to give away to
another the said coin. Possession includes
actual and constructive possession.
II. Actually uttering such false or mutilated coin knowing
the same to be false or mutilated.
ELEMENTS:
1. Actually uttering, and
2. Knowledge.
 In the second act it is the act of actually
circulating or uttering the counterfeited coin
despite knowledge that it is counterfeited or
mutilated.
Q: What if A is under surveillance, reports came to the
police that he had been circulating false coins. A went to the
bakery store, he bought bread worth P 50.00. He gave the
store owner 5 P 10.00 counterfeited coins. Thereafter, after
giving the counterfeited coins, he immediately left. The
police arrived and A was gone and it was the owner of the
store who is left. The police officer asked the owner of the
store to open the cash bin. There they saw the 5 P 10.00
coins which were counterfeited. They arrested the owner of
the store. Is the owner of the store liable under Art 165?
A: No he is not liable of selling of false coins or
mutilated coins, without connivance under
Article 165. First, he was caught in possession.
 Was there possession?
 Yes. The counterfeited coins were found
in his cash drawer. Possession does not
only mean physical or actual possession.
Possession means constructive
possession which means that the
counterfeited or mutilated coins are in
his control and custody. Therefore the
first element of possession is present.
 Was there intent to utter the counterfeited coins
on the part of the said owner?
 Yes. The fact that he placed it in the cash
drawer means he can use it to buy
another thing or as a change to the
people who will buy from his bakery
therefore circulation has a way from one
person to another. Therefore the second
element is also present.
 How about the third element of knowledge on his
part the coin was counterfeited?
45 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 The third element is absent evidently
based on the facts that the store owner
has no knowledge that the coins are
counterfeited. In fact he gave bread
worth P 50.00. He was also deceived. If
he had only known that the coins were
counterfeited, he would not have given
bread worth P 50.00.
Therefore, he may not be held liable
because also he is in possession, and he
has the intent to utter the coins; he does
not have the knowledge that the said
coins were counterfeited.
ARTICLE 166 – FORGING TREASURY OR BANK
NOTES OR OTHER DOCUMENTS PAYABLE TO
BEARER; IMPORTING, AND UTTERING SUCH
FALSE OR FORGED NOTES AND DOCUMENTS
ACTS PUNISHED:
I. Forging or falsification of treasury or bank notes or
other documents payable to bearer.
II. Importation of such false or forged obligations or
notes.
III. Uttering of such false or forged obligations or notes in
connivance with the forgers or importers.
ARTICLE 167 – COUNTERFEITING, IMPORTING,
AND UTTERING INSTRUMENTS NOT PAYABLE
TO BEARER
ELEMENTS:
1. That there be an instrument payable to order or
other document of credit not payable to bearer.
2. That the offender either forged, imported or uttered
such instrument.
3. That in case of uttering, he connived with the forger
or importer.
ARTICLE 168 – ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND USE
OF FALSE TREASURY OR BANK NOTES AND
OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF CREDIT
ELEMENTS:
1. That any treasury or bank note or certificate or other
obligation and security payable to bearer, or any
instrument payable to order or other document of
credit not payable to bearer is forged or falsified by
another person.
2. That the offender knows that any of those
instruments is forged or falsified.
3. That he performs any of these acts –
a. Using any of such forged or falsified
instruments; or
b. Possessing with intent to use any of such
forged or falsified instruments.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
An instrument is payable to bearer when it can be
transferred by mere delivery.
e.g. Check payable to cash. Whoever is in
possession of the said check can come to the bank.
It can be transferred by mere delivery.
On the other hand a check is payable to order where it
can be transferred by mere delivery when there is an
endorsement coming from the person named or specified
therein. It is an instrument payable to the order of a specific
person or his order.
e.g. Payable to the order of Charmaine. This
cannot be transferred from one person to another
without an order coming from Charmaine.
ARTICLE 169 – HOW FORGERY IS COMMITTED:
1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or any
instrument payable to bearer or to order mentioned
therein, the appearance of a true and genuine
document.
2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering
by any means the figures, letters, words, or sign
contained therein.
 If what has been falsified is a coin, you call it
counterfeiting.
 If it is the stamp, seal or signature of the President,
you call it forging.
 If it is treasury or bank notes, it is considered as
forging.
 It is a document, you call it falsification.
FALSIFICATION (ART 170, 171, 172)
 In case of FALSIFICATION, to amount to falsification,
it is necessary that the writing that is falsified must be
a document in a legal sense of the word – one
which is capable of making rights and/or extinguishing
an obligation. Therefore, it must be complete in itself
so that it would be sufficient to convey a particular
meaning, it must be susceptible of becoming evidence
of the facts stated therein.
 If a person is found is in possession of fake and unfilled
out forms, (e.g. unfilled out forms of driver’s license,
resident certificate, etc) such person cannot be held
liable for falsification. Falsification of mere forms does
not amount to falsification of a public document.
Because the said form is not yet a document in the
legal sense of the word, it is not yet complete in itself –
it has no name, no address – an unfilled-out/up form.
It is not falsification. It is not susceptible for becoming
evidence because there is no fact has been stated. The
crime committed would be Article 176 or possession of
instruments or implements which may be used for
falsification but not yet falsification.
46 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Q: So what if A was found outside the building of the LTO
office. He was carrying falsified unfilled-out/up forms of
driver’s license. It was distinct, it was falsified, it was not
the real driver’s license form. He was arrested by the NBI.
Can he be held liable for falsification of a public document?
A: NO. Because what he is carrying is only an unfilled-
out form. It is not yet complete in itself. It is not yet
capable of creating rights or extinguishing an
obligation. It is not yet susceptible of evidence of the
facts stated thereon.
Q: So what crime if any was committed by A?
A: A merely committed violation of Article 176 – that is
mere possession of instrument or implements for
falsification, but not yet falsification of a public
document.
Four types of documents which may be falsified:
1. PUBLIC DOCUMENT – a document which is issued
by a notary public or competent public officer with
the solemnities required by law.
2. OFFICIAL DOCUMENT – a document issued by a
public official in the exercise of his official functions.
3. COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT – any document
defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce or
any other mercantile law.
4. PRIVATE DOCUMENT – a document, a deed or
instrument executed by a private person without the
intervention of the notary public of any other person
legally authorized, by which document some
disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced or set
forth.
All official documents are public documents, but
not all public documents are considered official
documents. Before a public document may be considered
as an official document, it is necessary that it shall be issued
by a public officer in the exercise of his official functions.
There is a law that requires a public officer to issue the said
public document, then it becomes an official document.
A private document may become public or official
document if the said private document is submitted to a
government office and the same shall be released by the
custodian of the said office, it is no longer a private
document but a public document, an official document.
A PRIVATE DOCUMENT, one which has been executed by
a private person, if there is no intervention of public
official. A private document, however, even though
executed by a private person without the intervention of a
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
notary public or a legally authorized person, can also
become a public document. That is when the said private
document is submitted to the public officer and it becomes
part of the public records. The moment the said private
document becomes part of the public records, it is now a
public document and when it is issued and it is falsified,
what is falsified is a public document and no more a private
document.
It is necessary to distinguish the kind of document that is
being falsified - whether it is a public, official, commercial
or private because of the different effects.
If what has been falsified is a PUBLIC, OFFICIAL OR
COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT, damage or intent to cause
damage to the offended party or to any other person is not
an element.
On the other hand, if what has been falsified is a PRIVATE
DOCUMENT, for the crime to arise, it is necessary that
there must be damage or at least, intent to cause damage to
the private offended party or to any other party.
If what has been falsified is a PUBLIC OR OFFICIAL
DOCUMENT, it is not necessary that there be damage or
intent to cause damage. Because a public document – an
official document - is presumed authentic and legal. It is
presumed to be “prima facie evidence” of the facts stated
therein. As such, the moment it is falsified, the crime will
immediately arise, without need that there be damage on
the part of the offended party. Because in Falsification of a
Public Document, what has been violated is the
PERVERSION OF TRUTH being solemnly proclaimed by
the said document. Hence DAMAGE IS NOT AN
ELEMENT.
ARTICLE 171 – FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC
OFFICER, EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY OR
ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer, employee, notary
public or an ecclesiastical minister.
2. He takes advantage of his official position.
 The offender is said to have taken advantage
of his position or office when:
a. He has the duty to make or prepare or
to otherwise intervene in the
preparation of the document; or
b. He has the official custody of the
document which he falsifies
3. That the said offender falsifies a document by
committing any of the following modes stated
therein:
47 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
a. By counterfeiting or imitating any
handwriting, signature or rubric.
b. Causing it to appear that persons
have participated in any act or
proceeding when they did not in fact
so participate.
c. Attributing to persons who have
participated in an act or proceeding
statement other than those in fact
made by them
d. Making untruthful statements in a
narration of facts
e. Altering true dates
f. Making any alteration or
intercalation in a genuine document
which changes its meaning
g. Issuing in authenticated form a
document purporting to be a copy of
any original document when no such
original exists or including in such a
copy a statement contrary to or
different from that of the genuine
original
h. Intercalating any instrument or note
relative to the issuance thereof in a
protocol, registry or official book.
4. In case the offender is an ecclesiastical minister, the
act of falsification is committed with respect to any
record or document of such character that the
falsification may affect the civil status of persons.
First element: The offender is a public officer, employee,
notary public or an ecclesiastical minister.
 If the offender is an ecclesiastical minister, for him
to be liable under Article 171, it is necessary that
the document that he falsifies must affect the civil
status of a person.
 If the document falsified by an ecclesiastical
minister will not affect the civil status of a person,
he is still liable for falsification, but not under Art.
171, rather under Art. 172.
 So, a priest falsified the communion certificates of
one of the students/pupils receiving the first
communion, the crime committed is falsification
under Art. 172, not under Art. 171 because a
certificate of communion will not affect the civil
status of the said child.
Second element: He takes advantage of his official
position.
 It requires that the offender takes advantage of his
official position.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 The offender is said to have taken advantage of his
position or office when:
a. He has the duty to make or prepare or to
otherwise intervene in the preparation of the
document; or
b. He has the official custody of the document
which he falsifies
Third element: That the said offender falsifies a
document by committing any of the following modes stated
therein:
 If you will look at Art. 171, it does not state the
kind of document that has been falsified, it may
not be stated because it necessarily follows that
the document falsified is a public or official
document because the offender is public officer or
employee or notary public. Therefore necessarily,
the document being falsified in Art. 171 is a public
official or official document.
Art. 171 provides for the DIFFERENT ACTS OF
FALSIFICATION. These acts of falsification are also
applicable in Art. 172:
I. BY COUNTERFEITING OR IMITATING ANY
HANDWRITING, SIGNATURE OR RUBRIC.
 So what is COUNTERFEITING?
 The offender is said to have counterfeited
a signature, handwriting or rubric if he
has imitated an official handwriting,
signature or rubric.
 So there is an original handwriting or
signature and the offender imitiated or
copied the said original handwriting or
signature.
 Is COUNTERFEITING the same as
FEIGNING?
 Feigning a handwriting, signature or
rubric is NOT THE SAME as
counterfeiting. When you say
FEIGNING, it means “simulating” a
handwriting, signature or rubric. That is,
making a handwriting, signature or
rubric out of nothing which does not
exist. It is an imaginable, an inexistent
handwriting, signature or rubric.
II. CAUSING IT TO APPEAR THAT PERSONS HAVE
PARTICIPATED IN ANY ACT OR PROCEEDING
WHEN THEY DID NOT IN FACT SO PARTICIPATE.
Q: What if a notary public issued, he prepared or issued an
extrajudicial settlement of an estate. In the said
extrajudicial settlement of an estate, it is stated that all the
48 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
heirs of a certain decedent can already agree by themselves
to partition the property. So it is an extrajudicial settlement
of an estate and in it, the notary public made it appear that
all the 12 heirs of the decedent had participated, but un
truth and in fact, two of the heirs where in another country
and they did not participate in the execution of this
extrajudicial settlement of the estate. Is the notary public
liable?
A: YES. The notary public is LIABLE under the
second act (causing it to appear that persons
have participated in any act or proceeding
when they did not in fact so participate).He
caused it to appear that A and B participated in the
execution of the extrajudicial settlement of the estate,
when they did not in fact so participate.
III. ATTRIBUTING TO PERSONS WHO HAVE
PARTICIPATED IN AN ACT OR PROCEEDING
STATEMENT OTHER THAN THOSE IN FACT MADE
BY THEM
 So under the third act, persons participated in
an act or proceeding, they made statements
therein, however, the offender in a document
may appear that these persons have made
certain statements which were not in fact
made by them.
Q: So what if in the Sangguniang Panglungsod, an
ordinance was being passed. There was a votation, majority
of the councilors voted, two of the councilors dissented and
their vote were NO. They just stated that they were voting
in the negative, but, they did not give any explanation for
their dissent or the vote of NO. However, in the minutes
appeared by the Sangguniang Secretary, the latter made it
appear that the two councilors made statements that they
voted NO because the said ordinance is contrary to law. Is
the said secretary liable for falsification?
A: YES. He is a public officer. He is the one who
prepared the minutes for the SangguniangPanglungsod
and he made it appear that the 2 councilors stated that
the said ordinance is contrary to law and in truth and
fact, they did not made those statements. So the said
secretary is liable for falsification.
IV. MAKING UNTRUTHFUL STATEMENTS IN A
NARRATION OF FACTS
 The evidence of this act of falsification
requires:
i. That the offender makes in a document
untruthful statement in a narration of
facts;
ii. That he has legal obligation to disclose
the truth of the facts narrated by him
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
iii. The facts narrated by the offender are
absolutely false
iv. The untruthful narration must be such
as to effect the integrity of the
document and that the offender does
so with the intent to injure or prejudice
another person
 It is necessary that the intention of the
intention of the offender must be to INJURE
ANOTHER PERSON.
 In case of making false statements in a
narration of facts, it is necessary that the
offender must have the legal obligation to
disclose the truth in the said narration of
facts.
 Absence of such legal obligation, then it
cannot be said that he is liable for
falsification.
 When you say legal obligation, there is a law
which requires him to state nothing but the
truth in the said document.
Q: So what if the offender, a public officer, falsified the
statement in his residence certificate or community tax
certificate. Although he stated his true name, he did not
state his address, citizenship, etc. So makes false statement
of facts in his residence certificate or community tax
certificate, otherwise known as cedula. So he was charged
with falsification. He contended that there is no law which
requires him to state the truth in his residence certificate. Is
his contention correct?
A: His contention is wrong. According to a ruling in
the Supreme Court, if it is a residence certificate or
community tax certificate, there need not be a law
which requires a person to state the truth in the said
residence certificate, it is inherent in the kind of
document. Since it is a residence certificate or cedula,
it is inherent that in this document, nothing but the
truth must be stated – no falsity. Because it requires
identification.
V. ALTERING TRUE DATES
 It is necessary that what has been altered
must be a true date and in the alteration of
the said true date, the document will no
longer have any effect.
VI. MAKING ANY ALTERATION OR INTERCALATION
IN A GENUINE DOCUMENT WHICH CHANGES ITS
MEANING
TWO ACTS:
i. The offender makes an alteration
49 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
ii. The offender makes an intercalation in a
genuine document which changes its meaning
Alteration – changes in a document
Intercalation – there must be some insertion
made in the said document, in a genuine
document that changed the meaning of the said
document
VII. ISSUING IN AUTHENTICATED FORM A by a PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL, is just the same
DOCUMENT PURPORTING TO BE A COPY OF ANY
ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WHEN NO SUCH
ORIGINAL EXISTS OR INCLUDING IN SUCH A
COPY A STATEMENT CONTRARY TO OR
DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF THE GENUINE
ORIGINAL
TWO ACTS PUNISHED:
1. The offender issued in an authenticated form a
document purporting to be an authenticated
copy of an original document, but no such
original exists.
2. By including such copy a statement contrary to
or different from a genuine original.
Q: What if a notary public issued a deed of absolute sale
and he said that it is an original copy of a deed of absolute
sale between A and B. A selling his property to B, but in
truth and in fact, no such deed of absolute sale was
executed between A and B. Is the notary public liable?
A: YES. He is liable under the first act of falsification in
the seventh act of the 3rd element in Art. 171.
Q: What if a civil registrar issued a certificate of live birth.
So here comes A. A was asking that he should be given a
certified copy of a certificate of live birth. In the said
certificate of live birth issued by the said civil registrar,
there was a statement that A was an illegitimate child, but III.
in the original copy of the certificate of live birth submitted
to the office of the Office of the Civil Registrar, there was no
such statement. Is the civil registrar liable?
A: YES. He is liable under the second act of
falsification in the seventh act of the 3rd element in Art.
171. Because he included in the said copy a statement
contrary to or different from that of a genuine original.
VIII. INTERCALATING ANY INSTRUMENT OR NOTE
RELATIVE TO THE ISSUANCE THEREOF IN A
PROTOCOL, REGISTRY OR OFFICIAL BOOK.
Intercalation – making any insertion in any
instrument or note
So these acts, under ARTICLE 171, are also the very same
acts punished under Art. 172.
III.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
ARTICLE 172 – FALSIFICATION BY PRIVATE
INDIVIDUALS AND USE OF FALSIFIED
DOCUMENTS
THREE PUNISHABLE ACTS:
I. Falsification of a public, official or commercial
document by a private individual
 So in case of FALSIFICATION OF A PUBLIC,
OFFICIAL OR COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT
as ARTICLE 171 – they only differ in that in
Art. 171, the offender is a public officer or
employee.
 In ARTICLE 172, yes, the document falsified
is a public, official or commercial document,
but, the offender is a private individual even
if the offender is a private individual, since
the document falsified is a public, official or
commercial document, DAMAGE OR
INTENT TO CAUSE DAMAGE IS NOT AN
ELEMENT.
II. Falsification of private document by any
person
 The document falsified is a PRIVATE
DOCUMENT. The offender is any person. He
can be a private individual, he can be a private
officer or employee for as long as the
document falsified is a private document, it
necessary that there must be damage caused
to a third person or at least the intention of
the offender is to CAUSE DAMAGE.
 Absence of damage or intent to cause damage,
then falsification of a private document will
not arise.
Use of falsified document
 A document has been falsified and the
offender uses the said document.
 If the falsified document is used in a
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING, again, DAMAGE
or INTENT TO CAUSE DAMAGE is NOT AN
ELEMENT because it is a judicial proceeding.
 But if the said falsified document is used in
any other transaction, this time, damage or
intent to cause damage is an ELEMENT.
ARTICLE 173 – FALSIFICATION OF WIRELESS
TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE MESSAGES
PUNISHABLE ACTS:
I. Uttering fictitious, wireless, telegraph or telephone
message
II. Falsifying wireless, telegraph or telephone message
Using such falsified message
50 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 If the act punished is uttering fictitious, wireless,
telegraph or telephone messages and falsifying
wireless, telegraph or telephone messages, note that
these can only be committed by a person working in a
department, agency or corporation which is engaged
in a business of receiving and sending wireless,
telegraph and telephone messages.
 Under the third act – using falsified wireless,
telegraph or telephone messages, this time, it can be
committed by any person.
Articles 174 and 175 refer to the persons who shall
be criminally liable in case of falsified document.
ARTICLE 174 – FALSE MEDICAL CERTIFICATES,
FALSE CERTIFICATES OF MERIT OR SERVICE,
ETC
 Under Art. 174, if the offender is a PHYSICIAN OR
SURGEON who issues a false medical certificate in the
practice of his profession, he becomes liable under Art.
174.
 Likewise, Art. 174 punishes a PUBLIC OFFICER who
issues a false certificate of merit, service or good
conduct, moral character, etc.
 And, under Art. 174, ANY PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL who
falsifies a medical certificate or certificate of merit or
service or good conduct shall be also criminally liable.
 The offender is the person who falsifies, issues the
false medical certificate or certificate or merit.
 If the offender is not the falsifier, but he knows that the
said document is falsified and he makes use of the
same, his liability is under Art. 175.
ARTICLE 175 – USING FALSE CERTIFICATE
 Under Art. 175, the offender knows that the medical
certificate or certificate of merit has been falsified and
despite that knowledge, he makes use of the same.
Q: So what if the defense counsel is about to present his
witness. The witness is a person who was present in the
scene of the crime who actually saw the incident – that is
according to the defense counsel. However, on the date of
the said hearing, the said witness failed to appear, the
defense counsel said to the judge: “Your Honor, my witness
is in the hospital, he cannot even get out of bed. He is very,
very sick.” The judge, however, was doubtful of the said
manifestation of the defense counsel and so the judge told
the defense counsel: “Okay, let him appear in the next
hearing and make sure that he brings with him a medical
certificate to show that indeed he can testify in this hearing.
With that, the defense counsel informed the witness of the
said order of the court. The said witness was in that time,
healthy, it is just that he was too afraid to testify. However,
in the next hearing, he is deemed required to produce a
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
medical certificate showing that he was bedridden. And so,
he went to his medical doctor. He asked the doctor to issue
a medical certificate saying that he was very, very sick and
that he could not get out of bed on the said date. The said
doctor issued the said medical certificate and then his
witness appeared on the second hearing and presented him
to the court. It was submitted to the records of the court.
What crime or crimes is/are committed by doctor or the
physician as well as by the witness?
A: The PHYSICIAN is liable under Art. 174. He issues a
false medical certificate in the exercise or in the
practice of his profession.
On the other hand, the WITNESS, despite knowledge
that it is a falsified medical certificate, still made use of
the same and he presented and submitted it to the
court.
ARTICLE 176 – MANUFACTURING AND
POSSESSION OF INSTRUMENTS OR
IMPLEMENTS FOR FALSIFICATION
 This is the felony that is if a person was found in
possession of unfilled-out forms of driver’s license, he
can be held liable for falsification of a public document
and liable only in Article 176.
 Under Art. 176, what was being punished are:
1. Making or introducing into the Philippines any
stamps, dies, marks or other instruments or
implements for counterfeiting or falsification.
2. Possessing with intent to use the instrument or
implements for counterfeiting or falsification
made in or introduced into the Philippines by
another person.
ARTICLE 177 – USURPATION OF AUTHORITY OR
OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS
I. Usurpation of authority is committed when a
person knowingly and falsely represents himself
to be an officer or agent of any department of the
Philippine government or agency thereof or of a
foreign government.
 The crime will immediately arise from the
mere act of person of knowingly and falsely
representing himself to be an officer or agent
of any department or agency of the
Philippines or of a foreign country. It is not
necessary for the offender to commit any act,
to perform any act. It suffices that he falsely
represents himself to be an officer or agent of
the Philippine government. The crime will
immediately arise. However, the said false
representation, aside from being done
knowingly, must be such that he intended to
be known by such other person or by public as
51 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
a representative or agent of Philippine
government.
II. There is usurpation of official function if any
person performs an act pertaining to a person in
authority or a public officer of the Philippine
Government or of a foreign government or agency
thereof, under pretense of official position, and
without being lawfully entitled to do so.
 It is necessary that the offender performs an
act. Mere representation will not suffice. It is
necessary that he performs an act pertaining
to a person in authority or a public officer of
any department or agency of the Philippine
government or of a foreign government.
 In usurpation of official functions, it is
necessary that the act pertaining to a person
in authority or a public officer must be under
pretense of official position and without being
lawfully entitled to do so.
Q: What if an administrative case was filed against the
mayor before the Office of the Ombudsman. During the
investigation of the case, the Ombudsman preventively
suspended the mayor for a period of six months. The DILG
implemented the suspension order and the vice-mayor was
made the acting mayor. However, upon advice of his
counsel, the suspended mayor began working, began
performing the acts of being a mayor after 90 days of
preventive suspension. That is because according to his
counsel, he can only be suspended for a period of 90 days.
So on the 91st day of his suspension, he again began
assuming the function of a mayor. He signed documents, he
issued memorandum, etc. as the city mayor. Is he liable
under Article 177 for usurpation of official function?
A: Yes, he is liable for usurpation of official
function under Article 177. The reason is that he is
still under preventive suspension. Unless and until it is
lifted by the Ombudsman and the said lifting was
implemented by the DILG, he remains to be a
suspended mayor. And for having acted, for having
performing an act pertaining to the office of a mayor,
he is said to be committed a violation of Article 177,
usurpation of official function.
Q: What if there was heavy traffic. So there was no MMDA
officer or policeman manning the traffic. One of the owners
of the vehicle caught in the traffic alighted from the vehicle
and he manned the traffic to ease the flow of the traffic. The
said man performed an act pertaining to an officer of the
MMDA, pertaining to a traffic enforcer. Is the said man
liable for usurpation of official function?
A: NO. While the man performed however he did not
do so under pretense of official position and without
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
being lawfully entitled to do so. There was no intent on
his part to falsely represent himself as to be in that
position. There was no false pretense of official
position therefore he cannot be held liable under
Article 177 or usurpation of official function because
his act was only done out of pacific (promote peace; to
end a conflict) spirit to help ease the said traffic.
ARTICLE 178 – USING FICTITIOUS NAME AND
CONCEALING TRUE NAME
 Punishes two acts:
I. USING FICTITIOUS NAME
 Committed by any person who shall use a
name other than his real name publicly
for concealing a crime, or evade the
execution of a judgment, or to cause
damage to public interest.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender uses a name other than his
real name
2. That he uses that fictitious name publicly
3. That the purpose of the offender is either:
a. to conceal a crime; or
b. to evade execution of a judgment; or
c. to cause damage to public interest.
II. CONCEALING TRUE NAME
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender conceals—
a. his true name; AND
b. all other personal circumstances
2. That the purpose is only to conceal his
identity
HOW WOULD YOU DISTINGUISH IF THE CRIME
COMMITTED IS USING FICTITIOUS NAME OR
CONCEALING TRUE NAME?
 In case of using fictitious name, the use of a name
other than his real name, is done publicly. There is
the element of publicity. Whereas, in case of
concealing true name, it is not necessary that the
use of another name, concealing his true and real
name must be done publicly.
 Using fictitious name and concealing true name
differ in purposes. In case of using fictitious name,
the purpose is to conceal a crime, evade the
execution of judgment or to cause damage to
public interest. On the other hand, in concealing
true name, the only purpose of the offender is to
conceal his true and real identity.
ANTI-ALIAS LAW
(C.A. No. 142, as amended)
SO RELATED IN ARTICLE 178 IS C.A. 142 AS AMENDED
52 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 What is an alias? What does C.A. 142, as amended,
or the Anti-Alias Law provide?
 According to the SC, an alias is a name or names
use intended to be used by a person publicly and
habitually, usually in business transaction other
than the name registered at birth for the first time
before the local civil registrar.
 Under C.A. 142 as amended, except as pseudonym,
in literary, cinema, television, radio and other
entertainment purposes, and in athletic events
wherein the use of a pseudonym is a normal
practice, no person can use any name other than
his name by which he is registered at birth at the
local civil registrar or by which he is registered by
the Bureau of Immigration upon his entry into the
Philippines, in case of an alien.
 The use of any other name must only be upon
approval by the judicial or competent authority.
 Therefore, no person can use any other name
other than the name by which he is baptized at the
office of the civil registrar in your place other than
the name by which he is recorded in Bureau of
Immigration, if case he is a foreigner coming here
in the Philippines. He can only use his name.
EXCEPT if he is an actor, if he is an athlete, then
he is allowed to use a pseudonym. When he is a
writer of a book, then he is allowed to use a
pseudonym, a pen name other than his real name
because it is a normal practice OR if he files the
use of a substitute name before the court and he is
allowed by judicial or competent authority to use
any other name, then he can also use another
name. But outside these, a person can only use
the name by which he is registered at the office of
civil registrar.
Cesario Ursua v. CA
 The said accused made use of a different name. he
used the name of Oscar Perez in the office of the
Ombudsman as he was trying to get a copy of the
complaint filed against him. It was however
discovered that a case of violation of CA 142 was
filed against him.
 The SC held that he is not criminally liable. The SC
acquitted the accused because according to the SC,
the use of the name Oscar Perez in an isolated
transaction, without any showing, absent an
evidence that henceforth he wanted to be known
by the name of Oscar Perez in not within the
prohibition of CA 142 as amended. There was no
evidence that showed that henceforth he wanted
to be known by that name. There was no showing
that henceforth, he wanted to be called by the said
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
name therefore it cannot be said that Oscar Perez
is an alias of the accused.
People v. Estrada
 In this case, the former president made use of the
name Jose Velarde in signing a trust account. So
he signed a trust account, using the name Jose
Velarde and so he was charged with violation of
CA 142 as amended.
 Again, the SC said, the use by Erap of the name
Jose Velarde in a single, isolated transcation,
without any showing that henceforth he wanted to
be known by such name, is not within the
prohibition of CA 142 as amended. First, it was not
done publicly and was in fact done secretly in the
presence of Laquian and Chua and the said act of
signing does not make it public because these two
are his close friends therefore it was done secretly,
in a discreet manner. Hence, it was not done
publicly. It was also not done habitually. The
element of habituality is not present because there
was no showing that in any other transaction, he
made use of the name Jose Velarde. Hence, he was
also acquitted although convicted by
Sandiganbayan, he was acquitted by the SC.
Q: What if a lawyer was having a massage in a sauna bath
parlor. He did not know that as a front it is a sauna bath
parlor but in truth and in fact, it was a prostitution den. At
the time that he was having this massage service, the police
raided the place because they were able to secure a search
warrant. And among those arrested was the said attorney.
The said attorney was brought to the PNP station and he
was asked of his name, ashamed to reveal his true identity,
his true name, he said that he was Y and did not state that
he was Atty. X. However, when he was asked his residence,
he stated the truth. As of the name of his wife, he stated the
truth. As of the name of his children, he stated the truth. Is
he liable for using fictitious name?
A: He is not liable for using fictitious name.
First, he did not do so publicly. Second, his use of the
name was not done to conceal a crime, to evade the
execution of sentence or to cause damage to public
interest—none of these purposes is present; therefore
he is not liable for using fictitious name.
 Is he liable for concealing true name?
 No, he is not liable for concealing true
name. Although he concealed his real name, Atty.
X, he did not conceal his other personal
circumstances. He divulged his address. He
divulged the name of his wife, the names of his
children; therefore, it cannot be said that he has
the intention to conceal his true identity. In fact,
his true identity can easily be verified just by going
53 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
to the said address; therefore he is not also liable
for concealing true name.
 Is he liable under CA 142, as amended?
 He is also not liable under CA 142, as
amended, because the use of the name Y in a
single transaction, in a single isolated transaction,
without any showing that henceforth he wanted to
be known as Y is not within the prohibition of CA
142, as amended.
ARTICLE 179 – ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORMS AND
INSIGNIA
 Committed by any person who makes use of any
insignia, uniform or dress which pertains to an
office not being held by the offender or to a class
of person of which he is not a member and he
makes use of such insignia, uniform or dress
publicly and improperly.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender makes use of INSIGNIA,
UNIFORM or DRESS
2. That the insignia, uniform or dress pertains to
an office not being held by the offender or to a
class of person of which he is not a member.
3. That the said insignia, uniform or dress is used
publicly and improperly.
 The offender uses the insignia, uniform or dress of an
office not held by him or a by a class of person of which
he is not a member and he used the same publicly and
improperly.
Q: What if a person was wearing a uniform. So he said that
it was a uniform of a certain organization known as H world
but in fact, no such organization ever existed. Is he liable
under Article 179?
A: No, he is not liable of Illegal use of insignia,
uniform or dress Article 179. The reason is that H
world does not belong to any office, doesn’t refer to a
class of persons; therefore, he is not liable under
Article 179.
Q: What if a person made use of a uniform of a prisoner. So
you see a person, he was receiving a holy communion, he
was wearing an orange t-shirt with a big letter P at the back
which means Prisoner. Can he be held liable under Article
179?
A: He is not liable of Illegal use of insignia,
uniform or dress under Article 179. Although he
used the uniform of a prisoner, it is not an office held
by the offender, it is not also a class of persons. When
you say a class of persons of which he is a member, it
refers to a dignified class of persons. He is assuming
that he belongs to the said class of persons. Here, he is
even belittling himself because he was wearing a
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
uniform of a prisoner. Hence, it cannot be said that he
violated Article 179.
FALSE TESTIMONY (ART 180, 181, 182)
 False testimony can either be false testimony in
criminal cases (Articles 180 and 181), false
testimony in civil cases (Article 182) and false
testimony in other cases.
 False testimony in criminal cases can either be: (1)
false testimony against a defendant (Article 180)
and (2) false testimony favorable to defendant
(Article 181).
ARTICLE 180 – FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST A
DEFENDANT
 In a criminal proceeding, the offender-witness
testified falsely against a defendant knowing that
his testimony is false and then the said defendant
is either acquitted or convicted.
ELEMENTS:
1. That there be a criminal proceeding
2. That the offender testifies falsely under oath
against the defendant therein.
3. That the offender who gives false testimony
knows that it is false.
4. That the defendant against whom the false
testimony is given is either acquitted or
convicted in a final judgment. (People v.
Maneja)
ARTICLE 181 – FALSE TESTIMONY FAVORABLE
TO DEFENDANT
 In a criminal proceeding, the offender-witness
testified falsely in favor of the defendant and he
knew that his testimony is indeed false.
 Whether it be a false testimony against or false
testimony in favor of a defendant, it is immaterial
whether the court will consider or not the said false
testimony. The case may be filed.
Q: What if A is being prosecuted for the crime of homicide,
for having killed the victim. So while he is being
prosecuted, the fiscal presented a witness. This witness was
also brought in by the heirs of the victim. The heirs of the
victim said that the witness saw the said act of killing. The
fiscal believed and the fiscal presented the said witness. The
witness however was not present at the scene of the crime
but in his testimony the witness said that he was present at
the scene of the crime and that he actually saw the accused
stabbing the victim to death. The accused, A knew that the
witness was testifying falsely because he knew that at the
scene of the crime, it was only he and the victim who were
present. After trial on the merits, the judge, acquitted the
54 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
said accused A. In other words, the judge did not give
weight to the testimony of the false witness. Can A still file a
case against the false witness?
A:Yes, A can still file a case of false testimony
against the false witness. He can still file a case of
false testimony against the said false witness even of
the court did not consider the said false testimony.
Even if the court did not give any merit on the said
false testimony and acquitted him. The crime will arise
the moment the said offender testified falsely in open
court whether in favor or against a defendant.
Q: What if in the same case, A was being prosecuted for
homicide. Then the prosecution presented the witness. The
witness testified falsely against the defendant saying that he
saw the actual act of killing. After trial on the merits, the
judge convicted the accused, the judge believed the false
testimony and so the judge convicted him. Upon conviction,
within 15 days from the promulgation of judgment, the said
accused, the said convict, filed an appeal before the CA.
While the case was pending before the CA, can the said
accused, the convicted person, already file a case of false
testimony against the false witness who testified against
him?
A: Not yet. Any case would still be a premature
case. In fact, you would not know what court will have
jurisdiction. You would not know if the court that will
have jurisdiction over the false testimony is the RTC or
the MTC because the penalty to be imposed on the
false witness is always dependent on the penalty
imposed on the convict.
 Under Article 180, if the defendant has been
convicted and the penalty imposed is capital
punishment or death then the false witness shall
be imposed with a penalty of reclusion temporal.
If the defendant, upon conviction is imposed with
a penalty of reclusion perpetua and reclusion
temporal, the penalty will be imposed on the false
witness is prision mayor. If the said defendant is
convicted and the penalty imposed on him is any
other afflictive penalty, the penalty to be imposed
on the false witness is prision correcional. On the
other hand, if the penalty imposed on the said
defendant is prision correcional, arresto mayor,
fine or he was acquitted. If he was acquitted, the
penalty to be imposed on the said person who
testified falsely is arresto mayor.
 So in this case, the penalty on the false witness is
always dependent on the penalty to be imposed by
the court on the defendant; therefore, there must
first be a final conviction by final judgment.
 NOTE: if it is an acquittal, the case can be
immediately filed because an acquittal is
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
immediately executory. You cannot appeal an
acquittal. It is immediately executory.
(IN FAVOR)
Q: So the case was filed against A for homicide, here comes
a witness, the witness testified falsely in favor of the
accused. Can the private complainant, the heirs of the
victim, immediately file a case of false testimony against the
witness right after the giving thereof?
A: Yes, because in case of false testimony in favor of
the defendant, the penalty of the false witness is not
dependent on the penalty to be imposed on the said
accused or defendant.
ARTICLE 182 – FALSE TESTIMONY IN CIVIL
CASES
 Right after the giving of the false testimony, the
private complainant or the aggrieved party, can
immediately file a case against the false witness
who testified in favor of the defendant.
ELEMENTS:
1. The testimony must be given in a civil case
2. The testimony must relate to the issues
presented in said case (relative or pertinent)
3. The testimony must be false
4. The false testimony must be given by the
defendant knowing the same to be false.
5. The testimony must be malicious and given
with intent to affect the issues presented in
the said case (U.S. v. Aragon)
 In case of false testimony in a civil case, right after
the giving of the false testimony, the false witness
can be immediately prosecuted in court.
 In order to amount in false testimony in civil
cases, there must be litigation. Take for example a
sum of money, breach of contract. If the false
testimony is given in a special proceeding, for
example, petition for nullity of marriage, petition
for separation, petition for habeas corpus, these
are special proceedings and a false testimony of a
person who testified falsely during this special
proceeding, the case is under Article 183, false
testimony in other proceedings.
ARTICLE 183 – PERJURY
 PERJURY is the willful and deliberate assertion of
falsehood on a material matter made before an officer
duly authorized to receive and administer oath.
ELEMENTS:
1. The accused made a statement under oath or
executed an affidavit upon a material matter
 There are two ways of committing
perjury:
The offender either:
55 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
1. Makes a statement under oath
(he makes a false testimony); or
2. Executes an affidavit on a
material matter (if it is an
affidavit, it is also required
under oath)
2. The said statement under oath or affidavit
was made before a competent officer duly
authorized to receive and administer oath
 In order to amount to perjury, it is
necessary that the said oath must be
given before an officer duly authorized to
receive and administer. Otherwise, it
cannot be considered as perjury because
the essence of perjuryis the
violation of the solemnity of oath.
 If the person who received the oath is not
duly authorized, it cannot be said that
there is a violation of the solemnity of the
oath.
3. That in the said statement or affidavit, the
offender makes a willful and deliberate
assertion of falsehood
 It is necessary for perjury to arise that the
offender deliberately, knowingly
ascertained a falsehood. There was a
deliberate intent on his part; therefore,
good faith is a defense in perjury.
 Perjury likewise cannot be committed out
of mere negligence. It is necessary that
there must be a deliberate intent on his
part to assert a falsity either in the
statement or affidavit.
4. The said statement or affidavit containing
falsity is required by law.
 If it is not required by law then it cannot
be considered as a crime.
Q: What if X made a false statement in a criminal
proceeding, what crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is FALSE TESTIMONY.
Q: A makes a statement in a labor case against B. What
crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is PERJURY.
 If the false statement under oath is made in a judicial
proceeding whether it be a criminal or civil proceeding,
the crime committed is FALSE TESTIMONY. If the
said false statement, however, is made in a non-judicial
proceeding, administrative proceedings, or quasi-
judicial proceedings, then the crime committed is
PERJURY. So if the false testimony or the false
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
statement is made in a labor case, in an administrative
case, in an application for search warrant, during the
preliminary investigation, before the fiscals’ office, the
crime committed is perjury.
Q: What if the offender makes false narration of facts in a
cedula? The offender makes a false narration of facts in a
driver’s license. What crime is committed?
A: FALSIFICATION.
Q: What if the offender makes a false narration of facts in a
statement of assets, liabilities and net worth. So a public
officer filed a statement of assets, liabilities and net worth.
It contains falsities, false narration of facts. What is the
liability?
A: The liability is PERJURY.
WHERE LIES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
FALSIFICATION AND PERJURY?
 In falsification, the document is not required to be
under oath. In case of perjury, the document is
required to be under oath.
HOW ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE OF FALSE
STATEMENT AND PERJURY?
 If the false statement is made in a judicial
proceeding, it is false testimony. If the false
statement is made in a non-judicial proceeding or
administrative proceeding or quasi-judicial
proceeding, it is perjury.
Q: An applicant for the bar filled out an application form
for the bar, there was a statement therein, “Have you ever
been fined or convicted of any crime?” and the answer was
no, however, in truth and in fact, he has already been fined
for the crime of jaywalking. He answered no and then this
application for the bar is required to be under oath. He was
looking for a notary public since it was a Sunday, there was
no office opened so he went to the legal office of his father,
hoping that there was a lawyer there. However, there was
only the janitor and he asked the janitor to sign in the
notary public part and then submitted it to the office of the
bar confidante. Is the said applicant for the bar liable for
perjury or is he liable for falsification?
A: He is liable of FALSIFICATION and not of
perjury because the person who received and
administered the oath is not a confidante officer duly
authorized to receive and administer the oath. He was
a mere janitor and not a notary public. As such, the
crime committed is falsification. Again, the essence of
perjury is the violation of the solemnity of the oath.
Q: A wrote a love letter to the girl that he is pursuing. In
the said love letter, he stated falsities such as “You are the
56 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
only one in my life.” when in truth there were three of
them. He stated “I love you and I miss you” and they were
all falsities. He even asked it to be notarized and sent it to
his third girlfriend. Is he liable for perjury?
A: No, he is not liable for perjury. He is not liable
for perjury because the said love letter is not required
by law. The fourth element requires, to amount to
perjury, the sworn statement under oath or the said
affidavit must be required by law because it is a crime
against public interest not a crime against personal
interest.
Q: What if in a case submitted in a fiscal’s office, so there
was a complaint and attached thereto is a sworn statement.
In the said sworn statement, the witness said that he saw
the accident. He saw the accused bumped the victim.
According to him, at the time, he was watching Saksi, when
suddenly a commotion occurred outside, he ran out of the
window, he saw at that particular time the accused hitting
the said victim with his vehicle and so he saw the accused
that caused the death of the victim. That was his statement
in the affidavit filed to the fiscal’s office. During
investigation, however, it was discovered he was not
watching Saksi, he was watching Bandila, the news
program in ABS-CBN and not the news program in GMA. Is
he liable of perjury?
A: No, he is not liable of perjury. Although it was
under oath, administered by a fiscal, still it is no
perjury because it is not on a material matter.
Whatever it is that he was watching at the time, even if
it is cartoon, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that he
heard the commotion, he ran to the window, and he
saw the accused bumping the victim. He saw that it
was the accused who killed the victim and that it was
the car of the accused that hit the victim. Only then, it
will be considered as perjury but whatever he was
watching, it was immaterial. It was not on a material
matter; therefore it will not amount to perjury.
SUBORNATION OF PERJURY is committed by a
person who knowingly and willfully procures another to
swear falsely and the witness suborned does testify under
the circumstances rendering him guilty of perjury.
NOTE: Subornation of perjury is not expressly penalized in
RPC; but the direct induction of a person by another to
commit perjury may be punished under Article 183 in
relation to Article 7, meaning, the crime is plain perjury but
the one inducing another will be liable as principal by
inducement and the one who testified as principal by direct
participation.
ARTICLE 184 – OFFERING FALSE TESTIMONY IN
EVIDENCE
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 Committed by any person who shall offer in evidence
any false testimony or any false witness either in a
judicial proceeding or in any official proceeding.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender offered in evidence a false witness
or false testimony.
2. The offender knew the witness or the testimony
was false.
3. The offer was made in a judicial or official
proceeding.
 Is this the same as subornation of perjury?
 Subornation of perjury is committed by any
person who procures a false witness in order
to perjures himself and testify falsely in a
case. There is no such crime as
subornation of perjury under the present
RPC because we already have Article 184.
 Article 184 is committed when any person
who procures a witness and offers him as
evidence in court can be held liable under
Article 184 or he can be held liable as a
principal by inducement in false testimony or
as a principal by inducement in perjury;
therefore subornation of perjury is not
necessary and it is not a crime under
Philippine jurisdiction, under the RPC.
ARTICLE 185 – MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC
AUCTIONS
 There are two acts punishable under Article 185
I. SOLICITING GIFT OR PROMISE
 By soliciting any gift or promise as a
consideration for refraining from taking
part in any public auction.
 The mere act of soliciting any gift or
promise, so that he will refrain from
taking part of the public auction, will
already give rise to the crime. It is not
necessary that he actually received the
gift, it is not necessary that he actually
will not participate in the said auction.
ELEMENTS:
1. There be a public auction.
2. The accused solicited any gift or a
promise from any of the bidders.
3. That such gift or promise was the
consideration for his refraining from
taking part in that public auction.
4. The accused had the intent to cause
the reduction of the price of the
thing auctioned.
II. ATTEMPTING TO CAUSE BIDDERS TO
STAY AWAY
57 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 By attempting to cause bidders to stay
away from an auction by threats, gifts,
promises or any other artifice
 The mere attempt to cause bidders not to
participate in the said public auction by
threats, gifts or promise will already give
rise to the crime. It is not necessary that
the bidders would not actually
participate.
ELEMENTS:
1. There be a public auction
2. The accused attempted to cause the
bidders to stay away from that public
auction.
3. It was done by threats, gifts, promises
or any other artifice.
4. The accused had the intent to cause
the reduction of the price of the
thing auctioned.
 In order to be liable for this crime, whether it be the act
of solicitation or the act of attempting to cause bidders
to stay away from public auction, it is necessary that
the intention of the offender is to cause the reduction
of the price of the thing which is the subject of
the public auction. The acts complained of must be
done for the purpose of reducing the price of the
thing being auctioned.
 In public auction, it is necessary that the public must
be able to get the best price for the thing being
auctioned. If there will be less bidders, less participants
in the said public auction, then the public will not be
able to get the best price for the thing subject of the
public auction. Here, if the non-participation of the
other bidders was caused by a person, then he is liable
under Article 185. Again, the intention of the offender
is to cause the reduction of the price of the thing which
is the subject of the public auction.
ARTICLE 186 – MONOPOLIES AND
COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE
 Acts punished:
I. COMBINATION TO PREVENT FREE
COMPETITION IN THE MARKET
 This is committed by any person who
shall enter into any contract or
agreement or taking part in any
combination whether in the form of trust
or otherwise, in restraint of trade or
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
commerce or to prevent by artificial
means free competition in the market.
II. MONOPOLY TO RESTRAIN FREE
COMPETITION IN THE MARKET
 This is committed by monopolizing any
merchandise or object of trade or
commerce or by combining with any
other person or persons in order to alter
the prices thereof by spreading false
rumors or making use of any other
artifice to restrain free competition in the
market.
III. MANUFACTURER, PRODUCER, OR
PROCESSOR OR IMPORTER
COMBINING, CONSPIRING OR
AGREEING WITH ANY PERSON TO
MAKE TRANSACTIONS PREJUDICIAL
TO LAWFUL COMMERCE OR TO
INCREASE THE MARKET PRICE OF
MERCHANDISE
 The FIRST TWO ACTS under Article 186 can be
committed by any person and not necessarily by
manufacturers, producer or processors. The THIRD
ACT however, can be committed only by
manufacturers, processors, producers and importers
who combined with any other person or persons in
order to commit a transaction prejudicial to lawful
commerce or to increase the market price of any
merchandise or object of commerce
 Whether it be the first, second or third act, the mere
conspiracy in order to restrain or to prevent free
competition will already give rise to the crime. It is not
necessary that there be actual restraint in trade or
commerce.
Q: What if Petron, Caltex and Shell connived, combined
and agreed with one another to hoard fuel. They know that
the fuel prices will increase by March and so they decided
to hoard it. Can they be held liable under Article 186?
A:
 Juridical corporations cannot be the subject of
criminal action. First, it cannot be said that
juridical persons can act with intent. Second, you
cannot imprison a juridical person in case of
conviction. So if the offender is a juridical entity,
who shall be held liable?
 The president, the directors or any of the
members of the said corporation, association
or partnership, who knowingly permitted
and allowed this combination or monopoly
in restraint of trade or commerce. Note that
they must have knowingly permitted the same
58 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

otherwise, they cannot be held criminally

liable.

 If the objects, which are the subject of this monopoly

or combination in restraint of trade or commerce are
prime commodities such as food, motor fuel,
lubricants, it is not even necessary that there be
conspiracy. A mere proposal, a mere intial step
to hoard, to prevent free competition in the
market will already give rise to the crime.

ARTICLE 187 – IMPORTATION AND DISPOSITION

OF FALSELY MARKED ARTICLES
 Committed by any person who shall imports, sells or
disposes any article or merchandise made of gold,
silver, other precious materials, or their alloys
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender IMPORTS, SELLS or DISPOSES
any article or merchandise made of gold,
silver, other precious materials, or their alloys
2. That the STAMPS, BRANDS, or MARKS of
those articles or merchandise FAIL TO
INDICATE the actual fitness or quality of said
metals or alloys
3. The OFFENDER KNOWS that the stamps,
brands or marks fail to indicate the actual
fitness or quality of the metals or alloys.

 This is considered a criminal act because the offender,

despite knowing that the articles or merchandise that
he imported are misbranded, he still imports the same,
sells the same or disposes the same

 Mere importation is a punishable act; therefore it is

not necessary for the offender to become liable under
Article 187 that he must have sold the misbranded
articles or that he must have disposed the article
because mere importationwill already give rise
to the crime.

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 59 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
TITLE FIVE
CRIMES RELATIVE TO OPIUM AND OTHER
PROHIBITED DRUGS
COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF
2002 (RA 9165)
SECTION 4 – IMPORTATION OF DANGEROUS
DRUGS AND/OR CONTROLLED PRECURSORS
AND ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS
 Is committed by:
Any person, who, unless authorized by
law, shall import or bring into the Philippines any
dangerous drug, regardless of the quantity and
purity involved.
 In one Supreme Court decision, it held that: For
one to be liable for importation of
dangerous drugs, it is necessary to be proven
that the dangerous drugs that were taken in a
vessel came from a foreign country with the said
dangerous drugs on board the said vessel;
therefore the prosecution must prove that
the vessel which came into the Philippine
ports had with it the dangerous drugs. Only
then can it be said that the dangerous drugs have
been imported from another country.
SECTION 5 – SALE, TRADING,
ADMINISTRATION, DISPENSATION, DELIVERY,
DISTRIBUTION AND TRANSPORTATION OF
DANGEROUS DRUGS AND/OR CONTROLLED
PRECURSORS AND ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS
Selling Dangerous Drugs
 Act of giving away any dangerous drug and/or
controlled precursor and essential chemical
whether for money of any other consideration.
ELEMENTS OF SALE OF ILLEGAL DRUGS:
1. The identity of the buyer and the seller
 It is necessary that the identity of the
buyer and the seller are clearly
identified.
2. The object and the consideration
3. The delivery of the thing sold and the payment
thereof
 Because if the dangerous drugs had
not been delivered, the third element
is lacking, the sale is abds forted,
there is only ATTEMPTED ILLEGAL
SALE of dangerous drugs not
consummated illegal sale of
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
dangerous drugs because the third
element is lacking.
Q: What if a person has been prosecuted for Illegal sale of
Dangerous Drugs. The said operation was a buy bust
operation. It is an entrapment procedure which is allowed
by law. Here, the criminal/evil intent originated mainly
from the offender himself that’s why it is not considered as
an absolutory cause. Here, the Police Officers employed
means and methods to entrap and capture the criminal in
flagrante that is in the actual act of committing the crime.
So what if in the buy bust operation, the accused drug seller
was arrested. In the said operation, the informant acted as
the posuer buyer. He was given marked money. The
policemen ran into the place of the drug seller. Only the
poseur-buyer knocked at the door of the drug seller. The
drug seller came out and the poseur-buyer said that he
wanted to buy dangerous drugs in the amount of P200. The
drug seller said okay and gave 2 plastic sachets of
dangerous drugs to the poseur buyer. However, the poseur-
buyer without having given the marked money yet to the
drug seller negligently removed his eyeglasses so the Police
officers thought that that was the signal that the sale has
been consummated. They arrived at the said place and
arrested the drug seller. The marked money was not given
to drug seller. Does that constitute his acquittal?
A: No provided that all the elements are
present:
Note that the second element only requires the crime
must be established. The corpus delicti and the price
must be established. It does not require that there
must be giving of the price/money. It suffices that
the crime was established.
When the poseur-buyer said that he wants to buy
illegal drugs for P200, the price has already been
established. Therefore, all the elements will suffice
even if the marked money has not been given by the
buyer to the seller. In fact, even if the marked money is
not presented in court it will not be a hiatus on the
evidence of the prosecution provided that the police
officers and the witnesses were able to prove the crime
of illegal sale of dangerous drugs.
Q: How about the poseur-buyer? Is it necessary for the
poseur buyer to testify in court? What if the prosecutor
failed to have the poseur-buyer testify in court? Does it
mean to an acquittal?
A: The testimony of the poseur-buyer is not
indispensable in a case of illegal sale of dangerous
drugs. It is not indispensable because the transaction
60 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
can be proven by the other police officers who have
witnessed the transaction. However if the seller denies
the existence of the said transaction; it is the
incumbent upon the prosecution to grove the said
transaction by the presentation the said poseur-buyer.
General Rule: The testimony of the poseur-buyer is
not indispensable in a case of illegal sale of dangerous
drugs.
Exemption: When the accused denies the existence
of the said transaction. If the prosecution failed to
present the poseur-buyer to testify in court, it will
amount to the dismissal of the case.
Q: Let’s say there is this cigarette vendor on the side walk
and here comes a man who parked his car near the side
walk. He called the cigarette vendor and told the cigarette
vendor to deliver a package to the man inside the car which
is parked on the other side of the street. He told the
cigarette vendor that he will give him P1000 if the he
agreed to deliver the package to the man inside the car
which is parked at the other side of the street. The cigarette
vendor asked the man what is inside the package however
the man said “it’s none of your business to know what’s
inside that. I will give you P1000 if you deliver this to the
man inside that car parked at the other side of the street.”
So the cigarette vendor with the P1000 got the bag and
delivered it to the man at the other side of the street. He
knocked at the window and the man lowered his window.
However at the time of the said delivery the police officers
arrived and arrested the cigarette vendor. Can he be
prosecuted for delivery of dangerous drugs? Can he be
convicted for delivery of dangerous drugs?
A: He can be prosecuted for delivery of dangerous
drugs however it is a defense on his part that he has no
knowledge that the thing he is delivering is dangerous
drugs because under RA 9165, delivering has been
defined as the act of knowingly passing a dangerous
drug to another, personally or otherwise, and by any
means, with or without consideration. Therefore it is
necessary that the one delivering dangerous drug must
have the knowledge of the thing that he is delivering is
dangerous drug.
DELIVER – an act of knowingly passing a dangerous
drug to another, personally or otherwise, and by any
means, with or without consideration.
SECTION 6 – MAINTENANCE OF A DEN, DIVE, OR
RESORT
 Any person who maintains a den, dive, or resort
for the use of illegal drugs are liable under this
section.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 Are the owners, persons maintaining the said
dangerous drug dens are only the ones who are
criminally liable?
 Under Section 7 of the act, even the
employees who are aware of the nature of the
said den, dive or resort for the use and sale of
dangerous drugs are also criminally liable.
Likewise, even persons who are not
employees which knowingly visit the same
place despite the knowledge of the nature of
such den, dive, or resort are also criminally
liable.
Q: What if the said den, dive, or resort is owned by a third
person? Let’s say A and B rented a house. After giving the
down payment, A and B went to the said house. A and B
used the house as a den for illegal sale of dangerous drugs.
The police officers were able to secure a warrant and A and
B were arrested. Can the owner of the said house be
criminally liable for the maintenance of the said den? How
about the house? Can it be forfeited in favor of the
government?
A: Under Sec. 6, the said den, dive, or resort for the
use of illegal sale of dangerous drugs shall be escheated
in favor of the government provided that the following
circumstances concur:
1. The information must allege that the said
place is intentionally being used in
furtherance of illegal sale/use of dangerous
drugs.
2. Such intent must be proven by the prosecutor.
3. The owner of the said house must be included
as an accused in the information or
complaint.
If these 3 elements are present; then the said
house shall be confiscated and escheated in
favor of the government.
SECTION 8 – MANUFACTURE OF DANGEROUS
DRUGS
 The presence if any controlled precursor and
essential chemical or laboratory equipment in the
clandestine laboratory is a prima facie evidence of
manufacture of any dangerous drug.
SECTION 11 – ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF
DANGEROUS DRUGS
ELEMENTS OF POSSESSION OF ILLEGAL DRUGS:
1. The accused was in possession of prohibited
drug
61 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 In illegal possession of dangerous drugs;
the word possession does not only
mean actual possession of the dangerous
drug in his body. It suffices that the said
dangerous drug is found in a place
under the control and dominion of
the said offender.
Q: By virtue of a search warrant the police officers
conducted a search in the house of A to look for cocaine.
They looked inside the bedroom and underneath the pillow
on the bedroom of A, the found several sachets of cocaine.
Can it be held that A is in possession of the said drugs?
A: Yes because it is under his control and dominion.
Possession does not only mean physical or actual
possession. It also means as constructive possession
for as long as the dangerous drugs is under his control
and dominion.
2. Such possession is not authorized by law
 The offender is not authorized by law to
possess such drugs. Dangerous drugs are
per se contraband. They are per se illegal
items. The presumption is that such
possession is without authority of law.
Therefore the burden of proof is on the
accused to prove that he has the
authority to possess unlike illegal
possession of firearms. Illegal possession
of firearms is not per se contraband
therefore in illegal possession of
firearms, it is the prosecution who has
the burden of proof that the said person
lacks license.
3. The accused freely and consciously possessed
the prohibited drug
 There must be an animus posidendi on
the part of the said accused. This animus
posidendi on the part of the accused is a
prima facie presumed by law. The
moment a person was found in
possession of dangerous drugs, the
presumes that the person knows that the
thing in his possession is dangerous
drugs.
SECTION 12 - ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF DRUG
PARAPHERNALIA
e.g. A person was found in possession of empty
plastic sachets and other instruments used for
using dangerous drugs. He is therefore liable for
Illegal Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Q: What if a person was found in possession of drug
paraphernalia can they avail the benefit of probation?
A: Yes he can avail for probation. The
penalty prescribed by law for illegal possession of
drug paraphernalia’s is an imprisonment ranging
from 6 months and 1 day to 4 years which is within
the probationable penalty. Under Sec. 24 of R.A.
9165, any person convicted for drug pushing and
drug trafficking, regardless of the penalty imposed
by the Court, cannot avail for probation.
So under Sec. 24; only those who are convicted of
drug pushing and drug trafficking which cannot
avail for probation therefore for any other
violation of Dangerous Drugs Act, for as long as
the penalty imposed by the court is 6 years and
below, he can avail for the benefit of probation.
But if he is a drug trafficker/ pusher, one who is
engaged in selling dangerous drugs, he cannot
avail of the benefit of probation even if the penalty
imposed by the court is within the probationable
penalty because it is expressly prohibited by Sec.
24 of RA 9165.
SECTION 13 – ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF
DANGEROUS DRUGS DURING PARTIES, SOCIAL
GATHERINGS OR MEETINGS
 in Sec. 13, if any person was found in possession of
dangerous drug in a party, social gatherings or
meetings, or in the proximate company of at least
two (2) persons; the maximum penalty prescribed
by law shall be imposed.
SECTION 15 – ILLEGAL USE OF DANGEROUS
DRUGS
ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL USE OF
DANGEROUS DRUGS:
1. The offender was apprehended/ arrested in
the actual use of dangerous drugs.
 The first element requires that the
offender must be actually using,
sniffing the dangerous drugs.
2. After a confirmatory test; he was found to be
positive for use of any dangerous drugs.
 He was at the PNP Crime Lab and
after the confirmatory test, he was
found to be positive for use of
dangerous drugs.
3. No other amount of dangerous drugs must be
found in his possession.
62 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 If any other amount of dangerous
drugs was found in his possession,
then the proper charge would no
longer be illegal use but illegal
possession of dangerous drugs.
Q: The police officers saw a man snatched the cell phone of
a woman. Since the police officers saw the man in
committing the crime inflagrante delicto of actual act of
snatching and the man runaway, they followed the man.
The man entered the house. The police officers upon
entering the house saw 3 men on a round table; they were
in the actual act of sniffing shabu. They were arrested and
they were asked to stand up and fold their arms up and they
were searched. Upon the search, they found out that these 3
men; each of them was found a sachet of illegal drugs in
their pockets aside from the dangerous drug that they were
using. What cases will you file against the 3 men?
A: Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs. No
illegal use of dangerous drugs because the third
element is one thing. Let’s say after the confirmatory
test they were found to be positive however 3 elements
must concur: 1st element: They were caught in the
actual act of sniffing shabu. 2nd element: After
confirmatory test they were found positive of the use of
dangerous drugs however the 3rd element is lacking
because they found to have in their possession a plastic
sachet of other dangerous drugs other than the one
they used. Therefore the proper crime charged is illegal
possession of dangerous drugs.
SECTION 21 – PROCEDURE IN THE SEIZURE AND
CONFISCATION OF DANGEROUS DRUG
The apprehending team which has the initial
possession of the seized/confiscated dangerous
drugs shall:
1. Inventory the dangerous drugs
2. Take photographs of the same in the
presence of the accused or from the
person whom the dangerous drugs
have been confiscated or in the
presence of his counsel, a  It is defined as the duly recorded authorized
representative from the media, a
representative from the Department
of Justice, and an elected public
official who shall be given a copy of
the said inventory and who shall be
required to sign the same.
Procedure:
1. Upon seizure/ confiscation of dangerous drugs,
the same must be stated in the inventory list.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
2. There must be a picture taking of the dangerous
drugs in the presence of the accused or from the
person whom the dangerous drugs have been
confiscated or in the presence of his counsel, a
representative from the media, a representative
from the Department of Justice, and an elected
public official.
3. The elected public official must be required to sign
the inventory list and shall be given a copy of the
same.
Q: What if the police officers failed to comply with this
procedure? In People vs. Sta. Maria, the police officers
failed to comply with this procedure however there was
conviction. However, in the case of Dolera vs. People; the
police officers failed to comply with Sec. 21 procedure and
this time there was an acquittal. Why is there an acquittal
in the case of Dolera and why is there a conviction in the
case of Sta. Maria?
A: The Supreme Court held that even if there is failure
to comply with the procedure underlined in Sec 21 of
RA 9165 by the arresting officers, there will still be
conviction if the said non-compliance is due to
justifiable reasons and provided that the police officers
were able to preserve the integrity and evidentiary
bond of the confiscated dangerous drugs this is in
consonance with the chain of custody rule.
If the police officers were not able to comply with the
procedure due to justifiable cause, they must be able to
preserve the integrity and evidentiary bond of the
confiscated dangerous drug that is; right after
confiscation, it must be marked to ensure that it was
the dangerous drugs taken from the accused and must
be turned over to the forensic laboratory for testing.
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RULE
 What is the Chain of Custody rule? (People v
Gutierrez)
movements and custody of dangerous drugs
from the time of confiscation/seizure to the
receipt in the forensic laboratory to
safekeeping to presentation in court for
destruction.
 What is the purpose Chain of Custody rule?
 The purpose of Chain of Custody rule is to
ensure that the dangerous drug
seized/confiscated from the accused is
63 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
the very same dangerous drug which
has been tested by the forensic chemist
and it is the very same dangerous drug
presented in court that is; there has
been no substitution of evidence.
 Dangerous drugs are so small. There can be a
replacement of the effects therefore this Chain
of Custody rule will ensure that there will be
no substitution of the very same dangerous
drug seized/confiscated from the accused at
the time that they were presented to the court.
Q: What if a person is charged for illegal possession of
dangerous drugs and during his arraignment, he pleaded
not guilty and during the pre-trial, he said that he will
change his plea if he will be allowed to plead guilty for a
lesser offense of illegal possession of drug paraphernalia.
So he wanted to avail of the plea-bargaining rule under the
rules of court. Under the plea-bargaining rule, you can
plead guilty to a lesser offense provided that the said lesser
offense is necessary included in the offense charged. Here,
the charge is illegal possession of dangerous drugs; can he
plead for a lesser offense of illegal possession of drug
paraphernalia?
A: He cannot because Sec. 28 of R.A. 9165 provides
that any person charged in violation of any of the
crimes charged under this act cannot avail of the plea-
bargaining under the rules of court. Therefore any
person charged in violation of any of the punishable
acts under R.A. 9165 cannot plead guilty to a lower
offense.
SECTION 25 – A POSITIVE FINDING FOR THE
USE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS SHALL BE A
QUALIFYING AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE
Q: A killed B. The police officers arrested A and they
brought him to the crime lab to be tested for the use of
illegal use of dangerous drugs. After testing, he was found
positive for the use of dangerous drugs. What is the effect of
it in the criminal liability of A?
A: Sec 25 states the a positive finding for the use of
dangerous drugs shall be a qualifying aggravating
circumstance.
 What is the effect of a qualifying aggravating
circumstance?
 It changes the nature of the crime or even
without changing the nature of the crime it
will bring about a higher imposition of
penalty.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
SECTION 26 –ATTEMPT OR CONSPIRACY
 Express exception to the general rule that in case
of violation of a penal law, there are no stages and
there is no conspiracy.
 As a rule, in case of violation of penal law, we have no
attempted stages. In violation of special penal laws,
conspiracy unless expressly provided because these are
only for violation of the RPC, for felonies. One of those
exceptions is under Section 26 of RA 9165. Under
Section 26 of RA 9165, any attempt or conspiracy of
any of the following acts shall be punished already by
penalty prescribed by law:
1. Importation of any dangerous drug;
2. Sale, trading, administration, delivery,
distribution, transportation of dangerous
drug;
3. Maintenance of a den, dive, or resort where
any dangerous drug is used in any form;
4. Manufacture of any dangerous drug;
5. Cultivation or culture of plants which are the
sources of dangerous drugs.
 If any of these acts mentioned is committed by the
offender, a mere attempt; or conspiracy will
already give rise to the crime as an exception to
the rule that in case of violation of penal law, there
are no stages in the commission of the crime and
conspiracy will not lie. So if any of the crime
committed is any of these five acts, mere attempt
will lie against the offender, conspiracy will lie
against the offender.
As held in the case of People v Rolando Laylo, the
charge was only attempted illegal sale of dangerous drugs.
The sale was aborted because even before the said drug
poseur was able to transfer the dangerous drug to the police
officer, the police officers already introduced themselves as
such and arrested him. As such, we only have attempted
illegal sale of dangerous drugs.
SECTON 98 – LIMITED APPLICABILITY OF THE
RPC
 In Book I, under Article 10, the provisions of the
RPC shall apply suppletorily or supplementarily to
the provisions of the special penal laws UNLESS
the special penal law provides otherwise.
 One of the exceptions is provided for in Sec 98 of
RA 9165, it is provided that the provisions of RPC,
as amended, shall not apply to the provisions of
RA 9165. The law uses the word shall; therefore
64 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

you cannot apply the provision of RPC to the

provisions of RA 9165.
 Exception to Section 98: If the offender is a minor
offender.
 Where the offender is a minor, the penalty
for acts punishable by life imprisonment
to death provided shall be reclusion
perpetua to death.

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 65 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
TITLE SIX
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS (Articles 200
– 202)
ARTICLE200 – GRAVE SCANDAL
Grave Scandal – a highly scandalous act
offensive to good morals, good customs and
decency committed in a public place or within
public knowledge or public view.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender performs an act or acts
2. Such act or acts be HIGHLY SCANDALOUS as
offending against decency or good customs
 It is necessary that the act must be
highly scandalous and offensive to
morals, offensive to decency and
offensive to good customs.
3. That the highly scandalous conduct is not
expressly falling within any other article of this
Code.
 The third element requires that it
must not expressly fall within any
other article of this code. It must not
constitute any other violation in the
RPC. Grave scandal is a crime of
last resort because you only file a
complaint for grave scandal when the
said act is not punishable under any
other article in the RPC.
4. The act or act complained of be committed in a
public place or within the public knowledge or
view.
 Then the fourth element provides that
the highly scandalous act must be
committed either in a public place or
within public knowledge or view. If
the highly scandalous act is
committed in a public place, the crime
of grave scandal will immediately
arise. The place being public, the law
presumes that someone may have
witnessed the commission of the
highly scandalous act. However, if the
crime is committed or if the highly
scandalous act is committed in a
private place, for the crime of grave
scandal to arise, it is necessary that it
must be witnessed by one or more
persons to be said that it is within the
public knowledge or public view.
Q: So let us say that A and B are boyfriend and girlfriend
and it is their anniversary. They went to Luneta Park and
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
at exactly 12 midnight, in the middle of Luneta Park, they
engaged in sexual intercourse. No one witnessed their
sexual intercourse. Are they liable for grave scandal?
A: YES. They are liable for grave scandal. They have
the right to engage in sexual conduct but the fact that
they performed the sexual conduct in Luneta Park, a
public place makes the act offensive to public morals,
decency and good customs and the said act does not
constitute any other violation in the RPC because they
have the right to engage in sexual intercourse.
Therefore, the crime committed is grave scandal
because they performed the act in a public place even if
no one saw the commission of the said act still, still
because it is performed in a public place , it is
presumed that someone may have seen the
commission of the highly scandalous act.
Q: So what if a wife and a husband, celebrating their
anniversary, engaged in sexual intercourse in their terrace.
So the act is committed in their premises, in the terrace of
their house. However, the gate was open and so passersby
would see them performing the sexual intercourse. Are they
liable for grave scandal?
A: YES. They are liable for grave scandal. The said
act does not constitute another offense in the RPC
because they have the right to engage in sexual
conduct. The sexual conduct was performed in the
privacy of their home however; people witnessed
the commission of the said act. It now becomes a
highly scandalous act because it is within the
knowledge of the public or within public view.
Q: What if A and B are boyfriend and girlfriend. The
girlfriend is 11 yrs old and the boyfriend is 21 yrs old. And
because it is their monthsary the girlfriend thought of
giving herself as a gift and engaged in sexual intercourse in
a public place Are they liable for grave scandal?
A: NO. They are not liable for grave scandal. The man
is liable for statutory rape. A man who had sexual
intercourse with a child under 12 years of age,
regardless of the consent, regardless of the willingness
of the said child, the man is liable for statutory rape.
Because in so far as criminal law is concerned, a child
under 12 yrs old has no intelligence of his/her own and
is not capable of giving a valid consent. Therefore, even
if the girl voluntarily gave herself in so far as the law is
concerned, it is still statutory rape. It is not grave
scandal because the third element is wanting. The said
act fall under the violation of article of RPC that is
under article 266-A for rape. As I said, grave scandal is
a crime of last resort. You only charge it when the
crime committed does not constitute any other
violation in the RPC.
66 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

engages in sexual intercourse or lascivious

ARTICLE201 – IMMORAL DOCTRINES, OBSCENE conduct he can be punished under Article 202
PUBLICATIONS AND EXHIBITIONS, AND but now since vagrancy has been
INDECENT SHOWS decriminalized by R.A. No. 10158, he can no
Punishes: longer be prosecuted. Only prostitutes who
I. Public proclamations of doctrines openly contrary are woman.
to public morals
II. Publication of obscene literature. In case of
publication of obscene literature, it is the author,
the editor, the owner or proprietor of the
establishment that sells the said materials SHALL
BE HELD CRIMINALLY LIABLE.
III. The third act punished is the exhibition of
indecent shows, plays, scenes or acts in fairs,
theaters, cinemas or any other places.
IV. Selling, giving away or exhibiting films,,
engravings, sculptures or literature which are
offensive to public morals.

Q: So what if there is this building, when the person

entered the said building, on the floor of the said building
were these magazines. And the magazines contain men and
women engaging in sexual intercourse, naked women and
men, and other obscene materials. Who shall be held liable
when the place was raided by the police?
A: The author of the said literature, the editors
publishing such literature and the owner or proprietor
of the establishment where the said magazines were
being sold. They will be held criminally liable under
Article 201.

VAGRANTS AND PROSTITUTES (ART 202)

Q: Let us say that there is this man, a healthy man and he
can look for work but he does not want to work. So he was
just roaming around and he saw houses of prostitutes or
houses of ill-fames and he is always in this places. Can he
be held liable for vagrancy?
A: NO, because vagrancy has been
decriminalized by R.A. No. 10158 which was
approved on March 27, 2012. We no longer have the
crime of vagrancy. No person can longer be prosecuted
for being a vagrant.

 How about prostitution? Is there still a

crime for prostitution?
 YES.

 Who is a prostitute?
 A prostitute is any woman who, for money or
profit, indulges in sexual intercourse or
lascivious conduct. So it is the work or job of a
woman. Note that the law defines it to be a
woman therefore; a man cannot be
considered a prostitute. Before, if a man

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 67 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

TITLE SEVEN 2. That he renders a judgment in a case submitted

CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS to him for decision
(Articles 203 – 245) 3. That the judgment is unjust
4. The judge knows that his judgment is unjust
ARTICLE203 – PUBLIC OFFICERS
REQUISITES TO BE A PUBLIC OFFICER: UNJUST JUDGMENT – is one which is contrary to law,
1. One must be taking part in the performance of or one that is not supported by evidence or both.
public functions in the Government or one  The source of unjust judgment can either be mere
must be performing in said Government or in error or ill-will. If the source of an unjust judgment
any of its branches public duties as an is mere error on the part of the judge, then the said
employee, agent or subordinate official, of any judge is not civilly, criminally, and administratively
rank or class; and liable.
2. That his authority to take part in the
performance of public functions or to perform In a case submitted to him for decision, the judge
public duties must be – wrongfully interpreted a provision of law. It is a new law,
a. by direct provision of the law; or there is no jurisprudence yet, the judge wrongfully
b. by popular election; or interpreted it. The judge cannot be held civilly,
c. by appointment by competent administratively, and more so, criminally liable. The said
authority judgment is an unjust judgment because it was based on
this error in the interpretation of the law. However, there
Whenever a person applies to a public office, he has the so- was no intent on the part of the said judge. Considering the
called, OATH OF OFFICE. If he is high-ranking official, basis of the unjust judgment is mere error. The said judge
the oath is also before a high-ranking official. If he is a acted in good faith.
cabinet secretary, the oath is before the President or to the
Supreme Court Chief Justice. If he is only an ordinary If however, the unjust judgment is based on bad faith, that
employee, still he has oath of office. It is a document which is, it is based on ill-motive on the part of the said judge,
is entitled, “OATH OF OFFICE”, he merely signs it. therefore, he can be held liable criminally, civilly and
administratively
Felonies under TITLE SEVEN are felonies in violation of
this oath of office, they can either be: - For him to be criminally liable, knowing that he
NON- rendered an unjust judgment, it is necessary that
MISFEASANCE MALFEASANCE
FEASANCE the unjust judgment is rendered out of ill-motive
A public officer or bad faith, out of greed, revenge, envy, or any
A public officer
knowingly, other ill-motive. Hence he is known to have
performs an
A public officer willfully rendered an unjust judgment.
official acts in a
performs in his refuses or
manner not in
public office an act refrains from BASED ON MERE ERROR – no criminal, no civil, no
accordance with
prohibited by law. doing an act administrative liability
what the law
which is his
provides
official duty to ARTICLE205 – JUDGMENT RENDERED
(GN: Performance do. THROUGH NEGLIGENCE
(GN: Improper
of some act which This is again committed by a judge, who in a case
performance of
ought not to be (GN: Omission submitted to him for decision, renders manifestly unjust
some act which
done of some act judgment.
might be lawfully
which ought to ELEMENTS:
done)
 ARTICLE 210- be performed) 1. The offender is a judge
211 2. That he renders a judgment in a case
 ARTICLE 204
 ARTICLE submitted to him for decision
TO 207
208 3. That the judgment is manifestly unjust
4. The it is due to his inexcusable
ARTICLE204 – KNOWINGLY RENDERING negligence or ignorance
UNJUST JUDGMENT
ELEMENTS: MANIFESTLY UNJUST JUDGMENT – means that it is
1. The offender is a judge evident that a judgment is unjust. A first year law student

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 68 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

would know that it is unjust, therefore it is manifestly of the law who has the duty to cause the prosecution of
unjust judgment, because he acted in inexcusable or to prosecute the offenders. The said public officer
negligence or ignorance. commits dereliction of duty in the prosecution of
ARTICLE206 – UNJUST INTERLOCUTORY offenses under any of the following circumstances:
ORDER a. knowing the commission of the crime, he
ELEMENTS: does not cause the prosecution of the
1. The offender is a judge criminal, or
2. That he performs any of the following acts: b. knowing that a crime is about to be
a. knowingly renders unjust interlocutory committed, he tolerates its commission
order or decree and the said offender acts with malice and
b. renders a manifestly unjust deliberate intent to favor the violator of the
interlocutory order or decree through law
inexcusable negligence or ignorance  The dereliction of duty in the prosecution of offenses
cannot be committed by just any public officer.
ARTICLE207 – MALICIOUS DELAY IN THE  The public officer must be charged with the
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE prosecution of the cases or he is the one who can cause
ELEMENTS: the prosecution of these offenders.
1. The offender is a judge
2. There is a proceeding in his court CHARGED WITH THE PROSECUTION OF THE
3. He delays the administration of justice OFFENDERS:
4. The delay is malicious, that is, delay is caused - Fiscals
by the judge with deliberate intent to inflict - Prosecutors
damage on either party in the case. - State Prosecutors

ARTICLE208 – PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES; THOSE WHO CAN CAUSE THE PROSECUTION OF

NEGLIGENCE AND TOLERANCE THE OFFENDERS:
 ACTS PUNISHABLE: - Judges
I. By maliciously refraining from instituting - Barangay Chairman
prosecution against violators of the law - Persons in authority
Note that the first crime, he knows that a
crime was committed but he does not ARTICLE209 – BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY AN
prosecute the offender; ATTORNEY OR SOLICITOR – REVELATION OF
II. By maliciously tolerating the commission SECRETS
of offenses  ACTS PUNISHED AS BETRAYAL OF
the second act, a crime was about to be TRUST BY ATTORNEY:
committed, he tolerates its commission. I. By causing damage to his client, either
It must be done with MALICE. Absent a. by any malicious breach of
malice, Article 208 will not apply. professional duty
b. by inexcusable negligence or
ELEMENTS OF DERELICTION OF DUTY IN ignorance
THE PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES:  THERE MUST BE DAMAGE TO HIS
1. That the offender is a public officer or officer of CLIENT
the law who has a duty to cause the prosecution of, II. By revealing any of the secrets of his
or to prosecute, offenses. client learned by him in his professional
2. That there is a dereliction of the duties of his capacity.
office; that is knowing the commission of the  DAMAGE IS NOT NECESSARY
crime, he does not cause the prosecution of the
criminal or knowing that a crime is about to be III. By undertaking the defense of the
committed, he tolerates its commission. opposing party in the same case, without
3. That the offender acts with malice and the consent of his first client, after having
deliberate intent to favor the violator of the law. undertaken the defense of said first client
or after having received confidential
 Otherwise known as DERELICTION. information from said client.
 Can only be committed by a public officer or a officer

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 69 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 IF THE CLIENT CONSENTS TO
THE ATTORNEY’S TAKING THE
DEFENSE OF THE OTHER PARTY,
THERE IS NO CRIME
ELEMENTS:
1. Causing damage to his client, either:
a. by any malicious breach of professional duty
b. by inexcusable negligence or ignorance
2. Revealing any of the secrets of his client learned
by him in his professional capacity
3. Undertaking the defense of the opposing party in
the same case, without the consent of his first
client or after having received confidential
information from said client
 Under Article 209, this betrayal of trust is IN
ADDITION TO A PROPER ADMINISTRATIVE CASE
which may be filed against an attorney or solicitor. So
aside from the criminal case in violation of Article 209,
he can also be charged in a case also for disbarment,
for violation of lawyer’s oath of duty may be filed
against him, and these two cases can be proceeded at
the same time.
A lawyer for 3 consecutive times, without any
justifiable reason, failed to file his formal offer of exhibits.
During the first time he was given 15 days, he failed to file,
second time he was given 15 days, he failed to file. On the
third time, he was given 5 days still, he failed to file,
without giving any justifiable reason for his non-
compliance with the order of the court. By reason thereof,
there is no evidence in behalf of the defense of his client
was admitted by the Court. Because only evidences offered
may be admitted by the court. And so, the judge convicted
the accused, the client was prejudiced because of the
counsel’s malicious breach of his professional duty. It is
incumbent upon any counsel to file a pleading within the
reglementary period provided by law or required by the
court.
- For failing to do so without any justifiable
reason, he caused damage to his client by
malicious breach of his professional duty.
Q: What if Atty. A was the counsel of X, he was behind bars
for the crime of kidnapping for ransom. Atty. A visited X to
ask the facts of the case in order for him to study and to
nput up a good defense. During their conversation, X
informed his counsel, Atty. A that there will be another
kidnapping tomorrow night at 9PM in Quezon City, to be
done by his other gang mates who were at large. Atty. A,
upon knowing this information from his client X,
immediately went to the police officers of Quezon City in
order to pre-empt the commission of the crime. Is Atty. A
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
liable for the second act because he divulged the secrets of
his client which he learned in his professional capacity?
A: Atty. A is not liable under Article 209. The
secrets being referred to under Article 209 refers to the
past crimes of the said client and it refers to the facts
and circumstances related to the crime which is being
handed by the said Attorney or counsel.
It does not refer to future crimes that are still about to
be committed. When a lawyer takes his oath of office,
he says, or he promise, he swears that he shall be liable
not only to the client, but also to the STATE, to the
GOVERNMENT.
It is his duty to the Government, to the State of any
future crime that is about to be committed more than
his duty to his client. Hence, in this case, since it refers
to a future crime, for the protection of the state and the
citizenry, it is incumbent upon him to divulge, disclose
or to reveal the said secrets.
Q: What if A filed a case against B, Atty. X was the counsel
of A, A failed to give Atty. X his appearance list for 5
consecutive hearings, no appearance list. So Atty. X, filed a
motion to withdraw as counsel of A. The said motion to
withdraw was with the CONSENT OF A, because without
the consent of A, the said motion to withdraw will not be
granted by the court. So the court granted and Atty. X is no
longer the counsel of A. When B learned about this, went
immediately to the office of X and secured the services of X.
Atty. X signed a contract and he is now the counsel of B. Is
Atty. X liable for betrayal of trust by an attorney?
A: Atty. X is liable for betrayal of trust by an
attorney. He takes the case of B, the opposing party,
even after he has already taken the case of A and after
he has acquired valuable information about his client.
How can he prevent himself from being convicted of the
betrayal of trust?
 He must first secure the consent of the said first
client
In the said problem, there was no consent. The said
consent was only in the motion to withdraw. The said
consent in the motion to withdraw is not the consent
on the acceptance of the case. For every motion to
withdraw, there must be a consent written, otherwise
the court will not grant the motion to withdraw. The
consent here is to secure or to accept the service s of
the other party.
Since consent was not given, he is liable for betrayal of
trust by an attorney.
 Just remember aside from betrayal of trust, an
attorney or solicitor can also be held liable of
administrative case. So there may be disbarment.
 He can be disbarred or he can be suspended by
70 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
reason of committing any of these acts.
ARTICLE210 – DIRECT BRIBERY
 ACTS PUNISHABLE:
I. By agreeing to perform, or by
performing, in consideration of any offer,
promise, gift or present – an act
constituting a crime, in connection with
the performance of his official duties.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender be a public officer within
the scope of Article 203
2. The offender accepts an offer or a
promise or receives a gift or present
by himself or through another.
3. That such offer or promise be
accepted, or received by the public
officer with a view of committing
some crime.
4. That the act which the offender agrees
to perform or which he executes be
connected with the performance of
his official duties.
II. By accepting a gift in consideration of the
execution of an act which does not
constitute a crime, in connection with the
performance of his official duty.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender be a public officer within
the scope of Article 203
2. The offender accepts an offer or a
promise or receives a gift or present
by himself or through another.
3. That such offer or promise be
accepted, or received by the public
officer in consideration of the
execution of an act, which does not
constitute a crime, but the act must
be unjust
4. That the act which the offender agrees
to perform or which he executes be
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
connected with the performance of
his official duties.
III. By agreeing to refrain, or by refraining,
from doing something which it is his
official duty to do, in consideration of gift
or promise.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender be a public officer within
the scope of Article 203
2. The offender accepts an offer or a
promise or receives a gift or present
by himself or through another.
3. That such offer or promise be
accepted, or received by the public
officer to refrain from doing
something which it is his official
duty to do so.
4. That the act which the offender agrees
to perform or which he executes be
connected with the performance of
his official duties.
Under the First Act - By agreeing to perform or
performing, in consideration of offer or promise,
gift or present any act constituting a crime in
connection with the performance of his official
duties
- If the thing which the public officer is required to
do, is an act which will constitute a crime, a mere
agreement to do so, will already give rise to
direct bribery. It is not necessary that he actually
commits the crime, it is not necessary that he
actually receives the gift or present.
 A MERE AGREEMENT WILL
SUFFICE.
Likewise in the Third Act - By agreeing to refrain or
by refraining from doing an act which is his official
duty to do, in consideration of an offer, promise,
gift or present.
- If the thing that a public officer is required to do,
is to refrain from doing an act which is his
official duty to do, a mere agreement to refrain to
do an act will already give rise to direct bribery.
It is not necessary to refrain from doing an act, it
is not necessary to receive the said gift.
However, if the thing that a public officer is
required to do, does not constitute a crime, under
the Second Act, mere agreement will not suffice.
There must be actual acceptance of the thing. There must
be acceptance of the gift, in consideration of the execution
of an act which does not constitute a crime in connection
with the performance of his official duty. WHY?
71 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
- because the thing that he is being required to do
is not a criminal act. It is his official thing to do,
but he doesn’t want to do it without the bribe
first to be given to him. So it is only upon
ACCEPTANCE OF THE BRIBE that criminal
liability for direct bribery will arise.
Whatever may be the act constituting direct
bribery, in order to amount to direct bribery, it must always
be in connection with the performance of his official duty.
If it is not in connection with his official duty, it could other
crime like estafa or swindling, but NOT DIRECT BRIBERY.
Acejas, III v. People
It is the second act of direct bribery that has been
violated. The second act because it is the duty of the
said BID agent to return the passport. The duty to
return the passport is not a criminal act. It is also not
an act of refraining to do so. But he does not want to
perform the act without the bribe, so he becomes liable
under the 2nd act.
Q: What if a mother wanted her daughter to work in
another country. The daughter was still a minor, 16 years
old. So what the mother did, was to ask the civil registrar to
alter the birth date or the date in the certificate of live birth
with a promise that the first 2 months of the salary of the
daughter will be given to the civil registrar. The civil
registrar altered the date in the birth certificate. What
crime/crimes is/are committed by the civil registrar and by
the mother?
A: The civil registrar is liable for direct bribery
because he agreed to perform an act constituting a
crime in consideration of a promise that the 2 months
salary will be given to him. The said act is in
connection with his performance of his official duty.
Therefore he is liable for direct bribery. He actually
performs the act, he actually committed a crime,
therefore he is also liable for the falsification of a
public document because he actually altered the birth
date which is a very important date in the birth
certificate so he is also liable for the falsification of a
public document.
Without the said bribe, the mother would not have
committed falsification, so are you going to complex
them? because direct bribery is a necessary means to
commit falsification.
 Even if in reality, they should be complex because
direct bribery is a necessary means to commit
falsification, you cannot complex them because
ARTICLE 210 PROHIBITS SUCH
COMPLEXITY OF CRIMES.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Under Article 210, it is expressly provided that the
penalty for direct bribery shall be IN ADDITION TO
THE LIABILITY FOR THE CRIME
COMMITTED. Here, he actually altered, actually
committed the crime, therefore his liability for
falsification is in addition for his liability for direct
bribery. Therefore, 2 separate distinct charges have to
be filed against the civil registrar, we have direct
bribery and the other one is falsification of the public
document.
The mother is liable for corruption of public
official (Art. 212). Direct bribery is the crime of the
public officer who receives the bribe. On the other
hand, the private individual or the public officer who
gives the bribe is liable for corruption of public official
under Art. 212. (Refer to Art. 212 – elements)
The mother gives a promise under circumstances in
which the public officer becomes liable for direct
bribery. She is liable for corruption of public official.
The mother is also liable for falsification of a public
document as a principal by inducement. Without the
bribe, without the said inducement, the said public
officer will not have committed the said falsification.
ARTICLE211 – INDIRECT BRIBERY
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer
2. That he accepts gifts
3. That the gifts are offered to him by reason of his
office.
 Indirect Bribery is committed if the public officer
accepts any gift or present by reason of his office that
he owns. In case of indirect bribery, the public officer is
not deemed required to do a thing. By the MERE
ACCEPTANCE, indirect bribery is consummated. NO
ACCEPTANCE, NO CRIME IS COMMITTED.
Q: A is the newly appointed secretary of DENR. On his first
day of office, Mr. X visited him, paid a courtesy call. Mr. X
is the president of a big logging company. They exchanged
some pleasantries, thereafter, when this president of the
logging company left, he placed a small box on the table.
When he left, the new DENR secretary opened the box and
it was a key to a car parked in front of the building. The new
DENR secretary used it and drove the car. What is the
crime committed?
A: He is liable for Indirect Bribery. The president
of the logging company does not require him to do
anything, it was merely given to him because he was
newly appointed as the DENR secretary. His
acceptance brings about consummated indirect
72 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
bribery; therefore, indirect bribery has no attempted or
frustrated stage because outside acceptance, no crime
is committed.
ARTICLE211-A – QUALIFIED BRIBERY
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer entrusted with
law enforcement
2. The offender refrains from arresting or
prosecuting an offender who has committed a
crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or
death
3. The offender refrains from arresting or
prosecuting the offender in consideration of
any promise, gift or present.
 Qualified bribery is committed by any public officer
who is in charge with the enforcement of the law. So, in
order to amount to qualified bribery, it is necessary
that the offender whom the public officer does not
want to prosecute must have committed a crime
punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death.
Q: A police officer was conducting a patrol. He saw a man
behind the tree, looking at the other house adjacent to the
tree as if waiting for someone. So the police officer parked
his vehicle and observed what this man would do. The
moment that a man came out of the gate of the house, this
man hiding behind the tree, immediately went directly to
him and shot him 5 times, and killing him instantly. Then,
the said man rode a motorcycle and left. The police officer
chased him. The Police officer arrested him, however, he
gave the police officer P500,000 and told the police officer,
“Mr. Police officer, you saw nothing, you heard nothing.”
And the police officer allowed him to leave. What
crime/crimes is/are committed by the said police officer?
A: The said police officer is liable for qualified
bribery. The crime committed by the said man is
murder, because obviously, in his act of killing, there
was treachery, the other party was defenseless and
obviously the said man deliberately and consciously
adopted the ways means and methods employed by
him in killing the victim. Since there was treachery, the
crime committed is murder, punishable by reclusion
perpetua to death. His failure to arrest and prosecute
this man constitute qualified bribery because he did so
after accepting P500,000.
Q: What if a police officer was conducting a patrol, he saw
A and B fighting, boxing each other, killing each other, until
they already on the ground. In the course thereof, A pulls
out his balisong and stabbed B several times on the heart, a
vital organ. B died instantly. Thereafter, A ran away, the
police officer tried to catch up with A and he was able to
arrest A. However A, gave the police officer P100,000. The
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
police officer allowed him to leave. What crime/crimes
is/are committed by the said police officer?
A: The crime committed by A in killing B is precedent
by a fight, therefore it is merely homicide. Homicide
is punishable only by reclusion temporal. Since it is
only punishable by reclusion temporal, therefore,
qualified bribery is not applicable.
He committed direct bribery, because he accepts a
bribe, in consideration of an act of refraining to arrest
the said criminal. He actually refrain from arresting
and prosecuting the criminal, therefore in addition to
direct bribery, he also committed dereliction of duty in
the prosecution of offenses because he actually
committed dereliction of duty by refraining from
arresting the person who has actually committed a
crime. So this time, there are 2 crimes committed:
 Direct bribery (article 210) and
 Dereliction of duty in the prosecution of
offenses (article 208)
ARTICLE 212 – CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC
OFFICIALS
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender makes offers or promises or gives
or presents to a public officer.
2. That the offers or promises are made or the
gifts or the gifts or presents given to a public
officer, under circumstances that will make the
public officer liable for direct bribery or
indirect bribery.
THE ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES
ACT (RA 3019)
PUBLIC OFFICER - a public officer is any elective and
appointive officials and employees, permanent or
temporary, whether in the classified or unclassified or
exemption service receiving compensation, even nominal,
from the government. (Sec 2, RA 3019)
Javier v. Sandiganbayan
Although Javier has been appointed as a representative
of the private sector, in the book publishing board
attached to the office of the president (NBDB), she is
still considered as a public officer; first, the said board
functions as a collegial body performing public
functions; second, according to SC, she was
receiving allowance, a salary even though nominal,
from the government. Hence, she considered as a
public officer.
73 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
SECTION 3 – CORRUPT PRACTICES OF PUBLIC
OFFICERS
 IMPORTANT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 3:
(e) Causing any undue injury to any party including
the government, or giving any private party any
unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in
the discharge of his official, administrative or
judicial functions through manifest partiality,
evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence.
ELEMENTS:
1. The said offender was in charge of his official,
administrative or judicial function
2. That he acted with manifest partiality, evident bad
faith or gross inexcusable negligence
3. The said accused caused any undue injury to any
party, including the government, or gave any private
party unwarranted benefits, advantage, or
preference in the discharge of his official functions.
Santos v. People
 The Supreme Court said that there are two acts
punished under Section 3 (e) of RA 3019:
a. Causing any undue injury; or
b. Giving any private party any unwarranted
benefit, advantage or preference
 The law uses the conjunctive “or”;
therefore, the fact that the offender
causes any undue injury to any party or
the fact that the offender gave any party
unwarranted benefit, advantage or
preference, they can be charged distinctly
or separately from each other.
 The Supreme Court also stated that the elements
of Sec 3 (e) of RA 3019
UNDUE INJURY – means there must be an actual
damage caused to the offended party. Absent any actual
damage caused to the offended party, then section 3 (e) is
not violated.
(g) Entering, on behalf of the government, into any
contract or transaction manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the
public officer profited or will profit thereby
 The public officer entered into any contract or
transaction on behalf of the government. The
said contract is manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the government.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
In Nava v. Pallattao, the violation was Section 3 (g). The
DECS officials bought laboratory science materials and
after COA audited, it was discovered that there was an
overpricing. The same is true in Caunan v. People where
Joey Marquez and company bought walis-tingting, and
according to the COA auditors, there was also overpricing
of these walis-tingting. But in the case of Nava, there was
conviction but in the case of Caunan, there was an
acquittal.
 Where lies the difference?
 In the case of Nava, the COA officials proved
the overpricing because they bought the very
same laboratory materials from the same
supplier where the DECS officials bought and
by reason thereof, it was discovered that there
was indeed an overpricing.
 However, in the case of Caunan, Joey
Marquez bought from a different supplier
than where the COA officials bought. The
COA officials bought from a Las Pinas
supplier which they compared with the price
of walis-tingting bought by Joey Marquez.
Not only did they buy the said walis-tingting
from a different supplier, the walis-tingting
bought by COA officials was of different
specifications from that of the walis-tingting
bought by Joey Marquez and company.
Hence, the Supreme Court said that
prosecution was not able to prove beyond
reasonable doubt that there was overpricing.
Because the walis-tingting bought by Joey
Marquez was very much different from the
walis-tingting bought by the COA officials.
They were not able to prove beyond
reasonable doubt that there was overpricing
because of the difference in specifications.
 In both cases, there was NO PUBLIC BIDDING.
 Will the mere lack of public bidding bring about a
violation of Section 3 (g) of RA 3019?
 The Supreme Court said that mere lack of
public bidding may mean that the
government was not able to get the best price
for the thing purchased. However, it does
not bring about a violation of Section 3
(g) because what Section 3 (g) requires is the
transaction must be manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the government and mere
lack of public bidding will not show such
gross and manifest disadvantage.
74 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
SECTION 4 – PROHIBITION ON PRIVATE
INDIVIDUALS
 Under Section 4, it is unlawful for any private
individual who has a close personal relation to
any public officer to request, ask or receive
present from any person in any case from
which the said public officer has to control.
 Close personal relation does not only
include family members. It also includes
those who have social and fraternal relations;
therefore even a private individual who is not
in conspiracy of a public officer can be held
liable under RA 3019.
 Not only public officers but also private
individuals can be held liable under RA 3019.
Enumerated corrupt practices of Public Officials
(a) Persuading, inducing or influencing another public
officer to perform an act constituting a violation of rules
and regulations duly promulgated by competent authority
or an offense in connection with the official duties of the
latter, or allowing himself to be persuaded, induced, or
influenced to commit such violation or offense.
Persons liable:
1. Public officer who persuades, induces, or
influences another public officer;
2. Public officer who is persuaded induced or
influenced
Note: requesting or receiving any gift, present, or benefit is
not required in this provision.
(b) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,
present, share, percentage, or benefit, for himself or for any
other person, in connection with any contract or
transaction between the Government and any other part,
wherein the public officer in his official capacity has to
intervene under the law.
Note:
 the lack of demand is immaterial, the law uses the
word OR between requesting and receiving.
 There must be clear intention on the part of the public
officer and consider it as his or her own property from
then on. Mere physical receipt unaccompanied by any
other sign, circumstance or act to show acceptance is
not sufficient to lead the court to conclude that the
crime has been committed
 Refers to a public officer whose official intervention is
required by law in a contract or transaction
(c) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,
present or other pecuniary or material benefit, for himself
or for another, from any person for whom the public officer,
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
in any manner or capacity, has secured or obtained, or will
secure or obtain, any Government permit or license, in
consideration for the help given or to be given, without
prejudice to Section thirteen of this Act.
(d) Accepting or having any member of his family accept
employment in a private enterprise which has pending
official business with him during the pendency thereof or
within one year after its termination.
(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including the
Government, or giving any private party any unwarranted
benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his
official administrative or judicial functions through
manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable
negligence. This provision shall apply to officers and
employees of offices or government corporations charged
with the grant of licenses or permits or other concessions.
(f) Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request,
without sufficient justification, to act within a reasonable
time on any matter pending before him for the purpose of
obtaining, directly or indirectly, from any person interested
in the matter some pecuniary or material benefit or
advantage, or for the purpose of favoring his own interest
or giving undue advantage in favor of or discriminating
against any other interested party.
(g) Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any
contract or transaction manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the public
officer profited or will profit thereby.
(h) Director or indirectly having financing or pecuniary
interest in any business, contract or transaction in
connection with which he intervenes or takes part in his
official capacity, or in which he is prohibited by the
Constitution or by any law from having any interest.
(i) Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for personal
gain, or having a material interest in any transaction or act
requiring the approval of a board, panel or group of which
he is a member, and which exercises discretion in such
approval, even if he votes against the same or does not
participate in the action of the board, committee, panel or
group.
Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against those
public officers responsible for the approval of manifestly
unlawful, inequitable, or irregular transaction or acts by the
board, panel or group to which they belong.
75 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
(j) Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit,
privilege or benefit in favor of any person not qualified for
or not legally entitled to such license, permit, privilege or
advantage, or of a mere representative or dummy of one
who is not so qualified or entitled.
(k) Divulging valuable information of a confidential
character, acquired by his office or by him on account of his
official position to unauthorized persons, or releasing such
information in advance of its authorized release date.
Note: if damage was caused, Article 229 under the RPC is
committed.
SECTION 9 – PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS
 Under Section 9, both private individuals and
public officers have just the same penalty. It is
six years and one month to fifteen years plus
forfeiture of the ill-gotten wealth.
SECTION 7 – STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND
LIABILITIES & RA 6713
 When do the officers file the statement of assets,
liabilities and net worth?
 The said public officer can file his SALN within 30
days from assumption into office. And then it
must be filed on or before the 30th day of April of
the next years and within 30 days after separation
from the service.
 In RA 3019, it is stated “on or before 15th of April”
but there is another law which provides also for
the filing of SALN and that is RA6713 which is the
code of ethical standards for public officers.
 Under RA 6713, and this is what is being followed,
it must be on or before the 30th day of April.
 So you file first within 30 days upon assumption
to office and then the years thereafter on or before
the 30th day of April and then if you got separated
from office, within 30 days from separation from
office.
SECTION 8 – PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF AND
DISMISSAL DUE TO UNEXPLAINED WEALTH
 When is there a prima facie presumption of graft and
corrupt practices?
 There arises a prima facie presumption of graft
and corrupt practices if a public officer has been
found to have in his possession money or
property, whether in his name or in that name of
another person, which is manifestly out of
proportion from his lawful income. There arises a
prima facie presumption of graft and corrupt
practices.
SECTION 10 – COMPETENT COURT & RA 8429
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 Where do you file a case for violation of RA 3019?
 You file a case of violation of Article 3019 before
the Sandiganbayan. The Sandiganbayan has
jurisdiction unless otherwise provided by law.
 There is a law, RA 8429 which provides for the
jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan. Under this law, if a
public officer is of salary grade 27 and above, it
must be before the Sandiganbayan. If the public
officer is below salary grade 27, it must be before
the RTC.
SECTION 11 – PRESCRIPTION OF OFFENSES
 When is the prescriptive period?
 Violation for RA 3019 shall prescribe after 15
years. However, the right of the government to
forfeit or to recover ill-gotten wealth does not
prescribe. So there are no latches and estoppel
insofar as the right of the government to recover
ill-gotten wealth is concerned.
 When do you start counting the running of the
prescriptive period of crime?
 From the time the crime has been committed or if
it is not known, that is from the time of the
discovery of the said crime, then it is from the time
of the institution of the criminal perseverance.
SECTION 13 – SUSPENSION AND LOSS OF
BENEFITS
Q: What if a public officer, has been charged for violation of
RA 3019, the Ombudsman found probable cause. The case
was now filed before the Sandiganbayan. Is it incumbent
upon the Sandiganbayan to immediately place him under
preventive suspension? Is preventive suspension
automatic? Is preventive suspension mandatory?
A: Preventive suspension is mandatory but it is
not automatic. There must first be a pre-suspension
period to determine the validity of the information.
The moment the Sandiganbayan discovers the said
information is valid, sufficient in substance to bring
about a conviction, it is now mandatory upon the
Sandiganbayan to place the said accused public officer
under preventive suspension.
So it is not automatic because there must first be a
pre-suspension period. The only issue in the pre-
suspension period is the information filed by the
Ombudsman against the said public officer valid,
is it sufficient enough to bring about a conviction
in court? If the answer is yes, immediately,
mandatory on the part of the Sandiganbayan, a
ministerial duty, the said public officer must be
placed under preventive suspension. It it
ministerial not discretionary, not either or.
 For how long should the suspension be?
76 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 The suspension must not exceed the
maximum of ninety days, in consonance with
Section 52 of the Administrative Code.
SECTION 14 - EXCEPTION
Q: What if a public officer saw an old man waiting line. So
the old man received a notice, the notice said that his
license is ready, it has already been approved. So he was
waiting in line for the release of his license, it was already
approved. The head of office saw the old man. 85 years old,
under the heat of the sun and with his frail body. So the
head of office took the man and the head of office asked the
man to his office. The head of office asked the secretary, “Is
the license of this man approved?” The secretary said yes.
The head of office said, “get it.” The secretary took it and
gave to the head of office. The head of office, upon seeing
that it is approved, and the man was only waiting for its
release, gave it to the man; therefore the man need not wait
in the long line. The man was so thankful that the following
day, the man went back to the office with two big bilaos of
bibingka to the said head of office to say thank you. The
said head of office received two big bilaos of bibingka. Is the
said head of office liable under RA 3019?
A: No. It falls under the exception. Under Section
14, unsolicited gifts or presents of small or insignificant
value offered or given as a mere ordinary token of
friendship or gratitude, according to local customs or
usage is excepted from the provisions of RA 3019;
therefore the said public officer will not be held
criminally liable.
RA 7080: ANTI-PLUNDER ACT
ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH
- means any asset, property, business enterprise or
material possession of any person within the purview of
Section two (2) hereof, acquired by him directly or
indirectly through dummies, nominees, agents,
subordinates and/or business associates by any
combination or series of the following means or similar
schemes:
1. Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or
malversation of public funds or raids on the public
treasury;
2. By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift,
share, percentage, kickbacks or any/or entity in connection
with any government contract or project or by reason of the
office or position of the public officer concerned;
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
3. By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of
assets belonging to the National government or any of its
subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or government-
owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries;
4. By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly
any shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or
participation including the promise of future employment
in any business enterprise or undertaking;
5. By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial
monopolies or other combinations and/or implementation
of decrees and orders intended to benefit particular persons
or special interests;or
6. By taking undue advantage of official position, authority,
relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich
himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage
and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the
Philippines
Sec. 2. Definition of the Crime of Plunder, Penalties. Any
public officer who, by himself or in connivance with
members of his family, relatives by affinity or
consanguinity, business associates, subordinates or other
persons, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth
through a combination or series of overt or criminal acts as
described in Section 1 (d) hereof, in the aggregate amount
or total value of at least Fifty million pesos
(P50,000,000.00), shall be guilty of the crime of plunder
and shall be punished by life imprisonment with perpetual
absolute disqualification from holding any public office.
Any person who participated with the said public officer in
the commission of plunder shall likewise be punished. In
the imposition of penalties, the degree of participation and
the attendance of mitigating and extenuating circumstances
shall be considered by the court.
Sec. 4. Rule of Evidence. For purposes of establishing the
crime of plunder, it shall not be necessary to prove each
and every criminal act done by the accused in furtherance
of the scheme or conspiracy to amass, accumulate or
acquire ill-gotten wealth, it being sufficient to establish
beyond reasonable doubt a pattern of overt or criminal acts
indicative of the overall unlawful scheme or conspiracy.
Sec. 6. Prescription of Crime. The crime punishable under
this Act shall prescribe in twenty (20) years. However, the
right of the State to recover properties unlawfully acquired
by public officers from them or from their nominees or
transferees shall not be barred by prescription, laches, or
estoppel.
77 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

(6) Being tied or forced to assume fixed and

RA 9745 ANTI-TORTURE ACT: stressful bodily position;

Torture refers to: (7) Rape and sexual abuse, including the insertion
1. an act by which severe pain or suffering, whether of foreign objects into the sex organ or rectum, or
physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a electrical torture of the genitals;
person for such purposes as obtaining from
him/her or a third person information or a
(8) Mutilation or amputation of the essential parts
confession;
of the body such as the genitalia, ear, tongue, etc.;
2. punishing him/her for an act he/she or a third
person has committed or is suspected of having
(9) Dental torture or the forced extraction of the
committed;
teeth;
3. or intimidating or coercing him/her or a third
person;
4. or for any reason based on discrimination of any (10) Pulling out of fingernails;
kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or
at the instigation of or with the consent or (11) Harmful exposure to the elements such as
acquiescence of a person in authority or agent of a sunlight and extreme cold;
person in authority.
(12) The use of plastic bag and other materials
It does not include pain or Buffering arising only from, placed over the head to the point of asphyxiation;
inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
(13) The use of psychoactive drugs to change the
Acts of torture: perception, memory. alertness or will of a person,
such as:
(a) Physical torture is a form of treatment or punishment
inflicted by a person in authority or agent of a person in (i) The administration or drugs to induce
authority upon another in his/her custody that causes confession and/or reduce mental competency; or
severe pain, exhaustion, disability or dysfunction of one or
more parts of the body, such as:
(ii) The use of drugs to induce extreme pain or
certain symptoms of a disease; and
(1) Systematic beating, headbanging, punching,
kicking, striking with truncheon or rifle butt or
(14) Other analogous acts of physical torture; and
other similar objects, and jumping on the
stomach;
(b) "Mental/Psychological Torture" refers to acts
committed by a person in authority or agent of a person in
(2) Food deprivation or forcible feeding with
authority which are calculated to affect or confuse the mind
spoiled food, animal or human excreta and other
and/or undermine a person's dignity and morale, such as:
stuff or substances not normally eaten;

(1) Blindfolding;
(3) Electric shock;

(2) Threatening a person(s) or his/fher relative(s)

(4) Cigarette burning; burning by electrically
with bodily harm, execution or other wrongful
heated rods, hot oil, acid; by the rubbing of pepper
acts;
or other chemical substances on mucous
membranes, or acids or spices directly on the
wound(s); (3) Confinement in solitary cells or secret
detention places;
(5) The submersion of the head in water or water
polluted with excrement, urine, vomit and/or (4) Prolonged interrogation;
blood until the brink of suffocation;

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 78 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
(5) Preparing a prisoner for a "show trial", public
display or public humiliation of a detainee or
prisoner;
(6) Causing unscheduled transfer of a person
deprived of liberty from one place to another,
creating the belief that he/she shall be summarily
executed;
(7) Maltreating a member/s of a person's family;
(8) Causing the torture sessions to be witnessed by
the person's family, relatives or any third party;
(9) Denial of sleep/rest;
(10) Shame infliction such as stripping the person
naked, parading him/her in public places, shaving
the victim's head or putting marks on his/her body
against his/her will;
(11) Deliberately prohibiting the victim to
communicate with any member of his/her family;
and
(12) Other analogous acts of mental/psychological
torture.
Any confession, admission or statement obtained as a result
of torture shall be inadmissible in evidence in any
proceedings, except if the same is used as evidence against
a person or persons accused of committing torture.
Rights of Tortured Victims:
(a) To have a prompt and an impartial investigation by the
CHR and by agencies of government concerned such as the
Department of Justice (DOJ), the Public Attorney's Office
(PAO), the PNP, the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI)
and the AFP. A prompt investigation shall mean a
maximum period of sixty (60) working days from the time a
complaint for torture is filed within which an investigation
report and/or resolution shall be completed and made
available. An appeal whenever available shall be resolved
within the same period prescribed herein,
(b) To have sufficient government protection against all
forms of harassment; threat and/or intimidation as a
consequence of the filing of said complaint or the
presentation of evidence therefor. In which case, the State
through its appropriate agencies shall afford security in
order to ensure his/her safety and all other persons
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
involved in the investigation and prosecution such as, but
not limited to, his/her lawyer, witnesses and relatives; and
(c) To be accorded sufficient protection in the manner by
which he/she testifies and presents evidence in any fora in
order to avoid further trauma.
Who are Criminally Liable. - Any person who actually
participated Or induced another in the commission of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment or who cooperated in the execution of the act
of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment
or punishment by previous or simultaneous acts shall be
liable as principal
Any superior military, police or law enforcement officer or
senior government official who issued an order to any lower
ranking personnel to commit torture for whatever purpose
shall be held equally liable as principals.
The immediate commanding officer of the unit concerned
of the AFP or the immediate senior public official of the
PNP and other law enforcement agencies shall be held
liable as a principal to the crime of torture or other cruel or
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment for any
act or omission, or negligence committed by him/her that
shall have led, assisted, abetted or allowed, whether directly
or indirectly, the commission thereof by his/her
subordinates. If he/she has knowledge of or, owing to the
circumstances at the time, should have known that acts of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment shall be committed, is being committed, or has
been committed by his/her subordinates or by others
within his/her area of responsibility and, despite such
knowledge, did not take preventive or corrective action
either before, during or immediately after its commission,
when he/she has the authority to prevent or investigate
allegations of torture or other cruel, inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment but failed to prevent or
investigate allegations of such act, whether deliberately or
due to negligence shall also be liable as principals.
Any public officer or employee shall be liable as an
accessory if he/she has knowledge that torture or other
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment is
being committed and without having participated therein,
either as principal or accomplice, takes part subsequent to
its commission in any of the following manner:
(a) By themselves profiting from or assisting the
offender to profit from the effects of the act of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment;
79 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
(b) By concealing the act of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment
and/or destroying the effects or instruments
thereof in order to prevent its discovery; or(c) By
harboring, concealing or assisting m the escape of
the principal/s in the act of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment:
Provided, That the accessory acts are done with
the abuse of the official's public functions.
Aggravating Circumstances in torture:
1. Torture resulting in the death of any person;
2. Torture resulting in mutilation;
3. Torture with rape;
4. Torture with other forms of sexual abuse and, in
consequence of torture, the victim shall have become
insane, imbecile, impotent, blind or maimed for life;
and
5. Torture committed against children.
Note:
 Torture as a crime shall not absorb or shall not be
absorbed by any other crime or felony committed
as a consequence, or as a means in the conduct or
commission thereof. In which case, torture shall
be treated as a separate and independent criminal
act whose penalties shall be imposable without
prejudice to any other criminal liability provided
for by domestic and international laws. (Sec 15)
 Persons who have committed any act of torture
shall not benefit from any special amnesty law or
similar measures that will have the effect of
exempting them from any criminal proceedings
and sanctions. (sec 16)
REFOULER- No person shall be expelled, returned or
extradited to another State where there are substantial
grounds to believe that such person shall be in danger of
being subjected to torture.
CHAPTER THREE – FRAUDS AND ILLEGAL
EXACTIONS AND TRANSACTIONS
ARTICLE 213 – FRAUDS AGAINST THE PUBLIC
TREASURY AND SIMILAR OFFENSES
Article 213 punishes two (2) acts:
1. Fraud against public treasury (par.1)
2. Illegal exactions (par. 2)
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
ELEMENTS OF FRAUD AGAINST PUBLIC
TREASURY (ART. 213, PAR. 1):
1. That the offender is a public officer
2. that he should have taken advantage of his office, that
is he intervened in the transaction of his official
capacity
3. That he entered into an agreement with any interested
party or speculator or made use of any other scheme
with regard to:
(1) furnishing supplies
(2) the making of contracts
(3) the adjustment or settlement of accounts
relating to public property or funds
4. That the accused had intent to defraud the
Government
So here, the public officer took advantage of his official
position in entering into contract which involves the
furnishing of supplies, or which involves public funds or
property and the intention is to DEFRAUD THE
GOVERNMENT. It is not necessary that the Government,
the treasury be actually be defrauded, it suffices that
entering in the said contract, the intention of the said
offender, the public officer, is to defraud the Government.
ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL EXACTION (ART. 213,
PAR. 2)
1. That the offender is a public officer entrusted with the
collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts.
2. He is guilty of any of the following acts or omissions:
(1) Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of
sums different from or larger than those
authorized by law; or
(2) Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided
by law, for any sum of money collected by him
officially; or
(3) Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by
way of payment or otherwise, things or objects of a
nature different from that provided by law.
Here, the offender is a COLLECTING PUBLIC
OFFICER. A public officer who has been entrusted with
duty to collect taxes, licenses, fees or other imposts. Only
this kind of public officer can commit this crime because
ILLEGAL EXACTION involves violation of rules on
collection.
1st Act - Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of
sums different from or larger than those authorized by
law;or
Q: There was this cashier in the city treasurer’s office. Here
comes X, X said that he is going to get a cedula (residence
certificate) and then X said, “How much am I going to
pay?” and then, the cashier or the collecting officer said,
80 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
“you have to pay Php200” but it is actually Php20. X said,
“hmp, angmahalpala, ayokona.” and so he left. Is the said
collecting officer liable of any crime?
A: YES, he is liable. For merely demanding an
amount larger than that authorized by law, he is
already liable for ILLEGAL EXACTION under Article
213, Par. 2.
Q: He is already liable, he merely demanded, but what if in
the same problem, X said he was going to get a cedula. The
collecting officer saw him and he appears to be poor man
and so X asked the collecting officer, “How much am I
going to pay?” and the collecting officer took pity of X and
said, “Only Php 10”. So, the poor man said, “Oh, I have
more money, I’ll get two”. Is the collecting officer liable of
any crime?
A: YES, he is liable because he demanded an
amount different from that authorized by law. Note
that what the law requires is the demanding of an
amount, directly or indirectly, different from or larger
than those authorized by law. Therefore, even if it is
lower, so long as it is different from that provided by
law, and so long as it is demanded by the said
collecting officer, then it is considered as ILLEGAL
EXACTION.
It is not necessary for the said collecting officer to have
misappropriate the funds, the moment that he
misappropriates the funds, in addition to illegal
exaction, he may also be held liable for
MALVERSATION, because Illegal Exaction is only
about the rules on collection. It has nothing to do with
the appropriation or misappropriation of funds or
property. Only a violation of the rules on collection.
2nd Act - Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided
by law, for any sum of money collected by him officially;
Q: So what if it was January 2, all kinds of payment are
being made at the start of the year. So the collecting officer
in the treasurer’s office rans out of official receipt (O.R.).
And so he got a half sheet of typewriting paper and he note
there about the said payment and a provisional receipt and
he gave it to the same person who made the payment. Is the
said collecting officer liable of illegal exaction?
A: He IS NOT. Because he did not voluntarily fail to
issue the said O.R. He ran out of the said O.R., it was
not voluntary on his part. It was an emergency
situation. It is good that she even gave a provisional
receipt as a proof of payment. In this case, he cannot
be held liable for illegal exaction.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
3rd Act - Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by
way of payment or otherwise, things or objects of a nature
different from that provided by law.
Here, under the third act, it does not refer to the
amount of payment. It refers to the KIND OR NATURE OF
PAYMENT. So, when the law says that it should be paid in
cash, ONLY CASH may be received by the said collecting
officer.
So the collecting officer is known as a sabungero. So
here comes one of the persons who was making payment.
He has no money, but said, he has a magandang tandang.
And so, that was the payment received. He commits a
violation of illegal exaction.
Q: What if the person who demanded an amount or
different from or larger than that which is provided for by
law is an officer, a collecting officer from the Bureau of
Internal Revenue, or a collecting officer form the Bureau of
Customs. Is he liable under Article 213?
A: He is not liable for illegal exaction under
Art. 213. He is liable under the Tax Code or under the
Tariffs and Customs Code. Under Art. 213, it is
expressly provided that if the collecting officer is a
collecting officer coming from the Bureau of Internal
Revenue or Bureau of Customs is not liable under this
Article. The reason here is that, this collecting officer
from the BIR and the BOC, have the right to ask for
penalties, surcharges, and compromise. Therefore,
they can always demand and amount different from or
that which is larger than that authorized by law. If they
exceeded that authority, then they are liable under the
Tariffs and Customs Code or under the Tax Code, but
NOT UNDER THE RPC.
ARTICLE 214 – OTHER FRAUDS
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He takes advantage of his official position
3. He commits any of the frauds or deceits enumerated in
Articles 315-318
If any of the public officer commits any of the frauds or
deceits constituting ESTAFA or SWINDLING, under Art.
315-318, and he does so by taking advantage of his official
position, his criminal liability is Other Frauds under Art.
214.
- Not estafa, Not swindling. the reason is that in
case of a public officer, there is additional
penalty. If you look at Article 214, the law says
that the penalty is the same penalty as the first
offense under Art. 315-318. But additional to
that, temporary disqualification to perpetual
81 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
disqualification for having taken advantage of
his official position. Therefore, if it is a public
officer who commits estafa or swindling, the
crime is under Art. 214 and there is an additional
penalty.
ARTICLE 215 – PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is an appointive public officer
2. He becomes interested, directly or indirectly in any
transaction of exchange or speculation
3. Transaction takes place within the territory subject to
his jurisdiction
4. He becomes interested in the transaction during his
incumbency
ARTICLE 216 – POSSESSION OF PROHIBITED
INTEREST BY A PUBLIC OFFICER
PERSONS LIABLE:
1. Public Officer who, directly or indirectly, became
interested in any contract or business in which it was
his official duty to intervene.
2. Experts, arbitrators, and private accountants who, in
like manner, took part in any contract or transaction
connected with the estate or property in the appraisal,
distribution or adjudication of which they had acted
3. Guardians and executors with respect to the property
belonging to their wards or the estate
CHAPTER FOUR – MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC
FUNDS OR PROPERTY
ARTICLE 217 – MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC
FUNDS OR PROPERTY (PRESUMPTION OF
MALVERSATION)
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He has the custody or control of funds or property by
reason of the duties of his office
3. Those funds or property were public funds or property
for which he was accountable
4. He appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented,
or through abandonment or negligence, permitted
another person to take them
 Who is the offender?
- The offender is an accountable public officer. An
accountable of public officer is an officer in the
course of the performance of his duties, receives
funds or property from the government which he
has the obligation to account later. So he has in his
custody, public funds or public property and he
has the obligation to account these to the
Government.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Punishable acts:
1. Appropriating public funds or property
2. Taking or misappropriating the same
3. Consenting, through abandonment or negligence,
permitting any other person to take such public funds
or property
4. Being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or
malversation of such funds or property
Malversation of Public Funds and Property can be
committed either through a positive act, that is, that the
said public officer is the one who misappropriates, takes or
appropriates the public funds and property, OR, through a
passive act, that is, through his abandonment or
negligence, he permitted others to misappropriate the
same.
- Malversation can be committed either through a
positive act, which is through deliberate intent or
through dolo. He is the one who appropriates or
misappropriates, who took the the said public
funds or property
- Passive Act which is through his abandonment or
negligence, or cupla. he allowed others to
appropriate or misappropriate the said public
funds or property
When is there prima facie presumption of malversation?
- Under Article 217, there arises prima facie
presumption of malversation of public funds or
property when demand is made by a duly
authorized officer to an accountable public officer
to account for public funds or property, and the
same is not forthcoming
So the COA auditor, appeared and conducted an audit He
demanded for the said amount, the said accountable public
officer cannot reduce the said amount. There arises the
prima facie presumption that he has malverse the said
public funds or property. Although that is what is written
under Article 217, last paragraph. The Supreme Court in the
number of cases said:
“Mere shortage in audit will not suffice. For the Prima
facie presumption to arise the following requisites
must be present: - It is necessary that there must be
complete, thorough and reliable audit.
- In the said complete, thorough and reliable audit,
the following were discovered:
a. The public officer indeed receive the public
funds or property. That is, he is an
accountable public officer
82 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
b. The said public funds and property was
missing, or there was a shortage, or he
cannot produce it, and
c. The said public officer cannot give a
justifiable reason, a legal excuse for the said
shortage or missing of public funds or
property.”
If all of these are present, the Supreme Court says
that there arises the prima facie presumption that there is
malversation of public funds or property. Therefore, there
may NOT be direct evidence to convict one for malversation
of public funds or property. Obviously, there cannot be any
witness, because when you say direct evidence, there is a
witness. Of course, he would not let anyone see him
malversing the funds. It suffices in the audit, these three
things were discovered. If these three are discovered, then
there arises the prima facie presumption that there is a so-
called MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR
PROPERTY
Q: What if a man was walking, in the middle of the night, a
police officer who was conducting a patrol saw something
bulging on his waist. The police officer stopped him and
frisked him and there, they saw a firearm. They ask for the
license, the said man could not produce the license for the
said firearm. He was arrested for illegal possession of
unlicensed firearm, and the firearm was confiscated.
During the trials of the case, the fiscal move for subpoena
for the custodian of the said firearm. The custodian
appeared but failed to bring the firearm. He had already
sold the said firearm confiscated. What crime is committed
by the said custodian?
A: He is liable for Malversation under Article
217.
Q: His contention was, it cannot be malversation, because
the firearm was owned by a private person. It is not a public
property, therefore I cannot be held liable for malversation.
Is the contention correct?
A: His contention is wrong. The said firearm has
already been confiscated by public authority, therefore
it is now deemed, CUSTODIA LEGIS. The moment it is
in custodialegis, it loses its character as a private
property and it now assumes a character of a public
property. Hence the crime committed is Malversation.
Q: What if, there was this collecting officer, a cashier, and
there were many persons paying. And the long line persons
paying, one cashier said that he needed to answer the call of
nature, and so he asked another fellow cashier to look after
his drawer, and so, he left and went to the restroom. But he
also left the key of his drawing on the key holder. And so,
the moment he left, his fellow cashier went to his drawer
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
and opened it and took Php 2000 from the collection of A
on the same day. Then A arrived, and he then accepted
collections. In the afternoon, there was a surprise audit
coming from the COA. and it was discovered that based on
the receipts, The php 2000 were missing from the
collection of A. Therefore, A was charged. What crime if
any, has been committed by A? Is A liable for malversation?
A: Yes, he is liable for malversation through
negligence. That is the passive act. That is through
his abandonment or negligence, he permitted another
person, Cashier B to misappropriate a part of his
collection for the day. Hence A is also liable for
Malversation. Not B, but A, the one who went to the
restroom, because he is the one accountable for the
said public funds in his drawer.
That other person, B, who took the said property is
liable for qualified theft. because he was entrusted
with the same funds, and he took the same funds.
Q: What if, in the same problem, after the COA auditor
found out that Php 2000 was missing, A was charged with
Malversation of public funds and property through dolo.
So, in the information, it was stated that he is the one who
misappropriate, appropriates or has taken the said public
funds, and so he was charged with Malversation through
dolo, through deliberate intent. That was the case filed
against him because they did not know that it was B who
took the money. So, the presumption is that, he is the one
who took the money, who appropriated it. During the trial
of the merits, during the presentation of the defense
evidence, when it was already A’s term to testify, it was
divulged or disclosed to the court that it was in fact another
cashier, B who misappropriated the said funds through the
negligence of A. And by reason of this evidence presented in
court, the said judge, convicted A of Malversation through
culpa, in an information of malversation through dolo. Is
the judge correct? can he convict A?
A: Yes, the judge is correct. The reason is that,
according to the Supreme Court, whether Malversation
is committed through deliberate intent or culpa, DOLO
and CULPA are merely modalities of committing the
crime. Nevertheless, it is still malversation, and if you
look at Article 217, whether malversation is committed
through deliberate intent or through negligence, they
just have one and the same penalties. Further, the
Supreme Court said, Malversation through negligence
or culpa is NECESSARILY INCLUDED in Malversation
through deliberate intent or dolo. Hence, even if the
information is Malversation through dolo, one can be
convicted of Malversation through Culpa or
Negligence.
83 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Q: What if, there was this rape in a warehouse, in the
course of the said rape, dangerous drugs worth millions of
pesos were confiscated and they were placed in the PDEA
warehouse. The persons therein were charged with illegal
possession of dangerous drugs. In the course of the hearing
in this possession of dangerous drugs, the court sent a
subpoena to the PDEA custodian, to bring to the Court the
said dangerous drugs which were confiscated. And so, on
the designated day, the said PDEA agent boarded all the
dangerous drugs confiscated in a PDEA van and off he went
to the Court. However, before the PDEA agent could reach
the court, here comes two motorcycles who went in and
fired at him, and he fell on his seat, lifeless. And then, a big
vehicle arrived at the back of the said PDEA van and took
all the said dangerous drugs. Now the said PDEA agent was
brought into the hospital and despite the fatal wound,
because of the immediate medical intervention, he
survived. Is he liable of any crime?
A: Yes, he is liable of Malversation of public
funds or property under Article 217 through
Negligence. There was inexcusable negligence on his
part said the Supreme Court, because all by himself,
carried the millions worth of dangerous drugs in the
PDEA van, considering the value of the said dangerous
drugs, he should have asked for back up. Yes, he
survived, but he was charged with Malversation of
public funds or property through CULPA.
Q: What if, there is a public officer whose office is in pasay.
He is going to have a meeting in Caloocan. And so he went
to Caloocan in one afternoon and attended the said
meeting. He had to go to pasay in order to make a report,
However, the traffic was heavy, so instead of using his car
on the way back, he rode the LRT. Upon reaching the office,
he realized that his bag was opened, and the cellphone
which was __5:17___ by the Government was already
gone. By reason thereof, he was charged with Malversation
under Article 217 because through his negligence, the
cellphone which was ____ to him by the Government and
for which he is accountable to the Government was now
missing. It was taken or stolen by somebody. Is he liable?
He was convicted by the SandiganBayan but when it came
to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court acquitted him.
A: According to the Supreme Court, there was no
negligence on the part of the said public officer. He
cannot be faulted for having taken the LRT because of
the said heavy traffic. It cannot be said that there was
negligence on his part in placing the cellphone inside
his bag, because, where else would you place a
cellphone but inside the bag for safekeeping. It would
have been different while on board, he was using the
said cellphone. Hence, the Supreme Court said, there
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
was no negligence and therefore, although convicted by
the SandiganBayan, he was acquitted by the Supreme
Court.
ARTICLE 218 – FAILURE OF ACCOUNTABLE
OFFICER TO RENDER ACCOUNTS
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer, whether in the service or
separated therefrom
2. He must be an accountable officer for public funds or
property
3. He is required by law or regulation to render accounts
to the Commission on Audit, or to a provincial Auditor
4. He fails to do so for a period of two months after such
accounts should be rendered
ARTICLE 219 – FAILURE OF RESPONSIBLE
PUBLIC OFFICER TO RENDER ACCOUNTS
BEFORE LEAVING THE COUNTRY
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He must be an accountable officer for public funds or
property
3. He must have unlawfully left (or be on the point of
leaving) the Philippines without securing from the
Commission on Audit a certificate showing that his
accounts have been finally settled
ARTICLE 220 – ILLEGAL USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS
OR PROPERTY (Technical Malversation)
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender s a public officer
2. there is a public fund or property under his
administration
3. Such public fund or property has been appropriated by
law or ordinance
4. He applies the same to a public use other than that for
which such fund or property has been appropriated by
law or ordinance.
Q: What if a public officer has under his administration
public funds which is for a certain project. So let us say that
X is the city administrator. Under his administration, there
was Php500,000, the said Php 500,000 was for the
construction of a bridge between one barangay to another
barangay. Then suddenly there was a typhoon, a big
typhoon and many of the constituents were rendered
homeless. And so, they had to stay in the basketball court,
they need food, clothing, water and other basic needs. And
so, the city administrator made use of the Php 500,000
under his administration to buy these basic needs of his
84 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

constituents. Is the said public officer, the city Punishable acts:

administrator liable of any crime? 1. Failing to make payment by a public officer who is
under obligation to make such payment from
A: Yes, he is liable for technical Malversation Government funds in his possession
under Article 220. 2. Refusing to make delivery by a public officer who has
been ordered by competent authority to deliver any
EXAMPLE: property in his custody or under his administration
GMA and other head of Philhealth before were charged by
Frank Chavez because of Technical Malversation because of
transfer of COA funds, which was used for Philhealth
purposes during the elections. And so, because of that, ARTICLE 222 – OFFICERS INCLUDED IN
according to Frank Chavez, they are liable for Malversation. PRECEDING PROVISIONS
They were charged with Technical Malversation. But their Private Individual who may be liable under Art.
contention was there was a law that allowed it. If there was 217-221:
a law that allowed it, then, there was no violation. But, if 1. Private Individual who in any capacity whatsoever,
there is no law, there is an illegal transfer of funds, have charge of national, provincial or municipal funds,
therefore, technical Malversation will resolve. revenue or property
2. Administrator, depository of funds or property
ARTICLE 217 ARTICLE 220 attached, seized or deposited by public authority even
The public officer The public officer did not if such property belongs to a private individual
misappropriates the fund for misappropriate the funds 3. Those who acted in conspiracy in malversation
his personal use. for his personal use, he 4. Accomplice and accessories to malversation
used it for another public
purpose other than that Can private property be the subject of Malversation?
which has been - YES, under the 2nd act in Article 222, that is when
appropriated by law or the said funds or property has been attached, seized
ordinance that is why it is or deposited by public authority, it now becomes in
TECHNICAL custodialegis and it now assumes the character of
MALVERSATION – the being public funds or property. If any are
offense is on the misappropriated, then the crime committed is
technicality of the use of Malversation and not theft.
funds.
INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF PRISONERS
The public officer has in his The public officer has in his (Articles 223, 224, 225)
possession public funds or possession public funds or ARTICLE 223 – CONNIVING WITH OR
property for safekeeping. It property is only under his CONSENTING TO EVASION
is under his custody and administration. Not for ELEMENTS:
control and therefore it is safekeeping, but only for 1. Offender is a public officer
for his safekeeping and he the purpose of 2. He has in his custody or charge a prisoner, either
has the obligation to account administrating it that is, for detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment
it later on to the applying it for the purpose 3. Such prisoner escaped from his custody
Government which it has been 4. That he was in connivance with the prisoner in the
appropriated by law or latter’s escape, or is with his consent
ordiance
ARTICLE 224 – EVASTION THROUGH
ARTICLE 221 – FAILURE TO MAKE DELIVERY OF NEGLIGENCE
PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY ELEMENTS:
ELEMENTS: 1. Offender is a public officer
1. That the public officer has government funds in his 2. He is charged with the conveyance or custody of a
possession prisoner, either detention prisoner or prisoner by final
2. That he is under obligation to make payments from judgment
such funds 3. Such prisoner escapes through his negligence
3. That he fails to make payment maliciously

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 85 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
ARTICLE 225 – ESCAPE OF PRISONER UNDER
THE CUSTODY OF A PERSON NOT A PUBLIC
OFFICER
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a private individual
2. Conveyance (or charge) of custody of prisoner or
person under arrest is confided to him
3. Prisoner or person under arrest escapes
4. Offender consents to the escape of the prisoner or
person under arrest or that the escape takes place
through his negligence
Whether it be under Art. 223, 224, 225, the offender
infidelity in the custody of prisoners is one who has been
entrusted with the custody and charge of the prisoner.
Whether the prisoner is a prisoner convicted by final
judgment or a detention prisoner. He must be charged, he
must be the custodian of the said prisoner because the
essence of the crime is the violation of the trust reposed on
him. Because prisoners are accountabilities of the
Government.
 Can a private individual commit infidelity?
- Yes, under Art. 225. If he is entrusted with the
custody of this prisoner and the prisoner escapes,
either in connivance with him or through his
negligence, then his liability is infidelity in the
custody of prisoners
Q: A has been charged with illegal sale of dangerous drugs.
She is behind bars, it is a non-bailable offense, and
therefore, while the case is ongoing, she is behind bars. So,
it was the hearing date, she was accompanied by the jail
warden, the jail guard to the court, and after trial, there was
this husband and two children of the said woman who was
in jail. The husband and two children talked, and when the
said woman prisoner was about to be brought to jail, the
husband talked to the jail warden. He invited the jail
warden for a merienda, in a canteen inside the hall of
justice. And so, the jail warden saw nothing wrong and so,
he had merienda with the woman prisoner, the husband
and the two children. The handcuffs had to be removed for
the woman prisoner to eat. After eating, the woman
prisoner said that she needed to answer the call of nature,
and so, she went to the restroom, also inside or within the
hall of justice. The jail guard allowed her inside while the
jail guard was left outside, waiting. Hours passed, no
woman prisoner came out. It so happens that the said
husband put some disguise for the woman to use so that
she could escape without being noticed by the said jail
guard, and woman prisoner was able to escape without
being noticed by the said jail guard. Is the said jail guard
liable for infidelity in the custody of prisoner, or is it a mere
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
laxity which would not amount to infidelity in the custody
of prisoner?
A: People vs. Nava – The Supreme Court said that
mere laxity would not amount to negligence under Art.
224. Because according to the Supreme Court in that
old case, the negligence being required in order that a
public officer may be entitled, must be a deliberate
non-performance of his duty. Here, it is only a mere
laxity on the part of the said public officer for not
having accompanying the said woman in the rest room.
Rodriguez vs. SandiganBayan (new case) – The
Supreme Court said otherwise. According to the
Supreme Court, the moment that a public officer, a jail
warden has accompanied a prisoner outside jail, he
must not have lost sight of the said prisoner. The only
obligation of the said jail warden after the trial was to
bring her back to the court. The fact that the said jail
guard allowed himself to have a merienda, and even
allowed the woman prisoner to go to the restroom
alone, there was laxity on the part of the said jail guard.
The Supreme Court said, LAXITY is a deliberate non-
performance of his official duty as the guard of the said
prisoner, thereby amounting to infidelity in the
custody of prisoner under Art. 224.
INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF DOCUMENTS
(ARTICLES 226, 227, 228)
ARTICLE 226 – REMOVAL, CONEALMENT OR
DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENT
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He removes, destroys, or conceals documents or
papers
3. Said documents or papers should have been entrusted
to such public officer by reason of his office
4. Damage, whether serious or not, to a third party or to
the public interest should have been caused
Under Article 226, in order for infidelity in the custody
of documents to arise, it is necessary that there be damage
caused to a third person or to the public interest. If damage
is serious, the penalty is QUALIFIED, therefore, the
damage may or may not be serious provided that there is
damage, the crime will arise.
DAMAGE IS NECESSARY in order to give rise to
infidelity in the custody of documents.
ARTICLE 227 – OFFICER BREAKING SEAL
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He is charged with the custody of papers or property
86 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
3. These papers or property are sealed by proper
authority
4. He breaks the seals or permits them to be broken
Under Article 227, officer breaking the seal, infidelity
in the custody of prisoners to arise, even without damage
caused to a third party or to public interest. Damage is NOT
an element.
MERE BREAKING of the seal of the document will
already consummate the crime.
ARTICLE 228 – OPENING A CLOSED DOCUMENT
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. Any closed papers, documents, or objects are entrusted
to his custody
3. He opens or permits to be opened said closed papers,
documents or objects
4. He does not have proper authority
Infidelity in the custody of documents, the public officer
has been entrusted with papers, documents or objects,
which have been closed by proper authority and the said
public officer opened the said closed document or
permitted others to open the same. Again, Damage is NOT
an element.
MERE ACT OF OPENING the said closed document will
give rise to the crime.
Q: What if A has been charged with illegal sale of
dangerous drugs. The case was on trial, during the trial of
the case, the fiscal presented the first police officer who
acted as the poseur buyer in the course of the testimony of
the police officer, the fiscal produced and showed to him for
identification the marked money. So the marked money
consists of 5, 100 peso bill. The fiscal presented it to the
police and the police identified it as indeed the marked
money because of the serial numbers and because of the
markings, and thereafter the marked money have been
marked as Exhibit A, B, C, D, E for the prosecution. After
the trial, they were placed inside an envelope and given to
the clerk of court, the custodian of the evidence which have
already been marked. So trial ended that day, it was now
lunch time. The clerk of court was on her table and so the
vendor arrived. The clerk of court wanted to buy lunch and
she said, how much. The vendor said it costs 50 peso. The
clerk of court pulled out her money; it was a 1000 peso bill.
The vendor said, “anglakinamanniyan, walaakongpanukli”
And so, by reason thereof, he gave it back to the clerk of
court. The clerk of court said that she had no smaller bills,
and he remembered the exhibits. And so, he took 100 peso
bill, marked as Exhibit E. And she paid it to the vendor and
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
the vendor gave him the change of 50 peso. After eating,
before 1:00, the said clerk of court immediately went
outside to change her big 1000 peso bill into smaller bills.
When he now has these smaller bills, he got one 100 peso
bill and marked it as Exhibit E and then he signed it and
placed it inside the envelope. Here comes the next hearing
date, on the next hearing date, another police officer was
presented, the fiscal produced the said documentary
exhibits, the marked money and asked it from the clerk of
court. So the fiscal showed it to the police officer, the police
officer identified Exhibits A, B, C, D. However, when it
comes to exhibit E, the police officer said, “Your Honor, it
has a different serial number from the one in our sworn
statement” and so because of that, an investigation
happened and the court learned that it was taken by said
clerk of court and used in buying food. What crime, if any is
committed by the said clerk of court? Is it malversation or
is it infidelity in the custody of documents?
A: The crime committed is infidelity in the
custody of documents under Art. 226 by the
public officer in destroying the said document.
This marked money becomes documentary evidence,
the moment they have been marked as exhibits. Money
here is not used as a medium of exchange, but as
documents because they have been marked as
documentary evidence. The moment they have been
taken, removed, concealed or destroyed, the crime
committed is infidelity in the custody of documents
because the clerk of court is the custodian of the
documentary exhibits. If money is used, not as a
medium of exchange, but like this, as documentary
exhibits or any other use other than as a medium of
exchange, the one who malverse, or use it is the
custodian of the said documents, the crime is infidelity
in the custody of documents and NOT malversation.
When the clerk of court took the 100 peso bill, he
destroyed the exhibit, the documentary exhibit of the
said prosecution and the prosecution was seriously
damaged interface.
REVELATION OF SECRETS (Article 229-230)
ARTICLE 229 – REVELATION OF SECRETS BY AN
OFFICER
Punishable acts:
1. By revealing any secrets which affect public interest
learned by him in his official capacity
ELEMENTS:
(1) Offender is a public officer
(2) He knows of a secret by reason of his
official capacity
87 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
(3) He reveals such secret without authority or
justifiable reasons
(4) Damage, great or small, is cause to the
public interest
It is necessary that there be Damage caused, whether
serious or not.
2. Wrongfully delivering papers or copies of papers of
which he may have charge and which should not be
published thereby causing damage, whether serious or
not, to a third party or to public interest.
ELEMENTS:
i. Offender is a public officer
ii. He has charge of papers
iii. Those papers should not be published
iv. He delivers those papers or copies thereof to
a third person
v. The delivery is wrongful
vi. Damage is caused to public interest
ARTICLE 230 – PUBLIC OFFICER REVEALING
SECRETS OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He knows of the secrets of private individual by reason
of his office
3. He reveals such secrets without authority or justifiable
reason
Damage is NOT an element in Article 230.
ARTICLE 231 – OPEN DISOBEDIENCE
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a judicial or executive officer
2. There is judgment, decision, or order of a superior
authority
3. Such judgment, decision or order was made within the
scope of the jurisdiction of the superior authority and
issued with all the legal formalities
4. Offender without any legal justification openly refuses
to execute the said judgment, decision or order which
he is duty bound to obey
Open Disobedience is committed by any judicial or
executive officer who shall openly refuse without any legal
motive to execute a judgment or decision rendered by a
superior authority in the exercise of his duty and in the
legal infirmities of the law.
Q: What if in the case of Duterte, the sheriff wishes to
execute a writ of execution and cause the squatters to leave
the place because of the execution issued by the court has to
be implemented. Had not the sheriff performed the said
act, is he liable of any crime? Had the sheriff refused to
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
execute the writ of execution issued by the said judge? Is he
liable of any crime?
A: Yes, he is liable of Open Disobedience under
Article 231. He openly refused to execute a writ of
execution issued by a judge.
ARTICLE 232 – DISOBEDIENCE TO ORDER OF
SUPERIOR OFFICER, WHEN SAID ORDER WAS
SUSPENDED BY INFERIOR OFFICER
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. An order is issued by his superior for execution
3. He has for any reason suspended the execution of such
order
4. His superior disapproves the suspension of the
execution of the order
5. Offender disobeys his superior despite the disapproval
of the suspension
The offender refuses to disobey the suspension of the
said order which was disapproved by the said public officer.
ARTICLE 233 – REFUSAL OF ASSISTANCE
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. Competent authority demands from the offender that
he lend his cooperation towards the administration of
justice or other public service
3. Offender fails to do so maliciously
Public officer who shall fail to lend his cooperation
towards the administration of justice or any other public
service despite demand by competent authority.
Q: A raped B. B was treated by a medico legal officer at the
PNP. This medico legal officer who has examined A, issued
a medical certificate, And so in the case filed by B against A
for this so-called “rape”, the fiscal moved that the subpoena
(adjustificandum) be sent to this public officer, the medico
legal office who examined the rape victim. However,
despite receipt of the said subpoena, the medico legal
officer failed to appear. He did not appear without any
justifiable reason at all. The said prosecutor move again for
the issuance of another subpoena, a second subpoena.
Again, despite the receipt, the medico legal officer failed to
appear in court and testified and failed to give the copy of
the medico legal certificate. What crime if any has the said
medico legal officer has committed?
A: He is liable for Refusal of Assistance under
Article 233. It is committed by a public offcer that
despite demands of the public authority shall fail to
lend his cooperation toward the administration of
88 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
justice or any other public service. Thereby, causing
damage serious or not, to public interest.
NOTE: If the damage is serious, the penalty is
QUALIFIED.
ARTICLE 234 – REFUSAL TO DISCHARGE
ELECTIVE OFFICE
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is elected by popular election to a public
office
2. He refuses to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of
the said office
3. There is no legal motive for such refusal to be sworn in
or to discharge the duties of said office
This is a crime which cannot be committed in Philippine
Jurisdiction. Refusal to discharge public duties is
committed by any person entitled to a public office by
means of popular election, refuses to assume to assume the
powers and duties of his office. He refuses to be sworn in.
This will not happen in our lifetime. This will never happen
in the Philippine Jurisdiction because here, even if he did
not win in the election, he wanted to hold office.
ARTICLE 235 – MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He has under his charge a prisoner or detention
prisoner
3. He maltreats such prisoner either of the following
manners:
a. By overdoing himself in the correction or
handling of a prisoner or detention prisoner
under his charge either:
i. By the imposition of punishments not
authorized by the rules and regulations
ii. By inflicting such punishments (those
authorized) in a cruel or humiliating
manner
b. By maltreating such prisoner to extort a
confession or to obtain some information from
the prisoner
 Who is the offender?
- Any public officer or employee
 Who is the offended party?
- He must be a prisoner
In order to be considered a prisoner, it is necessary that the
said person has already been arrested, brought to the PNP
station and he has been incarcerated. If he is not a prisoner,
then, the crime can be physical injuries, whatever injuries
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
that may have been sustained by the prisoner, but NOT
maltreatment of prisoners
What if maltreatment does not only include physical
maltreatment. It shall also include moral, emotional,
psychological maltreatment because the law uses the
phrase physical injuries or damage caused.
Q: What if A has just withdrew his money from her ATM
account, she placed the money inside her bag and she was
already walking towards home when suddenly here comes
X. X snatched the handbag with the money. A police officer
passing by saw the incident and on boarded their mobile
patrol. They were able to arrest the man, took the bag and
returned it to the said victim. Thereafter, they placed X
inside the mobile patrol. While inside, they kicked, mauled
the man. And so, the man suffered less serious physical
injuries. What crime is committed by the said police
officers?
A: The crime committed is less serious physical
injuries. It is not maltreatment of prisoners because
the said person, X, is not yet a prisoner. He is only a
person under arrest because he has just been arrested
for having committed a crime, but he is not yet a
prisoner. In order to be considered as a prisoner, he
must be brought to the PNP station, taken a picture,
left view, side view, front view, thumbmark and
incarcerated. He is now an accountability of the
Government, he is now a prisoner. But before that, he
is not yet a prisoner. He is only a person under arrest.
That is why in the problem, the police officers are
liable only for less serious physical injuries and not of
maltreatment of prisoners.
Q: What if in the same problem, they chased the man. They
were able to catch the said man and brought him to the
PNP station. Booked him and incarcerated him, and all the
things needed to be done to a prisoner. Later, he was
brought out of jail for investigation to be brought in the
Investigation section. In the investigation, he was being
forced to admit to the commission of the crime. And so, by
reason thereof, the police officer boxed him and gave him a
huge black eye. The left eye suffered so much that he lost
sight, amounting to serious physical injuries. What are the
crimes committed by the police officer?
A: Two crimes – Maltreatment of Prisoners
and Serious Physical Injuries.
Maltreatment of Prisoners because he is a prisoner
who was maltreated in order to extort a confession and
Serious physical injuries because by reason of the
injury inflicted, he lost an eye.
89 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

Q: Are you going to complex them? because a single act
constitute a grave and less grave felony, are you going to
complex them under Art. 48?
A: No. You cannot complex them. Because under
Article 235, it is expressly provided that the liability
for maltreatment of prisoners shall be in addition to
the liability for any other physical injuries or damage
caused. Therefore two crimes will be charged against
the police officer.
There is also a violation of R.A. 9745, Anti-
Torture Act, because under Section 14 of the Anti-
Torture Act, Torture shall not absorb and shall not be
absorbed by any other crime committed as a
consequence. Therefore, he can also be held liable
under the so-called Anti-Torture Law.
ARTICLE 236 – ANTICIPATION OF DUTIES OF A
PUBLIC OFFICE
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is entitled to hold a public office or
employment either by election or appointment
2. Shall assume the performance of the duties and powers
of a public official or employee
3. Without being sworn into office or having given the
bond required by law
superior officer before it can be said that he have already
resigned.
So here, the public officer has already formally
resigned, his resignation has not been accepted, yet he
abandons to the detriment of public service. What is the
penalty?
- In the abandonment of office, the penalty is
QUALIFIED if the purpose of the said public
officer is to evade the prosecution punishment of
the crime involving violation of Title 1 – Book 2
(Crimes against National Security), or Chapter 1 –
Title 3 of Book 2 (Rebellion, Coup d’etat, Sedition,
etc.)
ARTICLE 239 – USURPATION OF LEGISLATIVE
POWERS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is an executive or judicial officer
2. That he:
a. Makes general rules and regulations beyond
the scope of his authority, or
b. Attempts to repeal a law, or
c. Suspend the execution of thereof
NOTE: It can only be committed by an executive or
judicial officer

ARTICLE 237 – PROLONGING PERFORMANCE OF

DUTIES AND POWERS
ELEMENTS: ARTICLE 240 – USURPATION OF EXECUTIVE
1. That the offender is holding a public office FUNCTIONS
2. That the period allowed by law for him to exercise such ELEMENTS:
function and duties has already expired 1. That the offender is a judge
3. That the offender continues to exercise such function 2. That the offender:
and duties a. Assumes the power exclusively vested to
executive authorities of the Government, or
ARTICLE 238 – ABANDONMENT OF OFFICE OR b. Obstructs executive authorities from the lawful
POSITION performance of their functions
ELEMENTS: NOTE: It can only be committed by a Judge
1. That the offender is holding a public office
2. That he formally resigns from his office ARTICLE 241 – USURPATION OF JUDICIAL
3. But before the acceptance of his resignation, he FUNCTIONS
abandons his office ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is holding office under the Executive
Abandonment of office is committed by a public officer Branch of the Government
who has already formally resigns from his position, and 2. That he:
having formally resigned from his position, he abandons to a. Assumes the power exclusively vested in the
the detriment of public service. Despite the fact that his Judiciary, or
resignation has not yet been accepted by a superior b. Obstructs the execution of any order or
authority. Under Labor Law, when you are an employee, decision given by a judge within his jurisdiction
when you file a resignation, it does not mean you are NOTE: It can only be committed by a public officer of
already resigned. There must be an ACCEPTANCE from the the Executive Branch of the Government

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 90 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Therefore, if the person who assumes judicial
power does not belong to the Executive Branch, but belongs
to the legislative branch, the crime is not Usurpation of
Judicial Function, but USURPATION OF PUBLIC
FUNCTION AND OFFICIAL AUTHORITY under
Article 177, because Article 239, 240 and 241 are specific
as to the offenders.
So, let us say, in the one who encroached upon the
powers of the Judge, does not belong to the executive
branch but he is legislator, it cannot be considered as
usurpation of judicial functions, rather it will beUsurpation
Of Public Function And Official Authority Under Article
177.
ARTICLE 242 – DISOBEYING REQUEST OF
DISQUALIFICATION
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a public officer
2. That a proceeding is pending before such public officer
3. That there has been a question regarding the
jurisdiction brought before the proper authority
4. There is a question brought before the proper authority
regarding his jurisdiction, which is yet to be decided
ARTICLE 243 – ORDERS OR REQUESTS BY
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS TO ANY JUDICIAL
AUTHORITY
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is an executive officer
2. That the offender addresses any order or suggestion to
any judicial authority
3. That the order or suggestion relates to any case or
business within the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts
of justice
ARTICLE 244 – UNLAWFUL APPOINTMENTS
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He nominates or appoints a person to a public office
3. Such person lacks the legal qualification thereof
4. Offender knows that his nominee or employee lacks
the qualifications at the time he made the nomination
or appointment
ARTICLE 245 – ABUSES AGAINST CHASTITY
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a public officer
2. That he solicits or makes any indecent or immoral
advances to a woman
3. That the offended party is a woman who is:
a. Interested in matters pending before the public
officer for his decision or where the public
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
officer is required to submit a report or to
consult with a superior officer; or
b. Under the custody of the offender, who is a
warden or other public officer directly charged
with the care and custody of prisoners or
persons under arrest; or
c. The wife, daughter, sister or any relative falling
within the same degree of affinity of the person
under the custody and charge of the offender
(Mother is not included here)
 How are abuses against chastity is committed?
- There are three acts. (Refer to the elements)
1. Public officer solicits or makes any
indecent or immoral advances to a woman
who is interested in matters pending
before his for his decision or where the
public officer is required to submit a report
or to consult with a superior officer
2. Warden or other public officer directly
charged with the care and custody of
prisoners or persons under arrest, and he
solicits or makes any indecent or immoral
advances to a woman
3. Warden or other public officer directly
charged with the care and custody of
prisoners or persons under arrest, and the
said officer makes any indecent or immoral
advances to the wife, daughter, sister or
any relative falling within the same degree
of affinity of the male prisoner.
 Who is the offender?
- He must be a public officer because there must be
abuse of public office in making immoral or
indecent advances.
Essence of the crime is taking advantage of one’s
position in soliciting or making immoral or indecent
advances.
Mere act of soliciting or making immoral and indecent
advances will already give rise to the crime. It is not
necessary that the woman will comply with the said
solicitation or immoral or indecent advances.
The solicitation must not be the gospel type of
solicitation. It must be bad, persistent, threatening such
that if the woman would not comply then it would adverse
on her part.
91 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

If a jail warden impregnated a female detainee, even if they

love one another, still liable because detainees are liabilities
of the state.

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 92 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
TITLE EIGHT
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS (ARTICLES 246 –
266-A)
ART 246 – PARRICIDE
ELEMENTS:
1. That a person is killed
2. That the deceased is killed by the accused
3. That the deceased is the father, mother, or child,
whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate
other ascendant, or legitimate other descendant, or
legitimate spouse of the accused
 Parricide is committed when a person kills his father,
mother, child, whether legitimate or illegitimate,
legitimate other ascendant, legitimate other
descendant, or legitimate spouse. Therefore the
offended party or deceased or the victim is specified,
he must be the father, mother, child whether legitimate
or illegitimate, legitimate other ascendant, legitimate
other descendant, or legitimate spouse.
 Parricide is a crime based on relationship.
 What kind of relationship?
 First, it must be a legitimate relationship
except in the case of parent and child.
Second, the said relationship must be in the
direct line
Third, the relationship must be by blood
(grandfather killed a grandson, a mother
killing a son, a son killing a father)
Q: So a father killed an illegitimate son. What crime is
committed?
A: It is parricide. Although the crime is based on
legitimate relationship, the exception is in case of
children, whether legitimate or illegitimate.
Q: A brother killed another brother. Is the crime
committed parricide?
A: No, the crime committed is murder or
homicide, as the case may be and not parricide
because the relationship between a brother and
another brother is in the collateral line and not in the
direct line.
Q: What if a stepfather killed his stepson?
A: The stepfather is not liable for parricide. It
can either be murder or homicide, as the case may be,
because their relationship is not based on blood.
 Again, the relationship must be
legitimate, in the direct line and by
blood.
 In Parricide, the circumstance which will qualify is the
relationship, therefore relationship between the
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
offender and the offended party must be stated in the
information.
Q: Let us say that the husband killed the wife. In the
information filed by the fiscal, the fiscal failed to state that
the husband is the legal husband of the said victim.
However, during trial, by virtue of a certificate of marriage,
it was proven that the accused was the legal husband of the
said victim-wife. Can the husband be convicted of
parricide?
A: No, the husband cannot be convicted of
parricide. This is because the relationship was not
alleged in the information although proven during
trial. Since the relationship between the husband and
the wife is not alleged in the information, although
proven during trial, he cannot be convicted of
parricide. It can only be murder or homicide, as the
case may be.
Q: What if a husband wanted to kill his wife. So he has a
mistress, the husband wanted to dispose his wife. However,
he cannot do it on his own and so the husband hired a high-
profile killer, he paid the man 100,000 pesos to kill the
wife. And so the man conducted surveillance on the wife,
checked the itinerary of the wife and so when the wife was
getting out of the grocery, here comes the killer. The killer,
on board a motorcycle, went directly to the wife, shot her
and off he went. The wife died. What crime/crimes is/are
committed?
A: The husband is liable for principal but said
killer is liable for murder. Conspiracy will not lie.
Although they conspired for the killing of the wife, the
husband, being the principal by inducement and the
killer, being the principal by direct participation,
conspiracy will not lie. This is because the
circumstance which qualifies parricide, the
relationship, is personal to the husband and cannot be
transferred to a stranger. That is why there will two
informations filed, one is parricide as against the
husband as a principal by inducement and the other
one is murder as against the killer.
ART 247 – DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES
INFLICTED UNDER EXCEPTIONAL
CIRCUMSTANCES
ELEMENTS:
1. That a legally married person or a parent
surprises his spouse or his daughter, the latter
under 18 years of age and living with him, in the
act of committing sexual intercourse with
another person.
2. That the said legally married spouse he or she
kills any or both of them or inflicts upon any or
both of them any serious physical injury in the
act or immediately thereafter
93 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
3. That he has not promoted or facilitated the
prostitution of his wife or daughter, or that he
or she has not consented to the infidelity of the
other spouse.
FIRST REQUISITE/ELEMENT:
 Under the first element, it is required that the
legally married spouse surprises the other spouse
while in the actual act of sexual intercourse with
another person. So note the surprising must be
in the actual act of sexual intercourse and
NOT before, NOT after.
 If you will read the book of Reyes, Justice Laurel,
naghinanakitsya. Sabinya, “Why? Why should it
be in the actual act of sexual intercourse, you
already saw your spouse with another man, why
wait for the sexual intercourse? You know it will
happen, why wait for it for Article 247? This is
what Justice Laurel said. But the Supreme Court
said no, the surprising must be in the act of sexual
intercourse with another person. Not before, not
after, not during the preliminaries.
SECOND REQUISITE/ELEMENT:
 The second element requires that the said legally
married spouse kills any or both of them or he
inflicts serious physical injuries upon any or both
of them. Again, while in the act of sexual
intercourse or immediately thereafter. There is
no question as to the “actual act of sexual
intercourse” but what about “immediately
thereafter”?
 What does the phrase “immediately thereafter”
mean?
 The Supreme Court said, “immediately
thereafter” means there must not be lapse of
time between the surprising and the killing or
infliction of serious physical injuries.
Therefore the surprising and the killing or
infliction of serious physical injuries must be
a continuing process.
Q: What if the husband arrived home and the wife arrived
home from the market. She was about to go the kitchen
when suddenly, she heard voices in the master’s bedroom
and so she opened the said master’s bedroom and saw her
legal husband in actual sexual intercourse with another
person. Notice that the law says, “other person” which
means it could be a man or a woman. Upon seeing that, the
wife who still has a knife in the basket, immediately went
towards the husband and stabbed him. The woman fled.
The husband died. Of what crime would you prosecute the
said wife? The wife is liable for parricide under Article 246
for having killed her husband. If you are the counsel of the
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
said wife, what defense would you put up in order to free
your client from criminal liability?
A: Article 247 or Death under exceptional
circumstances. The Supreme Court said that Article
247 is not a felony. Article 247 is a privilege, in fact is it
a defense. If Article 247 is invoked, the accused is free
from criminal liability. It is an absolutory cause, an
exempting circumstance. The Supreme Court said that
the penalty stated therein, destierro, is not really a
penalty on the legally married spouse who killed the
other spouse. It is not a penalty but it is more of a
guard, a privilege for him so that he may be free from
any retaliation of any of the family of the victim. So
destierro here is not really a penalty. Again, Article 247
is not a felony. It is a defense, a privilege; it is an
exempting circumstance or an absolutory cause.
People v. Abarca
In this case, there was this student reviewing for the
bar. There were already rumors that his wife was
having an affair. So one time, he went home
unannounced. Upon his arrival, he saw his wife in
sexual intercourse with another man. The man jumped
out the window. The husband wanted to kill the man
but he had no weapon at the time. The man went away.
It took the husband an hour before he was able to find
a weapon and upon finding a weapon, he went directly
to the whereabouts of the man, the lover of the wife
and killed the man. It took him one hour. The killing
took place an hour, not in the actual sexual
intercourse, but is it immediately thereafter? Despite
the fact that one hour had lapsed, would it be within
the meaning of immediately thereafter?
The Supreme Court, in this special case, said yes.
According to Supreme Court, when the law uses the
phrase “immediately thereafter”; that the killing or the
infliction of serious physical injuries must take place
immediately thereafter, the law did not say that the
killing must be done instantly. According to the
Supreme Court, it suffices that the proximate cause for
the said killing is the said pain and the look on the said
husband upon chancing his wife in the basest act of
infidelity. This is an exceptional case.
 Why an exceptional case?
 Because henceforth, after People v Abarca,
the Supreme Court has already interpreted
“immediately thereafter”, as there must be no
lapse of time between the surprising and the
killing. The surprising and the killing must be
continuous.
 Legal luminaries say that this is an
exceptional case because the husband was
94 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
reviewing for the bar which is why he was
given this special _. Because in all other cases
after this, the Supreme Court is strict in
implementing “immediately thereafter”. The
Supreme Court is strict because this is not a
felony, it is a privilege therefore it must be
strictly interpreted and not liberally
interpreted in favor of the accused.
 Look that if the injury inflicted by the legally
married spouse on the lover or the other
spouse, is less serious physical injuries or
slight physical injuries, he is totally free from
criminal liability. Liability will only come in if
the other spouse is killed or inflicted with
serious physical injuries.
 With regards to the liability of the accused to
the injuries sustained by other people, liable
to physical injuries through negligence, as the
case maybe. There is no intent to kill the other
victims.
 Note that the SC ruled that inflicting death
under exceptional circumstances is NOT
murder.
ART 248 – MURDER
ELEMENTS:
1. That a person was killed
2. That the accused killed him
3. That the killing was attended by any of the
qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 248
4. That the killing is not parricide or infanticide
 Murder is committed by any person who shall kill
another person which will not amount to parricide or
infanticide and the killing is attended by the following
qualifying circumstances:
1. Treachery, taking advantage of superior
strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense, or of
means or persons to insure or afford mutiny.
2. In consideration of price, reward or
promise
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,
derailment or assault upon a railroad, fall of
an airship, by means of motor vehicles, or
with the use of any other means involving
great waste and ruin.
4. On occasion of any calamities
enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of
an earthquake, eruption of a volcano,
destructive cyclone, epidemic, or any other
public calamities.
5. With evident premeditation.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and
inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the
victim or outraging or scoffing at his
person or corpse (RA 7659)
 These are the qualifying circumstances for murder
(See Article 14-aggravating circumstances, Book I)
Know the elements in Article 14.
 All of these are aggravating circumstance under
Article 14. Note, in order to qualify a killing to
murder, only one is necessary.
 If in the information, A killed B and it was attended by
treachery, in consideration of a price, reward or
promise, by means of a motor vehicle, so there are
three qualifying circumstances. Only one will suffice to
qualify the murder to killing, all the other aggravating
circumstances will be considered not as qualifying
circumstances but as mere generic aggravating
circumstances.
ART 249 – HOMICIDE
ELEMENTS:
1. That a person was killed
2. That the accused killed him without any justifying
circumstance
3. That the accused had the intention to kill, which is
presumed
4. That the killing was not attended by any of the
qualifying circumstances of murder, or by that of
parricide or infanticide.
 When a person kills another person, and it is not
attended by any qualifying circumstance under Article
248, the killing is considered as Homicide under
Article 249.
ART 250 – PENALTY FOR FRUSTRATED OR
ATTEMPTED PARRICIDE, MURDER OR
HOMICIDE
ART 251 – DEATH CAUSED IN A TUMULTOUS
AFFRAY
 What is a tumultuous affray?
 A tumultuous affray is a commotion, wherein
people fight in a tumultuous or confused manner
such that it cannot be ascertained or determined
who has killed the victim or who has inflicted
physical injuries on the victim.
ELEMENTS:
1. That there be several persons
2. That they did not compose groups organized for the
common purpose of assaulting and attacking each
other reciprocally
95 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
3. That these several persons quarreled and assaulted
one another in a confused and tumultuous manner
4. That someone was killed in the course of the affray
5. That it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the
deceased
6. That the person or persons who inflicted serious
physical injuries or who used violence can be
identified.
 Article 251, death in a tumultuous affray, is committed
when there are several persons who do not compose
groups which have been organized to assault and
quarrel with one another reciprocally, assaulted and
attacked each other reciprocally and in the course of
the affray, someone is killed. And it cannot be
ascertained or identified or determined who killed the
victim, then the person who inflicted serious physical
injuries or those who used violence against the said
victim can be identified.
 Someone is killed. Note that he can be any person; he
can be someone from the affray, he can be a mere
passerby, he can be just someone watching the affray,
so long as he is killed in the affray and it cannot be
ascertained who killed him, then the person who
inflicted serious physical injuries on him is liable if he
can be identified. If this person cannot be identified,
then the person who used any kind of violence against
him shall be criminally liable.
ART 252 – PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED IN
TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY
ELEMENTS:
1. That there is a tumultuous affray
2. That a participant or some participants thereof
suffer serious physical injuries or physical injuries
of a less serious nature only.
3. That the person responsible thereof cannot be
identified
4. That all those who appear to have used violence
upon the person of the offended party are known.
 Note that the victim here must be a participant. The
law is specific. The participants must be the one
injured with serious physical injuries or less serious
physical injuries. Not slight physical injuries.
 Article 252, we have physical injuries inflicted in
tumultuous affray, is committed when in a tumultuous
affray, a participant has suffered serious physical
injuries or less serious physical injuries and it cannot
be ascertained who inflicted these injuries but the
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
person who used violence on the victim can be
identified or determined.
 If the injury caused to the victim is only slight physical
injuries, then no one is liable because if a person
engaged in a tumultuous affray or participated therein,
the law presumes that it is __ therefore no one is liable
if the injuries sustained is only slight physical injury
and it cannot be determined who inflicted the said
slight physical injury on the victim.
Q: There was this tumultuous affray, several people were
attacking and fighting each other. Suddenly, here comes a
balot vendor. He saw the affray. He was just there,
watching, suddenly he fell on the ground. He died because
of a stab wound. Now, it cannot be ascertained who stabbed
him, so no one saw who stabbed him. Who will be held
criminally liable?
A: Any person who inflicted serious physical
injuries on him. No one has seen also who had
inflicted serious physical injuries against him. The
any person who inflicted any violence against
him shall be criminally liable.
Q: There was this tumultuous affray, several people were
attacking and fighting each other. Suddenly, here comes a
balot vendor who saw the affray and he was just there,
watching. While he was watching the affray, one of the
participants of the affray, X, saw him and went directly to
the balot vendor and stabbed him twice. The balot vendor
died. What crime is committed? Is it under Article 251,
Death in tumultuous affray?
A: No. It is murder or homicide as the case may
be. This is because the perpetrator of the crime is
identified, ascertained or determined. Death in a
tumultuous affray under Article 251 can only be
charged if the actual perpetrator of the crime who
killed the victim cannot be ascertained or identified.
ART 253 – GIVING ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE
TWO ACTS PUNISHABLE:
I.By assisting another to commit suicide, whether the
suicide is consummated or not; or
II.By lending assistance to another to commit suicide to
the extent of doing the killing himself.
 Giving assistance to suicide – binigyan mong rope;
binigyan mo ng poison.
 A friend wanted to commit suicide, he doesn’t know
the way, the means and you agreed with him, you
assisted and gave the best poison in the world. So you
assisted the said friend in committing suicide. Note
that if a person assisted in committing suicide by
giving him poison, the initiative must come from him.
The desire to kill himself must come from the victim.
96 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
He wanted to commit suicide and you merely provide
assistance in the commission of suicide.
 B wanted to commit suicide, here comes A, A gave
assistance to B but B survived. B did not die. Only A is
criminally liable because suicide or attempt to commit
suicide is not a felony within Philippine jurisdiction. It
is only the one who assisted to commit suicide is
criminally liable but not the person who attempted to
commit suicide.
Q: What if a terminally sick person with cancer, he was
lying in bed, almost lifeless and it was only a machine that
was giving life to his body. Now, the mother of the patient
and she took pity of her son because the son was agonizing
and was only breathing through the said machine. The
mother wanted to finish the suffering of the son and at the
time she visited the hospital, she turned off the machine
and the son died. He killed her son out of mercy. So it is
mercy-killing or euthanasia. Is the mother liable for giving
assistance to suicide?
A: No because the initiative to kill did not come from
the sai person who was ill. The crime committed by
the mother is parricide for killing her son. If it were
other person, it was murder. Evidently, it was murder
because there was evident premeditation; there was
thinking before doing the act of mercy-killing.
ART 254 – DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS/ ILLEGAL
DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender discharges a firearm against
or at another person
2. That the offender has no intention to kill that
person
Q: What if there was this park. The park was full of people
and then suddenly, here comes X, X went to the park, put
out his firearm, and he fired shots in the air. What crime is
committed?
A: X committed Alarms and Scandals under
Article 155. When he fired shots in the air, his intention
was to cause disturbance of public peace and
tranquility. The firearm was not aimed towards any
person.
Q: What if X went to a public place full of people. X saw his
enemy, Y, and so to threaten Y, X pulled out his firearm,
aimed the firearm at Y in order to threaten him. X
discharges the firearm, however, with no intention to kill Y.
His only intention is to threaten Y and Y was not killed.
What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is Article 254, Illegal
Discharge of Firearms. Illegal discharge of firearms
is committed by any person who aims and discharges
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
the firearm to any other person absent the intent to kill
the said person. The purpose is merely to threaten the
said person.
Q: What if in the same public place, X went there and
pulled out his firearm because he saw his enemy, Y. He
aimed the gun at Y with intent to kill, because he wanted to
kill his enemy. However, Y saw it and was able to avoid.
What crime is committed?
A: X committed attempted homicide or
murder, as the case may be. Although Y was not
hit, the fact that the said firearm was discharged with
intent to kill, it is already attempted homicide or
murder, as the case may be.
Q: What if in the said merry-making, there were so many
people. X went there. He saw his enemy Y and went directly
to Y, took out his gun and he poked the gun without
discharging. What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is other light threats.
So here, threatening another with a gun, without
discharging, only poking. It is other light threats. It is
not grave threats, it is not light threats. It is only other
light threats, arrestomenor.
 So kapag discharge, pinutok – it could either be alarms
and scandals, illegal discharge of firearms or attempted
or frustrated murder or homicide, as the case may be.
 If no discharging, only poking, or threatening with a
firearm, it is only other light threats
ARTICLE 255 – INFANTICIDE
Infanticide is the killing of a child less than three (3) days
old or less than seventy-two (72) hours. So in the case of
infanticide, it is the age of the victim that is controlling. The
victim, the child, the infant, must be less than three (3)
days old. He must be less than seventy-two hours. If it is
only three (3) days old or above it is any other crime but not
infanticide.
 Who is the offender in Infanticide?
 The offender can be the parents, the mother, the
father, the grandparents or it can be any other
person so long as the child is less than three (3)
days old, it is infanticide. It is the age that is
controlling, not the relationship.
Q: So what if there was this woman and this woman gave
birth to a child. After giving birth to the child while the
child was only a day old, she already wanted to kill the child
in order to conceal her dishonor. However, she could not
kill the child by herself and so she asked a favor from a
friend. And so the friend arrived and both the mother and
the said friend killed the child, a day old, by suffocating the
97 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
said child with a big pillow. The child less than three days
old, died. What crime/s is/are committed?
A: The mother is liable for infanticide. The
said stranger friend is also liable for
infanticide. There was conspiracy on them. This
time conspiracy on life, both of them are liable for
infanticide under only one information. Isang
information langsa court and that is infanticide. Both
the mother and the friend are conspirators of
infanticide.
Now let us say that the mother is convicted. If the mother
is convicted, the penalty imposed by the law as provided in
Article 255 is equivalent to parricide which is reclusion
perpetua to death. On the other hand, if the stranger is
convicted under Article 255, the penalty to be imposed is
equivalent to murder therefore, also reclusion perpetua to
death. But note the charge is that he is guilty of infanticide.
The fact that the said mother killed the child, less than
three days old, in order to conceal dishonorwill
mitigate the criminal liability of the mother. NOTE:The
penalty will be lowered not by one, but by two degrees,
from reclusion perpetua to death, the penalty of the mother
will only now become prision mayor.
Q: What if let us say that the killer of the less than three
day old child is the maternal grandparents. The
grandparents conspired in the killing in order to conceal
the dishonor of their daughter. What is the effect of the
concealment of the dishonor?
A: The concealment of the dishonor will also
mitigate the criminal liability of the maternal
grandparents that is one degree lower. So sa
mother, two degrees lower, from reclusion perpetua to
death magigingprision mayor. Sa maternal
grandparents one degree lower lang, from reclusion
perpetua to death it will now become reclusion
temporal. Whatever it is, concealment of dishonor is
akin to a privilege mitigating circumstance because the
lowering of the penalty is not merely by periods but by
degrees. So it is akin to a privilege mitigating
circumstance.
Q: So what if in the same problem I gave, the woman gave
birth to the child and wanted to kill the child but this time
the infant is already three days old and the child was killed
by the said mother and the friend. What are the crimes
committed?
A: The mother is liable for parricidewhile the
stranger/friend is liable for murder. And this
time no amount of concealment of dishonor will
mitigate the criminal liability of the mother. So there
lies a difference between parricide and infanticide if
the offender is the parent or the mother of the child.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
JUST REMEMBER: If the child is less than three days
old or less than 72 hours, IT IS INFANTICIDE. It is the age
that controls. If the child is three days old and above,
PARRICIDE OR MURDER, as the case may be. It is
obvious murder because a three day old child or infant is
totally defenseless.
ARTICLE 256, 257, 258 AND 259 ARE ALL ABOUT
ABORTION
ARTICLE 256 – INTENTIONAL ABORTION
ARTICLE 257 – UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION
ARTICLE 258 – ABORTION PRACTICED BY THE
WOMAN HERSELF OR BY HER PARENTS
ARTICLE 259 - ABORTION PRACTICED BY A
PHYSICIAN OR MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF
ABORTIVES
Note that there are four (4) articles on abortion but there
are only two (2) type of abortion:
1.) INTENTIONAL ABORTION
2.) UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION
Because the abortion practiced by the woman herself or the
mother and the abortion practiced by a physician or
midwife are all intentional abortion. So in effect, we only
have to kinds of abortion. We have intentional abortion and
unintentional abortion.
ABORTION – is the willful killing of a fetus from the
mother’s womb or the violent expulsion of a fetus from the
maternal womb which results in the death of the fetus.
INTENTIONAL ABORTION is committed in three (3)
ways:
1.) By using violence upon the person of the pregnant
woman resulting to abortion.
2.) Without violence, by acting without violence,
without the consent of the woman by
administering aborting drugs or beverages without
the consent of the pregnant woman.
3.) By acting without violence, with the consent of the
pregnant woman that is by administering aborting
98 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
drugs or beverages to a pregnant woman this time
with her consent.
UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION can only be committed
in one (1) way and that is by exerting physical violence on a
pregnant woman. And in result thereof, an unintentional
abortion was suffered.
In unintentional abortion the force employed was
physically exerted on a pregnant woman. The intention of
the offender is not against the baby or the fetus but against
the mother. His intention is against the mother but in so
doing, since the mother is pregnant, the baby/fetus was
also aborted. So abortion was unintentionally caused.
Q: So what if there were two college students, a boyfriend
and girlfriend. The girlfriend became pregnant and the
boyfriend said, ‘I am not yet ready. We are still so young so
I cannot marry you.’ And so by reason thereof the girlfriend
said, ‘how about my situation? I am already pregnant.’ And
so by reason thereof, they both decided in order to conceal
the dishonor of the said female student, they both decided
to abort the fetus. So what the boyfriend did was he went to
the sidewalks of Quiapo and bought there aborting
beverages and he administered the same to the said
woman. And the female student drank the aborting
beverage and the fetus died. What crime/s is/are
committed?
A: In so far as the boyfriend is concerned, the crime
committed is intentional abortion under Article 256. In
so far as the said female student is concerned, the
crime committed is also intentional abortion but it is
under Article 258 – Abortion practiced by the woman
herself or by her parents. So, both of them are liable
for intentional abortion.
Q: But what if despite the fact that the female student had
already taken or drank the abortive beverage still the fetus
survived? Malakasangkapitngbatasa maternal womb. What
crime is committed if any by the boyfriend and the
girlfriend? Is there a crime such as frustrated intentional
abortion?
A: YES. There is a crime such as frustrated
intentional abortion. Here, the said woman has
already taken the said abortive beverage. He has
already performed all the acts necessary to consume
the crime of abortion however, abortion did not result
because of causes independent of their will.
Malakasangkapitngbatasa maternal womb and so the
baby survived. And so, they are both liable for
frustrated intentional abortion.
IS THERE A CRIME SUCH AS FRUSTRATED
UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION?
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
NO. This time there is no crime such as frustrated
unintentional abortion. Because in unintentional
abortion, the intention is against the woman and
abortion only happens unintentional.
Q: So let’s say a man exerted physical violence against the
woman who happens to be his enemy. The said woman was
severely hurt however, the baby was not hurt. The fetus
inside the tummy did not die. What is the crime committed
by the said man?
A: Only serious physical Injuries against the
woman. No crimes against the fetus because there
was no intent in so far as the fetus is concerned.
Q: But what if in the said problem, the man inflicted
violence on the pregnant woman who happens to be his
enemy. Let’s say he kicked and moved the said woman
severely and by reason thereof the pregnant woman was
1:44:17. What crime/s is/are committed?
A: The crime committed against the woman is
serious physical injuries. As against the fetus,
the crime committed is unintentional abortion.
Now, it resulted from one single act therefore it will
result to a complex crime of SERIOUS PHYSICAL
INJURIES WITH UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION
under ARTICLE 48 OF BOOK 1. It is a complex crime.
It is a single act resulting to two less grave felonies.
Q: What if a husband arrived home at 5 o’clock in the
morning. He saw his wife looking at the children and is
making breakfast. Suddenly the cellphone of the wife rang,
the pregnant wife answered the cellphone and she began
giggling. When she began giggling, the husband took the
cellphone from the said wife and listened to the cellphone.
He heard a voice of a man on the other line of the
cellphone. Since he heard the voice of the man and he just
arrived from work, he became jealous and with the use of a
knife he stabbed the wife. The wife died and the fetus died.
What crime/s is/are committed?
A: In so far as the wife is concerned, the crime
committed is parricide. In so far as the baby is
concerned, the crime committed is
unintentional abortion. Again, it resulted from
one single act of stabbing the wife therefore it will give
rise to a COMPLEX CRIME OF PARRICIDE WITH
UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION. There is a crime
against the wife which is parricide and against the fetus
which is unintentional abortion resulting from a single
act therefore, it is parricide with unintentional
abortion.
99 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
ARTICLE 259 - ABORTION PRACTICED BY A
PHYSICIAN OR MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF
ABORTIVES
UNDER ARTICLE 259, there is another act punished
and that is dispensing of abortives. Dispensing of abortives
is committed by a pharmacist who shall dispense an
abortive without a prescription from a physician. The mere
act of dispensing the said abortives without prescription
from a physician will hold the said pharmacist criminally
liable.
ARTICLE 260 - DUEL
ARTICLE 261 – CHALLENGING TO A DUEL
A DUEL is a combat with deadly weapons concerted
between two or more persons who have decided or agreed
to fight.
ELEMENTS OF A DUEL:
1.) It is necessary that the offenders that there was an
agreement to engage in combat or in a fight.
2.) There must be two or more seconds for each
combatant.
3.) The firearms or the arms to be used as well as the
other terms of the combat must be agreed upon by
the said seconds.
Under Article 260 - Duel, there are three acts punished
in a duel:
1.) By killing one’s adversary in a duel.
2.) By inflicting physical injuries upon one’s
adversary.
3.) By making a combat by merely entering into a
duel.
So under Article 260, the persons who are liable are the
combatants and adversaries, those who engage in a duel
and yungkanilangalalay, yung seconds.
Under Article 261- Challenging to a duel, there are also
three acts punished:
1.) By challenging another to a duel.
2.) By inciting another to give or accept a challenge to
a duel.
3.) By scoffing at or decrying another publicly for
having refused to accept a challenge to fight a
duel.
Under Article 261, the persons criminally liable are both the
challenger and the instigator.
NOTE that if it is not a duel or there is no agreement to
combat or to fight, let’s say there was no agreement
between A and B to fight and yet they fought and B died,
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
the crime committed is HOMICIDE because Article 260
and 261 only applies if there is an agreement to fight, to a
duel or a combat.
CRIMES OF PHYSICAL INJURIES:
ARTICLE 262 – MUTILATION
Mutilation is the clipping off or chopping off of a
particular part of a body which is not susceptible to grow
again.
Two kinds of mutilation:
1.) By intentionally depriving another of a part of his
body which is an essential part for reproduction.
2.) By intentionally committing other mutilation that
is, by depriving him of any other part of his body
with intent to deprive him of such part of his body.
Under the first kind, that is mutilating an organ essential
for reproduction, is otherwise known as CASTRATION. You
will know that the penalty is even higher than homicide.
Killing a person is only punishable by reclusion perpetua
while castrating a person is punishable by reclusion
temporal to reclusion perpetua. Because if you are
castrated it is as if you are already killed. That’s why it has
a higher penalty.
 Mutilation is a felony which cannot be committed
out of imprudence or negligence. Because the law
requires that there must be the deliberate intent to
mutilate, the deliberate intent to clip off, to severe
a particular part of the body of a person. Absent
that deliberate intent, any person who loses a part
of his body, it can only be serious physical injuries
but not mutilation. So in mutilation it is always
committed with deliberate intent or dolo to
mutilate. Absent that, it is serious physical injury.
Q: Let’s say A and B were engaged in a fight, they were
both fighting and A was losing and so he took out his bolo.
His intention was to cut the body of B in order to defeat
him however, B tried to prevent him and placed his hand
and by reason thereof, the right hand of B was severed from
his body. Is the crime committed mutilation?
A: NO. It is not mutilation because there was
no deliberate intent to clip off or to severe the
right hand of B. His intention was to attack or to
stab B and in so doing, it resulted to the loss of an arm
therefore, the CRIME COMMITTED IS SERIOUS
PHYSICAL INJURIES. Physical injuries can either be
serious physical injuries, less serious physical injuries
or slight physical injuries.
PHYSICAL INJURIES is the act of wounding, beating or
assaulting another with no intent to kill. It also involves the
100 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
act of knowingly administering injurious beverages or
substances absent intent to kill. So always there is no
intent to kill in order to amount to physical injuries because
even if the injury is only slight or no injury at all but if there
is intent to kill, it is already in the stage of homicide. So
there must be no intent to kill.
It also includes the act of knowing administering injurious
substances absent intent to kill.
So always, there is no intent to kill in order to amount to
physical injuries.
Because even if the injury is only SLIGHT or no injury at
all, but there is intent7 to kill, it is already in the attempted
stage of Homicide. So there must be no intent to kill.
ARTICLE 263 –SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES
Under Art. 263, the serious physical injuries
punished are:
1. When the injured person becomes insane,
imbecile, impotent, or blind in consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted.
2. When the injured person:
a. Loses the use of speech or the power
to heal or to smell, or looses an eye, a
hand, a foot, an arm or a leg; or
b. Loses the use of any such member,
or
c. Becomes incapacitated for the work
in which he was therefore habitually
engaged in the consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted
3. When the injured:
a. Becomes deformed
b. Loses any other member of his body;
or
c. Becomes ill or incapacitated for the
performance of the work in which he
was habitually engaged for more
than 90 days, in consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted
4. When the injured person becomes ill or
incapacitated for labor for more that 30 days (but
must not be more than 90 days), as a result of the
physical injuries inflicted.
Note: All of these, all of the enumeration mentioned in Art.
263 are already considered serious physical injury. If a
person becomes ill or incapacitated for more than 30 days,
it is already serious physical injuries. It is already divided
into categories for purposes of penalty. Because they differ
in penalty. But the moment the said person, by reason of
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
the said injury becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for
more than 30 days, it is already, serious physical injury.
So the FIRST CATEGORY is, that the injured person
becomes INSANE.
INSANITY refers to a mental disease by reason
thereof a person can no longer appreciate the
consequences of his act.
IMBECILITY is when a person is already advanced in
age, yet he has only the mind of a 2-7 year old child.
IMPOTENCY includes the inability to copulate or
sterility.
BLINDNESS requires loss of vision of both eyes by
reason of the injury inflicted. Mere weakness in vision
is not contemplated.
Under the SECOND CATEGORY:
The offender loses the use of speech or the power to
heal or to smell, or looses an eye, a hand, a foot, an
arm or a leg.
- So if it is only an eye which has been lost, it is
serious physical injury but under the Second
Category already. The penalty is lesser than that of
the First Category.
Under the THIRD CIRCUMSTANCE/CATEGORY:
When the offender becomes DEFORMED.
So what is this so-called DEFORMITY which will result in
serious physical injury?
Q: A hacked B with the use of a bolo on his stomach. So
there was a big mark on his stomach despite the fact that it
was already healed, there was a big scar on the said
stomach. The doctor said that the said injury requires
medical treatment for 2 weeks. What crime is committed?
Is it serious physical injury or is it less serious physical
injury?
A: The crime committed is only LESS SERIOUS
PHYSICAL INJURY. There was no deformity.
Although there was a big scar on the stomach, it would
not amount to deformity. An injury in order to amount
to deformity which would bring about serious physical
injury must result to a physical ugliness on a person.
101 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
There are 3 requisites befor deformity may be
considered as a serious physical injury:
1. There must be physical ugliness produced on
a body of a person
2. The said deformity should be permanent and
definite abnormality and it would not heal
through the natural healing process
3. The said deformity must be located in a
conspicuous and visible place
EXAMPLE OF “The said deformity should be permanent
and definite abnormality and it would not heal through the
natural healing process”:
Q: A boxed B. He lost his 2 front teeth permanently. What
crime was committed?
A: The crime committed was SERIOUS PHYSICAL
INJURY. Because it is a deformity even if the doctor
says that he can still replace it, the fact still remains
that it cannot be healed through a natural healing
process.
Q: A boxed B, A lost a molar tooth.
A: The crime committed will LESS SERIOUS OR
SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES depending on the
medical attendance. Because it cannot be seen. It is not
located in a visible or conspicuous place.
Q: A poured muriatic acid on the face of another person
whom he hates and so because of that, the face of that
person becomes deformed, it became ugly. Later, she went
on a plastic surgeon. When he got out of the plastic surgery
clinic, she now looks like Vilma Santos. Is the accused
person liable for serious physical injuries?
A: Yes. Even if she became prettier than before, it is
still a fact that by reason of the said injury it cannot be
healed through the natural healing process. It will
require the attendance of medical surgeon. Therefore,
it is considered as a deformity.
If the said physical ugliness is not located on a visible or
conspicuous place, it would be depending on the
deployment of medical attendance.
Q: When is serious physical injuries qualified?
A: Serious physical injuries is qualified:
1. If it is committed against any of the persons
enumerated in Parricide. That is when serious
physical injuries is committed against the
father, mother, child, whether legitimate or
illegitimate; legitimate other ascendant or
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
other descendant and legitimate spouse of the
accused.
2. If in the infliction of serious physical injuries,
it is attended by any of the qualifying
circumstances for murder. That is, if it is done
with treachery, evident premeditation, the
crime committed is qualified serious physical
injuries.
ARTICLE 264 –ADMINISTERING INJURIOUS
SUBSTANCE OR BEVERAGES
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender inflicted serious physical injuries
upon another
2. It was done by knowingly administering to him
any injurious substances or beverages or by taking
advantage of his weakness of mind or cruelty
3. He had no intent to kill
ARTICLE 265 – LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL
INJURIES
LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES is
committed if by reason of the injury inflicted, the offended
party requires medical attendance or he cannot perform
the work with which he is habitually engaged for a period of
10-30 days. So the requirement of medical attendance or
his incapacity to do his work for a period of 10-30 days, it
will bring about less serious physical injury.
Q: What circumstances will QUALIFY LESS SERIOUS
PHYSICAL INJURIES?
1. When there is manifest intent to insult or offend
the injured person
2. When there are circumstances adding ignominy to
the offense
3. When the victim is the offender’s parents,
ascendants, guardians, curators, or teachers
4. When the victim is a person of rank or person in
authority, provided the crime is not direct assault
So the crime committed here, with the attendance of these
circumstances qualify less serious physical injuries.
ARTICLE 266 – SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES
AND MALTREATMENT
3 KINDS OF SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES AND
MALTREATMENT:
102 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
1. Physical injuries which incapacitated the offended
party for labor from 1 to 9 days, or required
medical attendance during the same period
2. Physical injuries which did not prevent the
offended party from engaging in his habitual work
or which did not require medical attendance
3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without causing
any injury
Maltreatment of another by deed without causing any
injury is the act of INFLICTING PAIN ON ANOTHER
PERSON WITHOUT CAUSING ANY WOUND OR
INJURY.
People v. Mapalo (in Book I)
Let us say that A was walking. Here comes B. B used a
lead pipe, he went to A and hit the head of A with a
lead pipe. Thereafter, he ran away. The medical
certificate showed that the head of A did not sustain
any injury. He was charged with wttempted homicide.
Supreme Court said, the crime committed is ILL-
TREATMENT OF ANOTHER BY DEED, a form of
slight physical injury under Art. 266.
According to the Supreme Court, there was pain
inflicted on A, but there was no injury and there was no
intent to kill because the said offender immediately ran
away after hitting him a single time. So the crime
committed is MALTREATMENT OF ANOTHER
PARTY.
ARTICLE 266-A – RAPE
RAPE is now a crime against person; it is no longer a crime
against chastity. Because of the amendment brought about
by RA 8353 – THE ANTI-RAPE LAW.
2 TYPES OF RAPE/HOW RAPE IS COMMITTED:
1. By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a
woman
2. Sexual Assault
There is RAPE BY CARNAL KNOWLEDGE when a man
has carnal knowledge of a woman against her will.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
ELEMENTS OF A RAPE BY A MAN WHO SHALL
HAVE CARNAL KNOWLEDGE OF A WOMAN :
1. Offender is a man
2. Offender had carnal knowledge of the woman
against her will
3. Such act is accomplished under any of the
following circumstance:
a. Through force, threat, or intimidation
b. When the offended party is deprived of reason
or is otherwise unconscious
c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave
abuse of authority
d. When the offended party is under 12 years of
age or is demented, even though the
circumstances mentioned above be present
FIRST - “OFFENDER IS A MAN”
So in rape by carnal knowledge, who is the offender? A
MAN.
Who is the offendeaprty? A WOMAN.
The law is SPECIFIC.
SECOND - “OFFENDER HAD CARNAL
KNOWLEDGE OF THE WOMAN AGAINST HER
WILL”"
The offender has carnal knowledge of a woman against her
will and it is committed by using force, threat, or
intimidation. When the offended party is deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious.
Q: What if the woman was sleeping when a man had a
carnal knowledge of the said woman. Is it rape by carnal
knowledge?
A: Yes. The Supreme Court said that the woman who is
sleeping is unconscious.
Q: What if the woman is half asleep when the carnal
knowledge was done by the said man? Is it still rape?
A: Yes, said by the Supreme Court. The woman was
unconscious.
THIRD:
A is 11 years old. He is cohabiting with a man who is 20
years old. They are living tgether as if they are husband and
wife. Of course, they had carnal knowledge. The man is
liable for STATUTORY RAPE. The number of times that he
had carnal knowledge of the said woman, that is the
number of the counts of rape. So if he had carnal knowledge
of the woman 5 times during the time that they were
together – 5 counts of statutory rape. That is because the
child, the victim, is below 12 years of age. Insofar as
103 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
criminal law is concerned, she does not have a mind of her
own, she cannot give a valid consent.
Q: What if, so the law requires that the said act of carnal
knowledge must be with the use of force, threat, or
intimidation, a father raped his daughter. The daughter did
not put up a fight, the father did not use force, threat, or
intimidation in the said carnal knowledge of a daughter. Is
the crime committed rape?
A: Yes. The crime committed is rape. It is
INCESTUOUS RAPE. In case of incestuous rape, it is
the overpowering and overbearing moral influence or
moral ascendency of an ascendant over a descendant
which takes place of force, threat, or intimidation. That
is why in case of inceuous rape, force, threat, or
intimidation is not indispensable; it is not necessary.
Because it is the overpowering and overbearing moral
influence or moral ascendency which a father has over
his daughter which takes place of force, threat or
intimidation.
Q: What if A and B are lovers and then suddenly B filed a
case against A because according to B, he was raped by her
boyfriend. In the course of the trial of the case, the defense
of the man was the so-called, “sweetheart defense theory.”
According to him, “We are sweet lovers.” Therefore
according to him, it is impossible for him to have raped her
because we are sweet lovers. Will said sweetheart defense
theory lie in his favor?
A: Supreme Court said, in case of “sweetheart defense
theory”, for it to lie, mere oral testimonty will not
suffice. There must be documentary evidence,
memorabilia, picture, love letters, etc. which would
show that indeed they are sweethearts – boyfriend &
girlfriend or lovers. But mind you, even the Supreme
Court said this, there was not a case wherein the
“sweetheart defense theory” has acquitted a man.
Therefore, under any all circumstances which involves the
“sweetheart defense theory” will not lie in favor of a man.
Because it does not mean that when you are the sweetheart,
you can no longer rape the other person.
In Book I, there is no such thing as FRUSTRATED RAPE.
Rape admits only 2 stages: ATTEMPTED RAPE and
CONSUMMATED RAPE.
The reason is that a mere touch of an erected penis on the
labia or lips of a woman’s genitalia will already
consummate rape.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
It is not necessary that there be deep or complete
penetration. It is not necessary that the vagina did
lacerated. Mere touch of the lips or the labia of a woman’s
genitalia already consummates rape.
Q: What if, what the erectile penis has touched was the
outer portion of genitalia, that portion which became hairy
during puberty, you have to distinguish whether it is acts of
lasciviousness or attempted rape.
A:
CASE: People v. Jalosjos
If when an erectile penis has touched the outer
portion of a woman’s genitalia which becomes
hairy during puberty, if the intention of the said
offender is to lie, to have carnal knowledge against
the said woman, it is attempted rape. But if in
doing so, the said man has no intention to lie or to
have carnal knowledge, that is only ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS.
What about the other form of Rape – RAPE BY
SEXUAL ASSAULT
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender commits an act of sexual assault
2. The act of sexual assault is committed by any of
the following means
a. By inserting his penis into another person’s
mouth or anal orifice, or
b. By inserting any instrument or object into the
genital or anal orifice of another person
3. The act of sexual assault is accomplished under
any of the following circumstances:
a. By using force or intimidation
b. When the woman is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious, or
c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave
abused of authority
d. When the woman is under 12 years of age or
demented
*So what if what has been inserted is the penis inside the
mouth or the anal orifice, before that would only amount to
acts of lasciviousness - before the passage of RA 8353.
*The law says that it must be an instrument or object which
was inserted in the genitalia or in the anal orifice of another
person.
104 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Q: What if it was the finger which was inserted in the
genitalia of a person? Is it acts of lasciviousness or rape by
sexual assault?
A: Supreme Court said it is RAPE BY SEXUAL
ASSAULT. According to the Supreme Court, it would
be so weird if what has been inserted is an instrument
or object, it would be rape by sexual assault, but if
it was finger, it would be rape by acts of
lasciviousness. The finger is within the mean of an
instrument or object insofar as rape by sexual assault is
concerned.
Q: In case of RAPE, what are the circumstances which will
qualify the penalty?
A: In case of RAPE BY SEXUAL ASSAULT, the
penalty is only PRISION MAYOR. It is a bailable
offense.
If it is a RAPE BY CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, note
that the penalty is RECLUSION PERPETUA. It is
a non-bailable offense
Q: In case of a RAPE BY CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, when is
a penalty qualified?
A: Reclusion Perpetua to Death:
1. When rape is committed with the use of a
deadly weapon
2. When rape is committed by two or more
persons
3. When by reason or on occasion of rape, the
victim becomes insane
4. When rape is attempted and homicide is
committed
Q: What are the instances wherein the penalty to be
imposed is the capital punishment of death, so the extreme
penalty of death?
A:
1. When by reason or on the occasion of rape,
homicide is committed
2. When the victim is under 18 years of age and the
offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent,
guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity
within the 3rd civil degree, or the common law
spouse of the victim
3. When the victim is under the custody of the police
or military authorities or any penal institution
4. When the rape is committed in full view of the
spouse, the parent, any of the children of the
relative by consanguinity within the 3rd civil
degree
5. When the victim is a religious and gauged in
legitimate religious calling or vocation and he
known to be such by the offender before or during
the commission of the rape
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
6. When the victim of the rape is below 7 years of age
7. When the said offender knows that he has been
afflicted with HIV virus or AIDS or any other
sexually transmissible disease and the virus of the
disease is transmitted to the victim
8. When the said offender is a member of the AFP or
parliamentary units, the PNP or any other
member of the law enforcement agency who took
advantage of his position in order to facilitate the
commission of the crime
9. By reason or on the occasion of rape, the said
victim suffered permanent physical mutilation or
disability
10. When the offender knew that the offended party
or victim is pregnant at the time of the
commission of rape
11. When the offender knew of the mental disability,
emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of
the offended party at the time of the commission
of the crime
The presence of any of these circumstances will bring about
the imposition of the maximum penalty of death. However,
death is lifted because of RA 9346 which prohibits the
imposition of death penalty.
In case of rape, PARDON will not extinguish the criminal
liability of the offender. According to Art. 266, pardon will
not extinguish the criminal liability of the offender. It is
only through:
1. The offended woman may pardon the offender
through a subsequent valid marriage, the effect of
which would be the extinction of the offender’s
liability
2. The legal husband maybe pardoned by forgiveness
of the wife provided that the marriage is not void
ab initio
EXCEPTION: In case of MARITAL RAPE. If the legal wife
has forgiven or pardoned the legal husband.
Q: When is there PRESUMPTION OF RESISTANCE?
A: If in the course of the commission of rape, the
said offended party has performed any acts in any
degree amounting to resistance of rape or when
the said offended party cannot give a valid
consent.
105 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR
CHILDREN ACT (VAWC) – R.A. 9262
Violence against women and their children
- refers to any act or a series of acts committed by any
person against a woman who is his wife, former wife, or
against a woman with whom the person has or had a sexual
or dating relationship, or with whom he has a common
child, or against her child whether legitimate or
illegitimate, within or without the family abode, which
result in or is likely to result in physical, sexual,
psychological harm or suffering, or economic abuse
including threats of such acts, battery, assault, coercion,
harassment or arbitrary deprivation of liberty.
Acts consisting violence against women and
children:
A. "Physical Violence" refers to acts that include bodily or
physical harm;
B. "Sexual violence" refers to an act which is sexual in
nature, committed against a woman or her child. It
includes, but is not limited to:
a) rape, sexual harassment, acts of lasciviousness,
treating a woman or her child as a sex object,
making demeaning and sexually suggestive
remarks, physically attacking the sexual parts of
the victim's body, forcing her/him to watch
obscene publications and indecent shows or
forcing the woman or her child to do indecent acts
and/or make films thereof, forcing the wife and
mistress/lover to live in the conjugal home or
sleep together in the same room with the abuser;
b) acts causing or attempting to cause the victim
to engage in any sexual activity by force, threat of
force, physical or other harm or threat of physical
or other harm or coercion;
c) Prostituting the woman or child.
C. "Psychological violence" refers to acts or omissions
causing or likely to cause mental or emotional suffering of
the victim such as but not limited to intimidation,
harassment, stalking, damage to property, public ridicule or
humiliation, repeated verbal abuse and mental infidelity. It
includes causing or allowing the victim to witness the
physical, sexual or psychological abuse of a member of the
family to which the victim belongs, or to witness
pornography in any form or to witness abusive injury to
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
pets or to unlawful or unwanted deprivation of the right to
custody and/or visitation of common children.
D. "Economic abuse" refers to acts that make or attempt to
make a woman financially dependent which includes, but is
not limited to the following:
1. withdrawal of financial support or preventing
the victim from engaging in any legitimate
profession, occupation, business or activity, except
in cases wherein the other spouse/partner objects
on valid, serious and moral grounds as defined in
Article 73 of the Family Code;
2. deprivation or threat of deprivation of financial
resources and the right to the use and enjoyment
of the conjugal, community or property owned in
common;
3. destroying household property;
4. controlling the victims' own money or
properties or solely controlling the conjugal
money or properties.
Acts of Violence Against Women and Their Children.- The
crime of violence against women and their children is
committed through any of the following acts:
(a) Causing physical harm to the woman or her
child;
(b) Threatening to cause the woman or her child
physical harm;
(c) Attempting to cause the woman or her child
physical harm;
(d) Placing the woman or her child in fear of
imminent physical harm;
(e) Attempting to compel or compelling the
woman or her child to engage in conduct which
the woman or her child has the right to desist from
or desist from conduct which the woman or her
child has the right to engage in, or attempting to
restrict or restricting the woman's or her child's
freedom of movement or conduct by force or
threat of force, physical or other harm or threat of
physical or other harm, or intimidation directed
against the woman or child. This shall include, but
not limited to, the following acts committed with
the purpose or effect of controlling or restricting
the woman's or her child's movement or conduct:
(1) Threatening to deprive or actually
depriving the woman or her child of
custody to her/his family;
106 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
(2) Depriving or threatening to deprive
the woman or her children of financial
support legally due her or her family, or
deliberately providing the woman's
children insufficient financial support;
(3) Depriving or threatening to deprive
the woman or her child of a legal right;
(4) Preventing the woman in engaging in
any legitimate profession, occupation,
business or activity or controlling the
victim's own mon4ey or properties, or
solely controlling the conjugal or
common money, or properties;
(f) Inflicting or threatening to inflict physical harm
on oneself for the purpose of controlling her
actions or decisions;
(g) Causing or attempting to cause the woman or
her child to engage in any sexual activity which
does not constitute rape, by force or threat of
force, physical harm, or through intimidation
directed against the woman or her child or her/his
immediate family;
(h) Engaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless
conduct, personally or through another, that
alarms or causes substantial emotional or
psychological distress to the woman or her child.
This shall include, but not be limited to, the
following acts:
(1) Stalking or following the woman or
her child in public or private places;
(2) Peering in the window or lingering
outside the residence of the woman or
her child;
(3) Entering or remaining in the dwelling
or on the property of the woman or her
child against her/his will;
(4) Destroying the property and personal
belongings or inflicting harm to animals
or pets of the woman or her child; and
(5) Engaging in any form of harassment
or violence;
(i) Causing mental or emotional anguish, public
ridicule or humiliation to the woman or her child,
including, but not limited to, repeated verbal and
emotional abuse, and denial of financial support
or custody of minor children of access to the
woman's child/children.
DATING RELATIONSHIP- refers to a situation wherein
the parties live as husband and wife without the benefit of
marriage or are romantically involved over time and on a
continuing basis during the course of the relationship. A
casual acquaintance or ordinary socialization between two
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
individuals in a business or social context is not a dating
relationship.
Q: The neighbor was aware of the beatings that the
husband has been doing to his wife so the neighbor who
was a witness to all these beatings filed a case against the
husband. Will the case prosper?
A: Yes because under sec. 25, Violation Against
Women and Children (VAWC) is a public offense.
Q: When does the crime prescribe?
A: If it involves physical abuse; it shall prescribe after
20 years. If it involves psychological, sexual, and
economical abuse; it shall prescribe in 10 years.
Q: Let’s say the wife filed a case against the husband for
violation of RA 9262; during the presentation of evidence
by the defense, the husband testified that he was always
drunk. He was alcoholic. That’s why he lost temper and
beats the wife. Will such defense mitigate the criminally
guilty husband? Can he use such defense?
A: Under Sec. 27 it cannot be used because under Sec.
27; the fact that the husband is under the influence of
alcohol, any illicit drug, or any other mind-
alteringsubstance cannot be used as defense in VAWC
therefore; alcoholism and drug addiction cannot be a
defense in VAWC.
Battered Women Syndrome (Sec. 26)
- Scientifically defined pattern of psychological
and behavioral symptoms found in the
battering relationship as a result of
cumulative abuse.
 Under Sec. 26, it is provided that victim survivors
founded to be suffering from this battered women
syndrome shall be exempted from both criminal
and civil liability notwithstanding the absence of
any of the elements of self-defense.
 The court however shall be held by a testimony of
a psychologist or psychiatrist if the woman is
indeed suffering from the so called battered
women syndrome.
ANTI-HAZING LAW – R.A. 8049
Q: What is hazing?
A: Hazing is an initiation rite or practice which is used
as an admission into membership in any fraternity or
any other organization wherein the said
recruit/neophyte/applicant is placed under the an
embarrassing or humiliating situations such as forcing
him to do menial, silly, and foolish tasks or services or
107 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
subjecting him into psychological or physical injury or
crime.
Q: Is hazing totally prohibited in the Philippines?
A: No. Hazing is not totally prohibited in the
Philippines. Hazing is allowed provided that the
following requisites are present:
1. There must be a prior written notice sent to
the head of the school authorities or the head
of the organization 7 days before the said
initiation rites and this prior written notice
shall contain the following:
a. It shall indicate the date of the said
initiation rites which shall not be more
than 3 days.
b. It shall indicate/state the names of the
neophytes or applicants who will
undergo the said hazing or initiation
rites.
c. It shall contain an undertaking which
states that there shall be no physical
violence employed in any form on
these neophyte recruits or applicants.
2. Upon the receipt of such prior written notice;
the head of the school or organization shall
assign atleast 2 representatives from their
school or organization who must be present
during the time of the said initiation rite or
hazing and these 2 representatives shall see to
it that no amount of physical violence shall be
employed on any person or any neophyte or
recruit or applicant during the said hazing or
initiation rite.
Q: What if in the course of the said hazing or initiation rite
someone died or suffered physical injuries; who shall be
held criminally liable?
A: If in the course of hazing or initiation rite, someone
died or some suffered any physical injuries; all of the
officers and members of the said fraternity or
organization who are present and who participated in
the said initiation rite shall be liable as principal.
Q: What if the said initiation rite was conducted or held in
a house of an Aling Nene? Is Aling Nene criminally liable?
A: Aling Nene is liable as an accomplice if she
has knowledge of the conduct of the said initiation rites
and she did not do any act in order to prevent its
occurrence.
 If the said initiation rite took place in the
house of a member or an officer of the said
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
fraternity or sorority; the parents of the said
members or officers shall be held liable not as
an accomplice but as a principal if they have
such knowledge of the said conduct of the
initiation rites and they did not perform any
act inorder to prevent its occurrence.
Q: When is there a prima facie evidence of participation?
A: Any person who is present in the said hazing or
initiation rite shall constitute a prima facie evidence
that there is a participation and shall be held liable as
principal.
Q: What if in the said hazing an officer beat an applicant
and he hit the neck thereby causing the death of the said
neophyte/recruit/applicant and so when prosecuted he
said: “I have no intention to commit so grave a wrong as
that committed”. Can such defense be used so as to mitigate
his criminal liability?
A: No such defense is prohibited defense. Under RA
8049; the defense that such person has no intention to
commit so grave a wrong as that committed cannot be
used by an accused under RA 8049.
 Whenever a person hits an
applicant/neophyte, he is already performing a
felonious act therefore he shall be held
criminally liable for all the consequences of his
actions. (Art 4 book 1)
 In the case of Lenny Villa Hazing; Sereno et. al.
considered Art. 4 wherein they ruled Reckless
Imprudence resulting to homicide.
o (I disagree) In Reckless imprudence,
the said person must be performing an
act which is not felonious but by reason
of negligence or imprudence, a felony
resulted. Therefore, in the case of
Lenny Villa, the ruling shall be
homicide, it shall not be reckless
imprudence.
ANTI- CHILD ABUSE ACT – R.A. 7610
In so far as RA 7610 is concerned; Children are those:
 Below 18 years of age
 Above 18 years of age who does not have the
capacity to fully protect themselves against any
abuse, cruelty or maltreatment because of their
physical or mental disability.
Q: What if two children, A and B were fighting over a gun
toy. The mother of A saw B beating A so A’s mother held B
108 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
and gave him a tender slap. However, because B is still a
child, his face became reddish. Based in the medical
certificate, it showed that the said act of slapping was the
cause of the injury sustained by B that made his face
reddish. What crime was committed by the mother of A? Is
the mother liable for Child abuse or is the mother liable for
slight physical injuries?
A: The mother of A is liable for slight physical
injuries only and not for violation of RA 7610.
Q: What do you mean by Child Abuse?
A: Child abuse refers to the maltreatment, whether
habitual or not, of the child which includes any of the
following:
 Physical or psychological abuse, neglect,
cruelty, sexual abuse and emotional
maltreatment;
 Any act by deeds or words which debases,
degrades or demean the intrinsic worth and
dignity of a child as a human being.
 Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs
for survival, such as food and shelter; or
 Failure to immediately give medical
treatment to an injured child resulting in
serious impairment of his growth and
development or in his permanent incapacity
or death.
 Not all acts committed against a child will result to
child abuse. It is necessary that in the said act,
there was this intention to debase, degrade or
demean the intrinsic worth of a child as a human
being.
Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse
What is child prostitution?
Children, whether male or female, who for money, profit, or
any other consideration or due to the coercion or influence
of any adult, syndicate or group, indulge in sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct, are deemed to be
children exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse.
Aggravating Circumstances:
(a) Those who engage in or promote, facilitate or
induce child prostitution which include, but are
not limited to, the following:
(1) Acting as a procurer of a child
prostitute;
(2) Inducing a person to be a client of a
child prostitute by means of written or
oral advertisements or other similar
means;
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
(3) Taking advantage of influence or
relationship to procure a child as
prostitute;
(4) Threatening or using violence
towards a child to engage him as a
prostitute; or
(5) Giving monetary consideration goods
or other pecuniary benefit to a child with
intent to engage such child in
prostitution.
(b) Those who commit the act of sexual
intercourse of lascivious conduct with a child
exploited in prostitution or subject to other sexual
abuse; Provided, That when the victims is under
twelve (12) years of age, the perpetrators shall be
prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 3, for
rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended,
the Revised Penal Code, for rape or lascivious
conduct, as the case may be: Provided, That the
penalty for lascivious conduct when the victim is
under twelve (12) years of age shall be reclusion
temporal in its medium period; and
(c) Those who derive profit or advantage
therefrom, whether as manager or owner of the
establishment where the prostitution takes place,
or of the sauna, disco, bar, resort, place of
entertainment or establishment serving as a cover
or which engages in prostitution in addition to the
activity for which the license has been issued to
said establishment.
When is there attempt to commit child
prostitution?
1. when any person who, not being a relative of a
child, is found alone with the said child inside the
room or cubicle of a house, an inn, hotel, motel,
pension house, apartelle or other similar
establishments, vessel, vehicle or any other hidden
or secluded area under circumstances which
would lead a reasonable person to believe that the
child is about to be exploited in prostitution and
other sexual abuse.
2. when any person is receiving services from a child
in a sauna parlor or bath, massage clinic, health
club and other similar establishments.
What is Child Trafficking?
Any person who shall engage in trading and dealing
with children including, but not limited to, the act of
buying and selling of a child for money, or for any
other consideration, or barter
109 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

Aggravating Circumstance: if the victim is under 12

years of age

Attempt to Commit Child Trafficking. – There is an

attempt to commit child trafficking under Section 7 of this
Act:

(a) When a child travels alone to a foreign country

without valid reason therefor and without
clearance issued by the Department of Social
Welfare and Development or written permit or
justification from the child's parents or legal
guardian;

(b) when the pregnant mother executes an

affidavit of consent for adoption for consideration;

(c) When a person, agency, establishment or child-

caring institution recruits women or couples to
bear children for the purpose of child trafficking;
or

(d) When a doctor, hospital or clinic official or

employee, nurse, midwife, local civil registrar or
any other person simulates birth for the purpose
of child trafficking; or

(e) When a person engages in the act of finding

children among low-income families, hospitals,
clinics, nurseries, day-care centers, or other child-
during institutions who can be offered for the
purpose of child trafficking.

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 110 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
TITLE NINE
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONSAL LIBERTY AND
SECURITY (ARTICLES 267 – 292)
ART 267 – KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL
DETENTION
 It is committed when: a private individual kidnaps or
detains another or in any other manner to deprive him
of his liberty when such detention is illegal and it is
committed in any of the following circumstances:
1. If the kidnapping or detention should have
lasted for more than 3 days.
2. If it is committed simulating a public
authority.
3. If threats to kill had been made upon the
person kidnapped or any serious physical
injuries are inflicted upon same.
4. If the person kidnapped or detained is a
minor, female, or a public officer.
 Any of the circumstances present, then we have serious
illegal detention.
Q: Who is the offender in Art 267?
A: He must be a private individual because if he is a
public officer who has been vested by law to make
arrest and he detains a person; it will be arbitrary
detention under Art 124.
Q: Can a public officer commit kidnapping and serious
illegal detention?
A: Yes if the said public officer has not been vested by
law with the authority to effect arrest and to detain a
person then the said public officer is acting in his
private capacity. Although a public officer; since he is
acting in his private capacity, the crime committed is
kidnapping and serious illegal detention under Art 267
and not arbitrary detention under Art 124.
 The second element requires that the offender kidnaps
or detains another or in any other manner depriving
him of his liberty.
Q: When is there detention?
A: There is detention if the offender restrains a person
or the liberty of another person. He must be detained,
incarcerated. There must be showing that there is a
restraint on his person or liberty; otherwise, if there is
no restraint on the person or liberty on the part of the
offended party, it could be any other crime but not
kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
 The law requires that the kidnapping and detention
must be illegal therefore there must be no reasonable
ground.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Circumstances which will make the crime serious:
1. The kidnapping or detention should have lasted
for more than 3 days;
2. If it is committed by simulating public authority.
 By pretending to be police officers,
pretending to be NBI agents
3. If any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon
the person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill
him are made.
4. If the person kidnapped or detained is a minor
(unless the offender is his parents); a female, or a
public officer.
 The presence of any of these circumstances will meet
the crime of Serious Illegal Detention and the absence
of any of the circumstance will make the crime Slight
Illegal Detention under Art 268.
Note that the penalty is reclusion perpetua to death.
Circumstances which will qualify the penalty:
1. If the purpose of the kidnapping is to extort
ransom from the victim or from any other person.
 Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention for Ransom.
Q: What is ransom?
A: A ransom is the money, price, or any
other consideration given or demanded
for the redemption of the liberty of the
person who has been detained or
incarcerated.
People v. Mamantak
- While the mother and the daughter where in a
food chain in tondo; the mother lost the said child.
- she had been looking for the said child for a year.
- A year and six months thereafter, the said mother
received a call from a woman who sounded to be a
masculine man from Lanaodel Norte according to
the said woman.
- The woman said that she has the child with her
and the woman was demanding P 30,000 in
exchange for the child.
- The said woman, Mamantak and company asked
the mother to go to a certain restaurant.
- The mother went to the said restaurant however
the mother already informed the authorities.
- Upon the exchange of the child and the demand;
Mamantak and co. were arrested by the said
authorities.
111 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
- The crime charged was: Kidnapping and Serious
Illegal Detention for Ransom.
- RTC ruled that it is only kidnapping and serious
illegal detention but not for ransom because
according to the trial court; the amount given is
measly a sum to be considered as ransom because
according to the RTC; it is only in payment for the
board and logging of the child during the time that
she was in the captivity of the said woman.
- SC ruled that the crime committed is kidnapping
and serious illegal detention for ransom. Even if
it is only 5 centavos; if it was given in exchange for
the liberty of a person who has been detained, by
whose liberty has been restricted; it is already
considered as ransom.
- There is no such thing as small amount in
so far as ransom is concerned.
Q: Let’s say A is indebted to B; B was asking payment from
A, A however said that he has no money until B got fed up
so what B did is he kidnapped and detained the minor child
of A. He then called A telling the same: “I will only release
your minor child the moment you give your indebtedness in
the amount of a million pesos”. Is the crime committed
kidnapping and serious illegal detention for ransom?
A: Yes it is already kidnapping and serious illegal
detention for ransom even if the amount being asked
by the kidnapper is the indebtedness of the father of
the said child. Any amount demanded in exchange for
the liberty of the person detained; that is already
considered as ransom.
2. When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence
of the kidnapping or detention.
 Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention with Homicide.
 This is a special complex crime.
Therefore, since it is a special
complex crime; regardless of the
number of victims killed; it is
still kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with homicide.
People v. Laranaga
- There were two kidnap victims and these two
sisters were both killed and raped yet the SC held
that the crime committed was kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with homicide and rape.
- Despite the fact that there were 2 victims who
were killed and raped because regardless of the
numbers of the victims killed, since it is a special
complex crime; in the eyes of the law there is only
one crime committed so it is only: Kidnapping
and Serious illegal detention with homicide.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 Note however that it is required that the victim himself
is the one who has been killed. If it is another person; it
will result to a separate and distinct crime because the
law is particular that the person detained/ kidnapped
must be the one who is killed or died as a consequence
thereof.
Q: What if A kidnapped the child of B who is his enemy.
The said child is 10 years old and he was placed in a
hideout. The child tried to escape but A saw him so A fired
a shot towards the child which resulted to the death of the
child. What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is kidnapping with
serious illegal detention with homicide.
Q: What if in the same problem; the father learned about
the said kidnapping so the father informed the NBI agents.
The NBI agents were able to track down the place where the
said child was being hidden so the NBI agents together with
the said father went to the hideout. There was an exchange
of gun fires between A (the kidnapper) and the NBI agents.
While there was an exchange of gun fires, the father saw his
child so the father rushed towards the son, carry the son
and they were able to leave the said hideout. While they
were leaving, A the kidnapper saw them and A the
kidnapper shot the father. What crime/s is/are committed?
A: In so far as the minor is concerned; the crime
committed is Kidnapping and serious illegal
detention even if it did not last for a period of more
than 3 days, the fact that the offended party is a minor,
it is already kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
In so far as the father who has been killed; since he is
not the victim of serious illegal detention, it will
constitute a separate and distinct crime of: homicide.
Therefore, there are 2 crimes committed by the said
kidnapper. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention in
so far as the child is concerned and homicide in so far
as the father who has been killed is concerned.
3. When the victim is raped.
 Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention with Rape.
 It is necessary that the victim is the one who
has been raped.
 Again; since this is a special complex crime;
regardless of the times that the victim has
been raped. The crime committed is only
kidnapping and serious illegal detention with
rape. There is no kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with multiple rape.
112 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
4. When the victim is subjected to torture or any
dehumanizing acts.
 The presence of any of these circumstances will bring
about the imposition of maximum penalty of death.
Q: A, a 6 yr old child is playing at a playground at about 5
o’clock in the afternoon while the mother is hanging
clothes. A man (X) gave the child a candy and the child was
so happy. Later, the man again approached the child and
gave the child money and then the said man invited the
child to go with him. Since the child was so happy because
the man was so good to her; the child went with the said
man. At 6 o’clock; the mother came looking for the child
but the child was no longer in the playground. Meanwhile,
the man brought the child to his place. That evening, the
mother kept on looking for the child however they could
not locate the child. In the house of the man, the child was
molested and raped twice. The following morning, when
the mother opened the door of the house, she saw her child
at the door with torn clothes and blood. So the man was
charged with serious illegal detention with rape. Is the
charge correct?
A: The charge is wrong because the obvious intention
of the man is to rape the child and not to detain the
child therefore the SC said: the crime committed would
be 2 counts of statutory rape not only a single
indivisible offense of kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with rape but 2 counts of statutory rape
because the said child is under 12 years of age and she
was raped and molested twice. Therefore, unless and
until there was an intent to detain on the part of the
offender; it could be any other crime but not
kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
Q: A saw his enemy walking. He abducted his enemy and
placed him inside the van. The following morning, the said
enemy was found in a vacant lot with 10 gunshot wounds.
What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is Murder. Obviously, there
was no intent to detain the offended party. The intent
was to kill him. Therefore the crime committed is
murder and not kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with homicide or murder as the case may be.
 In order for kidnapping and serious illegal detention to
amount to with rape, murder, with homicide with
physical injuries; it is necessary that there is an intent
to detain and in the course of the said detention, the
victim dies, raped, subjected to torture or other
dehumanizing acts.
 Again, as mentioned earlier; the absence of any of the
circumstances which will make illegal detention
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
serious will make the crime Slight Illegal Detention
under Art 268.
ART 268 – SLIGHT ILLEGAL DETENTION
 Slight illegal detention is committed by: any
person who shall kidnap or detains another or in
any other manner deprive him of his liberty when
the said detention is illegal absent of any of the
circumstances under Art 267; it will only be slight
illegal detention.
Q: What if A was so envious of his neighbor. To teach the
neighbor a lesson, he kidnapped and detained the said
neighbor and placed the said neighbor in a secluded place
in a vacant area one morning. However, later on, A felt
sorry for his neighbor and he released his neighbor that
night. What is the effect in the criminal liability of the
offender A?
A: Under Art 268 (Slight Illegal Detention); if the
offended party has been released. Such release will be
considered as a privileged mitigating circumstance
because from the penalty of reclusion temporal, the
penalty would be lowered by one degree that is prision
mayor.
 Note however that this voluntary release of the victim
may only be considered as a privileged mitigating
circumstance the following requisites must concur:
1. It is necessary the release has been made
within 3 days from the commencement of the
said kidnapping.
2. It must have been made without the offender
having attained or accomplished his purpose.
3. It must have been made before the institution
of the criminal proceedings against the said
offender.
 If all of these 3 are present then such
voluntary release of the offender will
mitigate the criminal liability of the said
offender.
Q: What if the person kidnapped by A is a public officer?
He is mad with the said public officer and so he kidnapped
the same and detained him in the morning. In the evening,
he immediately released the public officer because he told
himself that perhaps the NBI would look after him so he
immediately released the public officer. Will such release
mitigate his criminal liability?
A: No. the fact that the person kidnapped is a public
officer; the crime would immediately be kidnapping
and serious illegal detention under 267. And if the
crime is committed under Art 267, no amount of
113 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
voluntary release will mitigate the criminal liability of
the offender.
 So if the victim is a minor, a female, or a public
officer; automatically, it will be kidnapping and
serious illegal detention and no amount of
voluntary release will mitigate the offender’s
criminal liability.
ART 269 – UNLAWFUL ARREST
 Unlawful arrest is committed by: any person who
shall arrest or detain another without authority by
law or without reasonable ground therefore and
his main purpose is to deliver him to the proper
authorities.
 The purpose is: to deliver him to the proper
authorities.
Q: A was walking when suddenly he was arrested by B, a
police officer. The police officer said that a case has to be
filed against him. The arrest was made without warrant of
arrest. A was not caught committing a crime inflagrante
delicto and not also an escapee but he was incarcerated.
Thereafter a case has been filed against him however since
there was no complainant, the fiscal dismissed the case for
lack of probable cause. What crime is committed by the
police officer?
A: The crime committed is unlawful arrest.
Q: What about the fact that he has been detained
arbitrarily?
A: It is already absorbed because the intention of the
said police officer is to file a case against him that is; to
deliver him to the proper authorities. Therefore the
arbitrary detention is merely incidental in the said act
of unlawful arrest.
ART 270 – KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO
RETURN A MINOR
 Kidnapping and failure to return a minor is
committed by: any person who had been entrusted
with the custody of a minor who shall deliberately
fail to restore the said minor to his parents or
guardians.
Q: Who is the offender?
A: The offender is the person entrusted with the
custody of a minor.
Q: When will the crime arise?
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
A: The crime will arise if the offender shall deliberately
fail to restore the said minor to his parents or
guardians.
Q: What if A and B has a child and they entrusted the child
to X as they will be going for a vacation for a week. They
told X to deliver the child to them after 7 days. A week after,
the husband and wife arrived home but X failed to deliver
the said child. The reason of X was he was so busy with his
work that he forgot that it was already the 7th day from the
time that he has been entrusted with the child. Can he be
held liable under Art 270?
A: No because he did not deliberately fail to restore the
said minor to his parents or guardians. The law
requires deliberate failure. Here, he only failed because
of negligence or just because he was so busy.
ART 271 – INDUCING A MINOR TO ABANDON HIS
HOME
 It is committed by: any person who induces a
minor to leave the home of his parents, guardians,
or person entrusted with the custody of the said
minor.
 The crime will arise even if the child hasn’t left the
house of the parents or guardians. Mere
inducement with intent to cause damage will
suffice.
Q: A and B husband and wife’s marriage has been declared
a nullity by the court and the custody of their 5 yr old child
has been given definitely to the mother. However the father
has been given visiting rights. One Sunday, the father
visited the 5 yr old son and the son was brought out by the
father. Usually, whenever the father takes his son out; he
will return the child by night time. However this time, the
father did not bring back the child to the house of the
mother and so the mother demanded the return of her son
but the father still failed to return their child therefore the
mother filed a case of Kidnapping and failure to return a
minor under Art 270 against the father. Will the case
prosper?
A: Yes the case will prosper. Under Art 271 it is
provided that Art 270 and 271 can also be committed
not only by strangers but also by the father or the
mother. The only difference is that under Art 270; if
the offender is any other person the penalty is
reclusion perpetua. But if the offender is the father or
the mother, note that the penalty is so low; only arresto
mayor or a fine of not more than P300 or both fine and
penalty depending upon the discretion of the court
therefore, even the father or the mother can be held
liable under Articles 270 and 271. The only difference
is their respective penalties.
114 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
ART 272 – SLAVERY
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender purchases, sells,
kidnaps or detains a human being.
2. The purpose of the offender is to
enslave such human being.
 It is committed by: Any person who shall buy,
sells, kidnaps or detains a person for the purpose
of enslaving the said person.
 If the purpose is to engage in immoral traffic; then
the penalty will be qualified.
ART 273 – EXPLOITATION OF CHILD LABOR
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender retains a minor in his
service.
2. It is against the will of the minor.
3. It is under the pretext of reimbursing
himself of a debt incurred by an
ascendant, guardian or person
entrusted with the custody of such
minor.
 It is committed by: Any person who shall detain a
child in his service against the will of the child
under the pretext of reimbursing a debt incurred
by the parents, ascendants, guardian or any
person entrusted with the custody of the child.
ART 274 – SERVICES RENDERED UNDER
COMPULSION IN PAYMENT OF DEBT
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender compels a debtor to work for
him, either as household servant or farm
laborer.
2. It is against the debtor’s will.
3. The purpose is to require or enforce the
payment of a debt.
 It is committed by: a creditor to shall compel a
debtor to work for him as a household servant or a
farm laborer against the will of the said debtor
inorder to require or enforce the payment of a
debt.
ART 275 – ABANDONMENT OF PERSONS IN
DANGER AND ABANDONMENT OF ONES OWN
VICTIM
ACTS PUNISHED:
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
1. Failing to render assistance to any
person whom the offender found in
an uninhabited place wounded or in
danger of dying when he can render
such assistance without detriment to
himself, unless such omission shall
constitute a more serious offense.
2. Failing to render help or assistance
to another whom the offender has
accidentally wounded or injured.
3. Failing to deliver a child under 7
years of age whom the offender has
found abandoned, to the authorities
or to his family, or failing to take him
to a safe place.
Q: A saw B at Luneta Park. He was wounded and bitten by
a dog and he was crying for help. However, A, instead of
helping B left. Is A liable under Art 275?
A: No because the place is not an uninhabited place.
Luneta Park is a public place. People come and go
there. Therefore, A is not liable under Art 275 despite
the fact that B is wounded and dying.
Uninhabited place
- One wherein there’s a remote possibility for the
victim to receive some help.
Q: What if in the same problem, A found B in a forest? So A
went hunting in a forest when he suddenly saw B in the
middle of the forest. There was this big trunk of tree on the
neck of B and he cannot move. He was begging for the help
of A. A however left. Later, B was rescued. Can he file a case
in violation of Art 275 against A?
A: Yes because B was found by A in an uninhabited
place and he was wounded and in danger of dying
because there’s a big trunk of tree on his neck and
there’s no detriment on the part of A to render
assistance but he failed to render assistance therefore
A may be held liable for violation of Art 275.
Q: But what if when A found B and he was bitten by a snake
and the snake was still there. B was asking for help however
A did not give help because there’s a snake. He’s afraid that
he might get bitten by the snake too. Can A be held liable
under Art 275?
A: No because helping B will be detrimental on his
part.
Q: What if A was driving his vehicle when suddenly his car
tripped on a stone so the stone flew and hit an eye of a
bystander. The left eye bled. Is A liable?
115 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
A: No because it is purely accidental; it is an
exempting circumstance. He was performing an act
with due care and accident happened without fault or
negligence on his part
Q: What if when the left eye of the bystander bled; A saw
him and he knows that the bystander is his victim.
However, instead of bringing the bystander to the hospital;
he increased his speed and left. Is A criminally liable this
time?
A: Yes.
For the first act he is not liable because it is purely
accidental but when he failed to render help or
assistance to his own victim. This time, he is criminally
liable under Art 275.
ART 276 – ABANDONING A MINOR
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender has the custody of the
child.
2. Child is under 7 years of age.
3. He abandons such child.
4. He has no intent to kill the child
when the latter is abandoned.
 Abandoning a minor is committed by any person
who has been entrusted with the custody of a child
under 7 years of age and he abandons the said
child permanently, deliberately, and consciously
with no intent to kill the said child.
 The penalty will be qualified if DEATH resulted
from the said abandonment or WHEN THE
SAFETY OF THE CHILD HAS BEEN PLACED IN
DANGER.
Q: A woman; an OFW worker who left her newly born child
inside a garbage bin of an aircraft/airplane and later she
has been arrested. What crime is committed by the said
mother?
A: The crime committed is Abandoning a Minor
under Art. 276. The mother is in custody of the child
and she deliberately or and consciously abandoned her
child without the intent to kill. Obviously there was no
intent to kill because she could have killed the said
child instead she placed her child inside a garbage can
in the restroom of an aircraft so there was no intent to
kill therefore the crime committed is Abandoning a
Minor under Art. 276.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
ART 277 – ABANDONMENT OF MINOR BY A
PERSON ENTRUSTED WITH HIS CUSTODY;
INDIFFERENCE OF PARENTS
ACTS PUNISHED:
1. Abandonment of a child by a person entrusted
with his custody.
 It is committed by: any person who, having
entrusted with the living and education of a
minor shall deliver a minor to a public
institution or other persons without the
consent of the person who entrusted such
minor to the care of the offender or, in his
absence, without the consent of the proper
authorities.
2. Indifference of parents
 It is committed by: any parent who neglects
any of his children by not giving them the
education which their station in life requires
and financial capability permits.
ART 278 – EXPLOITATION OF A CHILD
ACTS PUNISHED:
1. Causing any boy or girl under 16 to engage
in any dangerous feat of balancing,
physical strength or contortion, the
offender being any person.
2. Employing children under 16 years of age
who are not the children or descendants of
the offender in exhibitions of acrobat,
gymnast, rope walker, diver, or wild
animal tamer, the offender being an
acrobat, etc., or circus manager or person
engaged in any of said callings.
3. Employing any descendants under 12
years of age in dangerous exhibitions
enumerated on the next preceding
paragraph, the offender being engaged in
any of the said callings.
4. Delivering a child under 16 years of age
gratuitously to any person if any of the
callings enumerated in paragraph 2, or to
any habitual vagrant or beggar, the
offender being an ascendant, guardian,
teacher, or a person entrusted in any
capacity with the care if such child.
5. Including any child under 16 years of age
to abandon the home of its ascendants,
guardians, curators or teachers to follow
any person entrusted in any of the callings
mentioned in paragraph 2 or to
116 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
accompany any habitual vagrant
beggar, the offender being any person.
 These acts are considered as exploitation of minors
because these acts endanger the life and safety, the
growth and development of the minors. (usually these
involves circus)
Note: If the delivery of the said child is on the basis of a
consideration, compensation or money, the penalty will be
QUALIFIED.
 Mere act of delivering the child gratuitously under 16
years of age; the crime is already committed.
 The fact that it is with consideration; the penalty will
be qualified.
ART 280 – QUALIFIED TRESSPASS TO
DWELLING
 It is committed by: a private individual who shall
enter the dwelling of another against the will of
the latter.
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a private individual
 It is committed by a private individual
because if it is a public officer; then the
crime is under Art 128 which is: Violation
of Domicile.
2. He enters the dwelling of another
3. Such entrance is against the will of the latter.
 As discussed under Art. 128; when
the law says against the will, there
must be a prohibition or opposition
from entering whether express or
implied.
 Mere entry without consent will not bring about
QUALIFIED TRESSPASS TO DWELLING.
 If the door is opened therefore it means that anyone
could enter even without the consent of the owner and
the moment he enters he is not liable for qualified
trespass to dwelling because there is no prohibition or
opposition from entering.
 It is necessary that there is an opposition or
prohibition from entering. It can be expressed
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Updated by: Dinty
or prohibition (e.g. A note which states: “Do Not Enter”
or the door was closed and a person knocked so the
owner got up and opened the door but upon seeing the
person he immediately closed the door) or implied
prohibition (e.g. Door is closed even if it is not locked).
ART 281 – OTHER FORMS OF TRESSPASS TO
DWELLING
(TRESSPASS TO PROPERTY)
ELEMENTS
1. Offender enters the closed premises
or the fenced estate of another.
2. Entrance is made while wither of
them is uninhabited.
3. Prohibition to enter is manifest.
4. Trespasser has not secured the
permission of the owner or the
caretaker thereof.
 Trespass to property is committed by: any person
who enters a closed premises or fenced estate
which at that time is uninhabited and the
prohibition to enter is manifest and the offender
enters the said uninhabited place without
securing the permission of the owner or the care
taker thereof.
TRESSPASS TO TRESSPASS TO
DWELLING PROPERTY
Place entered into is a closed
Place entered into is a
premises or a fenced estate
dwelling and uninhabited.
which is uninhabited.
Prohibition to enter can
Prohibition to enter must be
either be expressed or
manifest.
implied.
Entry was made against Entry was made without
the will of the owner or securing the permission from
the possessor of the said the owner or the care taker of
dwelling. the said property.
Q: Let’s say there are these town houses. In one of the town
houses, town house A; there’s no person living at the
moment and there was this sign: FOR RENT/ FOR LEASE.
X entered the said town house. What crime is committed by
X? Is it qualified trespass to dwelling or is it trespass to
property?
A: It is trespass to property because it is a closed
premises which is uninhabited at the time of the
entering and he entered without first securing the
permission of the owner/care taker.
Q: What if there is this house which is occupied by husband
A and B. Husband A and B went for a vacation for a month.
So for a month, there is no person in the said place. X
117 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

learned that there is no person in the said place. He entered any wrong amounting to a crime and demanding
the said place. What crime is committed? Is it qualified money or imposing any other condition even
trespass to dwelling or trespass to property? though not unlawful and without the offender
A: The crime committed is Qualified Trespass to attaining his purpose. (Elements for this act are
Dwelling. The said place is a residential place and the same with the first except that the purpose is
there is someone who is occupying it even if at the not attained.)
moment there are no people because the said husband 3. By threatening another with the infliction upon his
A and B are on vacations, it is still considered as an person, honor or infliction upon his person, honor
inhabited place. Therefore, the moment anyone enters, or property or that of his family of any wrong
the crime committed is trespass to dwelling and not amounting to a crime, the threat not being subject
trespass to property. to any demand of money or imposition of any
condition.
THREE KINDS OF THREATS:
1. Grave threats
2. Light threats ARTICLE 283 – LIGHT THREATS
3. Other light threats Light threats is committed if a person threatens another
DISTINCTION: GRAVE, LIGHT, OTHER LIGHT with the commission of any wrong which does not amount
THREATS to a crime. But it always subject to a demanded money or
GRAVE LIGHT OTHER LIGHT the imposition of any other condition even though not
THREATS THREATS THREATS unlawful.
The threat is The threat does Committed by
always & always not amount to a threatening another
amounting to crime. It is with a weapon or Art. 284 – BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR
and constituting always and draw such weapon “In all cases falling within the two next preceding
a crime. It may always subject to in a quarrel, unless articles, the person making the threats may also be required
or may not be a demand of it be in lawful self- to give bail not to molest the person threatened, or if he
subject to money or the defense; or orally shall fail to give such bail, he shall be sentenced to
demand of imposition of threatening, in the destierro.”
money or any other heat of anger,
imposition of condition, even another with some
other though not harm not ARTICLE 285 – OTHER LIGHT THREATS
conditions. The unlawful. constituting a There are 3 instances or punishable acts under
offender may or crime, and who by light threats:
may not attain subsequent acts 1. Threatening another with a weapon or by drawing
his purpose. show that he did such weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful
not persist in the self-defense. Here, the weapon must not be
idea involved in his discharged.
threat; or orally 2. Orally threatening another, in the heat of anger,
threatening to do with some harm constituting a crime, without
any harm not persisting in the idea involved in his threat.
constituting a 3. Any threat made in a jest or in the heat of anger
felony. constitutes light threat only.
4. Orally threatening to do another any harm nt
constituting a felony.
ARTICLE 282 – GRAVE THREATS
PUNISHABLE ACTS: So whether it be grave threats, light threats or other light
1. Threatening another with the infliction upon his threats, the essence of threats is INTIMIDATION. It is a
person, honor or property or that of his family of promise of a future wrong, a promise of a future harm. Not
any wrong amounting to a crime and demanding now, but in the future.
money or imposing any other condition even
though not unlawful, and the offender attained his So, since it is a promise of a future wrong, threats may be
purpose. committed either personally or orally or it can also be
2. By making such threat with the infliction upon his committed in writing or through an intermediary. If threats
person, honor or property or that of his family of

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 118 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
are committed through writing or through an intermediary,
the penalty is qualified.
Q: What is the difference between grave threats, light
threats or other light threats?
A: In GRAVE THREATS, the threat will always
amount or constitute a crime. It may or may not be
subject to a demand money or condition. The offender
may or may not attain his purpose. But, in grave
threats, the threats will always amount or will always
constitute to a crime. On the other hand, in case of
LIGHT THREATS, the threat will not constitute to a
crime but it is always and always subject to a demand
of money or the imposition of any other condition.
So in LIGHT THREATS, the threat threatened to be
committed will not amount to a crime, will not
constitute to a crime, however it is always subject to a
demand of money or the imposition of any other
condition, even though not unlawful.
Lastly, in case of OTHER LIGHT THREATS, other
light threats can be done by threatening another with a
weapon or by drawing such weapon in a quarrel, unless
it be in lawful self-defense or it can be done by orally
threatening another with a harm amounting to a crime
in the heat of anger. So it is necessary that the offender
is in the heat of anger or he threatens another with a
harm amounting to a crime. But he did not pursue with
the idea involved in his threat. And the last one is by
orally threatening another which does constitute a
crime.
Q: So what if A went to the store and then from the said
store he learned that had been spreading negative rumors
against him. And so A was so mad, he was so angry that he
went to the house of B and he called on B: “B get out of the
house! I will kill you! I will kill you! Get out of the house B!”
But B did not get out of the house. Instead, it was the son of
B who came out of the house and said: “What do you want
with my father?” A angrily said that, “You let your father
come out or I will kill him because he has been spreading
negative rumors about me.” The son went inside the house
and did not come back. The father also did not come out of
the house. And so later, A just left the house. What crime is
committed by A? Is it grave threats, light threats or is it
other light threats?
A: The crime committed is under Article 285 –
OTHER LIGHT THREATS. Orally, in the heat of
anger, he threatened another with a harm constituting
a crime, but he did not pursue with the idea in his
threat. It is only other light threats.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Q: What if, let us say, A saw that B has a new car. It was a
luxury car. He knew that it was smuggled and so he told B:
“B, if you will not give me P500,000, I will call the Bureau
of Customs, I will tell Comissioner Biazon right now that
your car is smuggled.” What crime if any is committed by A
against B?
A: It is LIGHT THREATS. He threatened to commit
a wrong which does not constitute a crime. It is not a
crime to inform the Bureau of Customs that the car
was smuggled and it is subject to a demand of money
and the imposition of any other condition even though
not unlawful.
Q: What if A, who is the creditor of B, was inside the house
of B. He was asking B to pay his indebtedness. B said: “Get
out of my house. If I still see you in the afternoon when I
get back inside my house and if you are still here, I will kill
you.” What crime is committed?
A: In this instance where B told A : “Get out of my
house. If I still see you in the afternoon when I get back
inside my house and if you are still here, I will kill you.”
The crime committed is GRAVE THREATS. There is
a promise of a future wrong to be committed in the
afternoon if A is still there in the house.
Q: What if in the same problem, A was asking B to pay his
indebtedness. B said: “Get out of my house! Otherwise, I
will kill you.” What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is GRAVE COERCION. The
threat is present, direct, personal, immediate and
imminent. Not in the future, but now direct, personal
and immediate.
Note that in case of threats made while committing
physical injuries, threats are absorbed.
ARTICLE 286 – GRAVE COERCIONS
2 way of committing grave coercion:
1. Preventive Coercion
2. Compulsive Coercion
PREVENTIVE COERCION – if a person prevents
another, by means of violence, threat or intimidation, from
doing something not prohibited by law.
COMPULSIVE COERCION – if a person compels
another, by means of violence, threat or intimidation, to do
something against his will, whether it be right or wrong,
whether it be prohibited or not by law.
So, to amount to preventive coercion, the offender by
means of violence prevents someone from doing something
which is not prohibited by law.
119 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

Q: Therefore, what if, the offender prevents someone from It is committed by a creditor who shall seize anything
doing something which is prohibited by law? So let us say belonging to his debtor by means of violence or
A, wanted to enter the house of B, against the will of B. X intimidation in order to apply the same to the
saw A wanting to enter the house of B against the will of B. indebtedness.
X prevented A. A in his act of wanting to enter the house of
B, is an act prohibited by law, so X prevented A from doing There is one form of light coercion under Article 287, that
so. However, A still pursued with the act of entering and so is UNJUST VEXATION. It is a form of light coercion.
what X did in order to prevent him is that X boxed A UNJUST VEXATION – refers to any human conduct,
resulting in his injury of slight physical injuries. What which although not capable of producing any material harm
crime is committed by X? or injury, annoys, vexes or irritates an innocent person.
A: It is not grave coercion. Because X is preventing A
by means of violence and intimidation, not from doing Example in Book I: a person walking and hit with a lead
something which is prohibited by law but from doing pipe on the head.
something which is prohibited by law. Therefore, it is
not grave coercion. CASE OF BALEROS, JR.:
So what crime is committed? There was a UST medical student. There was a
The crime committed is SLIGHT PHYSICAL cloth soaked with chemical pressed on her face. So
INJURIES. there was this man, she was awakened with a man
on top of her placing a cloth soaked with chemical
Q: What if in case of grave coercion, it is necessary that the pressed on her face. The charge was attempted
offender compels another to do something against his will, rape. Supreme Court said it was just UNJUST
regardless of whether it be right or wrong, regardless VEXATION – nang-iinis lang daw yung
of whether it is allowed or prohibited by law. The fact is a lalaking yun. So, Supreme Court said it is a
person cannot put the law in his hands and prevent human conduct which annoys or vexes the said
someone from doing something so long as it is against his female medical student.
will.
A: So in case of grave coercion, if the essence of threats Art. 288 – OTHER SIMILAR COERCIONS;
is intimidation or a promise of a future wrong, a (COMPULSORY PURCHASE OF MERCHANDISE
promise of a future injury, the injury or threat is AND PAYMENT OF WAGES BY MEANS OF
present, direct, personal, immediate and imminent. It TOKENS)
is NOW. That is why, grave coercion cannot be Other light coercion is committed by forcing or
committed in writing or through an intermediary compelling directly or indirectly or knowingly permitting
because it is always personal. Hence, it is about to take the forcing or compelling any employee or laborer to buy
place imminent and immediate. merchandise or commodities from the said employer. And
lastly, by paying the wages due to the laborer or employees
by any tokens or object other than the legal tender currency
of the Philippines unless to be requested by the said
employee or laborer.
THREAT v. COERCION
THREAT COERCION So it is more on LABOR – other light coercion.
The wrong threatened to be
The wrong threatened to be committed is direct, Q: What if a person, A threatened to kill B. and so B filed a
committed is in the future personal, immediate and case of grave threats against A. The case was filed before
imminent the court. Upon the filing of the court, what bail, if any,
Cannot be committed in should the court impose on A in order to insure that A will
May be committed in writing or through not make good the said threat?
writing or through an intermediary because it is A: Under Article 284, we have BOND FOR
intermediary always personal and GOOD BEHAVIOR. Bond for good behavior is a
immediate bail which is required by the court to be posted by
It is violence or intimidation any accused only in the crimes of grave threats
The essence of threat is and other light threats. In the crimes of grave
amounting serious enough
intimidation threats or other light threats, the court would
to amount to violence
allow or would require an accused to file or to post
ARTICLE 287 – LIGHT COERCION a bond for good behavior in order to ensure that

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 120 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
he will not make good the said threat. If the said
accused failed to pay or post the said bond for
good behavior, then the penalty hat would be
imposed is destierro in order to ensure that he
will not make good the said threat.
REVELATION OF SECRETS:
ARTICLE 290 – DISCOVERING SECRETS
THROUGH SEIZURE OF CORRESPONDENCE
We have seizure of correspondence in order to discover the
secrets of another.
This is committed by any person who shall seize any
correspondence of another in order to discover the secret of
any person.
NOTE: In case of seizure of correspondence in order to
discover the secrets of another, DAMAGE is not element.
Likewise, REVELATION is not an element.
The mere act of seizing the correspondence of
another with the intention to discover the secrets,
the crime is already consummated. It is not necessary
that the secret be revealed, it is not necessary that there be
damage on the part of the offended party.
ARTICLE 291 – REVEALING SECRETS WITH THE
ABUSE OF OFFICE
This is committed by a manager or by an employee or by a
servant who reveals the secrets of his principal or master
learned by him in such capacity.
It is the REVELATION OF SECRETS which will
consummate the crime, not merely discovery but
revelation of the said secrets. Again, damage is not an
element. It is not necessary that the offended party be
prejudiced or damaged.
ARTICLE 292 – REVELATION OF INDUSTRIAL
SECRETS
This is committed by any person in charge, employee or
workman of a manufacturing or industrial establishment
who shall learn and discover the secrets of the industry and
shall reveal the same to the prejudice of the owner thereof.
In case of revelation of industrial secrets, mere
revelation of those secrets will not suffice. There
must be DAMAGE OR PREJUDICE CAUSED TO THE
OFFENDED PARTY.
The law requires to the prejudice of the owner thereof.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
RA 92400 - ANTI-WARTAPPING LAW
The following acts are punishable:
1.) It shall be unlawful for any person, without
securing the consent of all the parties to any
private communication or spoken word, to
tap any wire or cable, or by using any other
device or arrangement to secretly overhear,
intercept or record such private
communication or spoken word by using a
device commonly known as a Dictaphone or
dictagraph, walkie talkie, tape recorder, or
other similar devices.
2.) Knowingly possessing any tape record, wire
record, disc record, or any other such record,
or copies thereof, of these private
communication or spoken word.
3.) Replaying these any tape record, wire record,
disc record to another person.
4.) Communicating the contents of the said tape
record, wire record or disc record, in writing
or verbally to another person.
5.) Furnishing transcriptions of these tape
record, wire record or disc record whether
totally or partially to any other person.
What is foremost prohibited is the act of tapping, recording
or intercepting any private communication or spoken word
without the consent of all the parties. Without being
authorized by all the parties to the said private
communication or spoken word.
Q: So what if A told B to come inside his room and when B
entered the room, A started scolding B. In scolding B, A
said scandalous remarks against B. Unknown to A, B was
tape recording the private conversation between them. Can
B later use the said tape recording in order to file a case of
defamation or slander against A?
A: NO. Because the said act of tape recording
without being authorized by all the parties to a
private communication or spoken word is
inadmissible in any judicial, quasi-judicial,
legislative or administrative proceedings or
investigation.
The ONLY EXCEPTION is when a police officer or peace
officer is authorized by written order of the court to listen
to, intercept or record any communication in crimes
involving treason, espionage, inciting to war or giving
motives for reprisals, piracy, mutiny, rebellion, conspiracy
and proposal to commit rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to
commit sedition and kidnapping. Only in these instances
and provided that the said peace officer is authorized by a
written order coming from the court may he be allowed to
121 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

intercept, listen to or record the private communication or

spoken word.

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 122 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
TITLE TEN
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
Art. 293 – Who are guilty of robbery?
Robbery is committed by any person, who with
intent to gain shall take any personal property belonging to
another by means of violence against, or intimidation of
any person, or using force upon anything.
Elements of Robbery:
1. That the offender unlawfully takes a personal
property
2. That the said personal property belongs to another
person
3. There must be intent to gain in the taking of the
said property
4. That the said taking is either by means of violence
against, or intimidation of any person, or using
force upon anything
5.
Unlawful taking – is the deprivation of the offended party
of his personal property with an element of permanency.
So, it is necessary that in taking the personal property from
another person, there is an element of permanency.
The law requires that the property must be personal
property, not real property because real property is under
Article 312 – Occupation of real property.
The personal property must belong to another person
because if it do not belong to another person it cannot be
said that there is intent to gain on the part of the offender.
The law requires that there must be intent to gain.
Intent to gain is an internal state of mind. So how can you
prove intent to gain? The law presumes there is intent to
gain the moment there is taking of the personal property of
another person. Intent to gain is presumed by law.
Two ways of committing robbery:
1.) Robbery with violence against or intimidation
(Art.294)
2.) Robbery with the use of force upon things
(Art.299)
The value of the property taken in robbery with violence
against or intimidation against people is immaterial
because the penalty is dependent on the violence used by
the offender against the offended party. However, in
Robbery with the use of force upon things (Art.299), the
value of the property taken is material because the penalty
is dependent on the value of the property taken.
Art.294 - Robbery with violence against or
intimidation of persons
The following acts constitute robbery with violence against
or intimidation of persons:
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
1.) When by reason or on occasion of the robbery, the
crime of homicide is committed.
2.) When robbery is accompanied by rape or
intentional mutilation or arson.
3.) When by reason or on occasion of such robbery,
any of the physical injuries resulting in insanity,
imbecility, impotency or blindness is inflicted.
4.) When by reason or on occasion of robbery, any of
the physical injuries resulting in the loss of the use
of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or the
loss of an eye, a hand, foot, an arm, or a leg or the
loss of the use of any such member or incapacity to
go to work in which the injured person is thereto
habitually engaged is inflicted.
5.) If violence or intimidation employed in the
commission of the robbery is carried to a degree
clearly unnecessary for the commission of the
crime
6.) When in the course of its execution, the offender
shall have inflicted upon any person not
responsible for the commission of the robbery any
of the physical injuries in consequence of which
the person injured becomes deformed or loses any
other member of his body or loses the use thereof
or becomes ill or incapacitated for the
performance of the work in which he is habitually
engaged for more than 90 days or the person
injured becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for
more than 30 days
7.) If violence employed by the offender does not
cause any of the serious physical injuries defined
in Article 263, or if the offender employs
intimidation only.
In other words, we have robbery with homicide, robbery
with rape, robbery with intentional mutilation, robbery
with arson, robbery with serious physical injuries, robbery
with unnecessary violence and lastly, simple robbery.
Robbery with Homicide
Robbery with homicide is a special complex crime or a
composite crime or a single indivisible offense. In reality
two or more crimes have been committed, the robbery and
the homicide yet, in the eyes of the law only one crime, a
single indivisible offense of robbery with homicide.
Q: When should the killing or the homicide take place?
A: In case of robbery with homicide, for as long as the
original intent of the offender, for as long original
criminal design is to commit robbery or to rob, the
killing may take place before, during or after the said
123 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
robbery provided, that the original intent/ original
criminal design is to commit robbery or to rob.
Since it is a special complex crime, regardless of the
number of the persons killed there is only a single
indivisible offense of robbery with homicide. Even if
the killing is an unintentional killing or accidental
killing still, it is a single indivisible offense of robbery
with homicide. Even if the victim of the said robbery is
different from the victim of the killing, it is still robbery
with homicide. There lies the difference between
Article 294 and Article 267. In kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with homicide, the victim of the
kidnapping and serious illegal detention must be the
victim in the said killing to amount to kidnapping and
serious illegal detention. But in case of robbery with
homicide, regardless of who the offended party may be,
whether the offended party in robbery is different from
the offended party in the killing it is still robbery with
homicide.
Q: So let us say, A entered the house of B in order to
commit robbery. He took the valuables therein and after
taking the jewelries suddenly the box of jewelries fell so X
was awaken. When A saw that X was awaken, A shot X. X
died. What crime is committed?
A: Robbery with homicide because by reason or on
occasion of robbery, homicide was committed.
Q: What if in the same problem, when X was awaken, the
robber, A, shot X. The wife was also awaken and so the wife
started shouting so A also shot the wife. The wife also
died. What crime/s is committed?
A: Two persons are killed still, the crime committed is
still a single indivisible offense of robbery with
homicide. All the killings are merged into a composite
intergraded whole that is a single indivisible offense of
robbery with homicide.
Q: What if let us say, in the same problem, so A went to the
house of X and took the jewelries. He was on his way out
when he bumped the door and so the owner of the house
was awaken. So A went down and saw the back of the
robber. And so he chased the robber. In the garden, A tried
to shoot the owner of the house and so A jumped on him
and they struggled for the possession of the gun. In the
course of struggle for the possession of the gun, the gun
fired hitting a ballot vendor passing by. The ballot vendor
died. What crime/s is committed?
A: The crime committed is still the single indivisible
offense of robber with homicide. Since it is a special
complex crime, even if the victim of the robbery is
different from the victim of the homicide, it is still
robbery with homicide. Even if it is only accidental
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
killing it is still robbery with homicide so long as the
killing is by reason or on occasion of the said robbery.
Q: So what if, A, B, and C entered the house of X in order to
commit robbery. They have already taken the valuables
when the owner of the house was awaken. It was only A
who saw the owner of the house was awaken and so A shot
X and killed him. Are they all liable for robbery with
homicide or only A who shot X?
A: All of them are criminally liable for the crime of
robbery with homicide. Under Article 8, that in case of
an express or direct conspiracy, the conspirators are
liable only for the crime agreed upon. The crime agreed
is to commit robbery but how come all of them are
liable for homicide? Because it falls under the
exception that when the resulting felony is a special
complex crime because you cannot separate or divide a
special complex crime. Therefore, even if it was only A
who killed the victim, even if their agreement is only to
commit robbery, because homicide or the killing was
committed by reason or on occasion of the said
robbery, all of them are criminally liable for the crime
of robbery with homicide.
The only exception to the exception is when B and C
performed acts in order to prevent A from committing
the homicide.
People v. Cabbab
Let us say, A and B versus X, Y and Z. A and B
committed robbery and upon leaving the said place, X
and Y saw A and B and shot them and made gun fires.
Z, a police officer dove into the canal in order to
prevent himself from being killed. A and B went
directly to X and Y and killed them both. And
thereafter, A and B took the winnings. Based on the
circumstances or facts the fiscal filed the following
cases before the RTC, robbery, double murder, and
attempted murder, robbery because of the taking of the
winnings, double murder for the death of X and Y and
attempted murder as to the police officer who dove
into the canal. What is the ruling of the RTC? It said
wrong ka fiscal! The crime is robbery with double
homicide and attempted murder. Then it went to
appeal on the Court of Appeals, sabiniya wrong fiscal!
Wrong ka din RTC! The crime committed is robbery
with homicide and attempted murder. Then it went up
to the Supreme Court. Sc said, malika fiscal! Mali ka
RTC! Mali kadin CA! Mali kayo lahat! The only crime
committed is the single indivisible crime of robbery
with homicide. Because all the acts are considered
absorbed in the crime of robbery with homicide despite
the fact that two persons were killed, despite the fact
124 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
that one person was greatly injured, all these
circumstances are merged into a composite integrated
whole that is single indivisible offense of robbery with
homicide.
Robbery with rape
Just like robbery with homicide, is also a special
complex crime or a single indivisible offense. So, for as
long as the intention of the offender is to commit
robbery, rape may be committed before, during or after
the commission of robbery. Since it is a special
complex crime, regardless of the number of times the
victim was raped, the crime committed is only robbery
with rape. There is no such crime as robbery with
multiple rapes. There is only robbery with rape.
Q: So a woman was walking on her way home and because
it was pay day here comes X. X dragged the woman in a
dark place and took the bag and took the money inside it.
And then he found the woman attractive so he raped the
woman not once but twice. What crime/s is committed?
A: X committed the crime of robbery with rape
regardless of the times the woman was raped.
People v. Suyu
Two persons, boyfriend and girlfriend, they were
having snack and saw the shadow of 3 men. And these
3 men were pushing the truck trying to open the door.
They took their valuables and the boyfriend hurriedly
left the girlfriend allegedly to ask help to the police.
And so the girlfriend was alone with the three men and
they dragged her into a nipa hut and there she was
raped by the mastermind, Suyu. Not only she was
raped by Suyu but also Cainglet while, the other two
was outside serving as lookouts. So the said woman,
Clarissa, was raped by two persons and she was raped
three times. Suyu and Cainglet raped her by carnal
knowledge. Not only that, Cainglet also inserted two
fingers to her genitals therefore, he also committed
rape by sexual assault. What crimes are committed by
the 4 persons? What crime/s they should be criminally
liable of?
Supreme Court said, they are all liable for the single
indivisible offense of Robbery with Rape. Regardless
of the fact that two persons raped the victim,
regardless of the fact that the victim was raped 3 times,
regardless of the fact that there is two nature of rape
committed against the victim (rape by carnal
knowledge and rape by sexual assault), still the crime
committed is the single indivisible offense of robbery
with rape.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
There are four conspirators but not all of them raped
the victim. Yet they are all liable for robbery with rape
because the two lookouts did not perform acts in order
to prevent the consummation of the said rape. So since
it is a special complex crime and a single indivisible
offense all the other rapes are merged into a composite
integrated whole that is robbery with rape.
The same theory applies in case of robbery with
intentional mutilation and robbery with arson.
Robbery with intentional mutilation, arson and
serious physical injuries
For as long as the intent or the criminal design of the
offender is to commit robbery, the intentional mutilation,
arson or serious physical injuries may be committed before,
during or after the commission of the said robbery.
Q: So let say A and B saw X walking. It was pay day and so
A and B announced a holdup. They were both armed with
guns and so what X did since they were both armed with
guns, he gave the bag. By reason thereof, A and B already
left the place. While A and B was waiting for a ride in a
waiting shed, A and B divided the things they took from X.
So A told B, this is your share. B said, why is my share
smaller than your share?! And so B got and he shot A. A
died. What is the crime committed?
A: The crime committed is robbery with homicide
because even if it was also an offender who was killed,
the killing took place by reason of the said robbery.
Q: So what if in the same problem, so A and B were already
dividing the things they took and B said, wait why is my
share so small? B got mad shot A but A did not die. A
suffered serious physical injuries. What crime is
committed?
A: The crime committed is robbery with serious
physical injuries.
Q: What if in the same problem, A were dividing the things
and B said, why is my share so small compared to your
share? B got mad and what he did was took an ice pick from
his pocket and stab A in his face and placed the ice pick in
A’s face. A suffered serious physical injuries and deformity
in his face. It caused physical ugliness to A therefore there
is deformity. What crime/s is committed?
A: This time the crime committed by B is not the single
indivisible crime of robbery with serious physical
injuries but two crimes, Robbery and Serious physical
injuries under paragraph 3 of Article 263 because of
the deformity. Why? Because under paragraph 4 of
Article 294, when the serious physical injury that
resulted is a deformity or the loss of any of the member
125 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
of his body, the law requires that the said physical
injury or deformity must be inflicted because of the
execution of a robbery and to a person not responsible
to the commission of the crime of robbery. Here, the
deformity was inflicted after the robbery, not before.
Not only that. The deformity was inflicted on A, the
person responsible for the commission of the robbery.
If the serious physical injuries inflicted resulted to a
deformity or to a loss of any of the member of his body
or loss of the use of any such member or incapacity to
go to work in which the injured person is thereto
habitually engaged for more than 90 days, under
paragraph 3 of Article 263, it is required that in order
to amount to a single indivisible offense the said
deformity or serious physical injury must be inflicted
in the course of the execution of the robbery and to a
person not responsible to the commission of the
robbery. Otherwise, it will bring about a separate and
distinct crime.
Art. 295. Robbery with physical injuries,
committed in an uninhabited place and by a band,
or with the use of firearm on a street, road or
alley.
Art. 296. Definition of a band and penalty
incurred by the members thereof.
Art. 297. Attempted and frustrated robbery
committed under certain circumstances.
Art. 298. Execution of deeds by means of violence
or intimidation.
Section Two – Robbery by the use of force upon
things
 ROBBERY WITH USE OF FORCE UPON
THINGS
Art. 299. Robbery in an inhabited house or public
building or edifice devoted to worship
 Another form of robbery is robbery with the use of
force upon things in Art 299.
 In case of violence against persons, the value of the
property is not important because the penalty is the
basis of the violence.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 In Art. 299, the basis of the penalty is the value of the
property taken.
3 ways of committing robbery with use of force
upon things:
1) When a person enters the dwelling, house, public
building or edifice devoted to worship where
personal property is taken through:
a. An opening not intended for entrance or
egress
b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or
breaking any door or window.
c. By using false keys, picklocks or similar
tools
d. By using any fictitious name or
pretending the exercise of public
authority
NOTE:
 Under the first act, the essence of the crime is in
the unlawful entry; it is the act of trespassing and
also the taking of the property of another.
 It is necessary that the entire body must have
enter, otherwise, even if there is breaking, it would
only amount to theft and that breaking would
amount only to aggravating circumstance. The
Supreme Court ruled that when the law used the
word “enter”, it means that the entire body must
have entered said place to take the property of
another.
Q: A, in order to rob the house made an opening in the
roof, sufficient for him to enter. So he used a rope in going
down and thereafter he took the valuables and then left.
What crime is committed?
A: Robbery by use of force upon things. A made an
opening and he was able to enter fully.
Q: What if he made an entry, let down a rope with a hook
and used it in taking the valuable?
A: The crime committed only is theft with aggravating
circumstance of the breaking of the roof. His body did
not enter the premises.
2) When the offender manages to enter said
inhabited place, dwelling, public place or place
dedicated to religious worship without any
unlawful entry, or is an insider, and once inside,
he used force in opening in order to:
a. Break doors, wardrobes, chests, or
any other kind of locked or sealed
furniture or receptacle
NOTE:
126 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 The second act is when the offender was able to
enter without unlawful entry or was an insider and
once inside, breaks the doors, wardrobes, chest,
receptacles, and thereafter took the personal
properties inside the house.
Q: A and B are brothers, living in the same house and in the
same room but have different cabinets where each of the
cabinets have locks. One time brother A was in need of
money and wanted to borrow money from brother B, but
brother B was out of the house. So what brother A did was
that he forcibly opened the cabinet of brother B and took
the expensive jewelries of brother B and appropriated the
jewelry? What are the crimes committed? Is Brother A only
liable civilly?
A: A is guilty of robbery with use of force upon things.
He is an insider, and he used force to break open the
cabinet of B. He did not commit theft. Since the crime
committed is robbery, brother A is criminally liable
and civilly liable. Because under Article 332, it is only
on cases of theft, swindling, estafa, and malicious
mischief, wherein there’s no criminal liability but only
civil liability in case of relatives living together.
Q: In the same problem, what if A was in need of money, he
saw the expensive watch of B on top of the table and sold
the watch. What crime was committed?
A: A committed the crime of theft since there is no
breaking or forcibly opening the receptacle. Under Art
332, he is only liable for civil liability. They are free
from criminal liability.
Art. 332. Persons exempt from
criminal liability. — No criminal, but
only civil liability, shall result from the
commission of the crime of theft,
swindling or malicious mischief
committed or caused mutually by the
following persons:
1. Spouses, ascendants and
descendants, or relatives by affinity
in the same line.
2. The widowed spouse with respect
to the property which belonged to
the deceased spouse before the
same shall have passed into the
possession of another; and
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-
in-law and sisters-in-law, if living
together.
The exemption established by this article
shall not be applicable to strangers
participating in the commission of the
crime.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 Since it refers to simple crimes, if the crime committed is
estafa through falsification of public document, there will
be criminal liability. This exemption from criminal
liability will only lie in the cases mentioned in Art. 332.
3) When the offender manages to enter said
inhabited place, dwelling, public place, or place
dedicated to religious worship without any
unlawful entry, once inside he took the sealed
receptacle outside to be opened or forced open.
 The offender was able to enter and once inside, he
did not use force to open the close cabinet or
receptacle. Instead, he took the cabinet and
receptacle outside to open it.
Circumstances that will qualify robbery with use
of force upon things:
Art. 300. Robbery in an uninhabited place and by
a band.
 Under Article 300, if robbery is committed
with in an uninhabited place and by a band —
the law used the conjunction AND, both must
concur in order to amount a qualifying
circumstance, to increase the penalty. So it
should be in an uninhabited place and by
a band, therefore both must be present.
Art. 295. Robbery with physical injuries,
committed in an uninhabited place and by a band,
or with the use of firearm on a street, road or
alley.
 In case of robbery with serious physical injuries,
unnecessary violence or simple violence, how will the
crime be qualified?
The answer is under Art. 295, where if the said
robbery is:
1. Committed in an uninhabited place OR
by a band
2. By attacking any moving train, street car,
motor vehicle or airship
3. By entering the passenger’s
compartments in a train; or
4. Taking the passengers by surprise in
their respective conveyances
5. On a street, road, highway, or alley and
the Intimidation is made use of a firearm
NOTE:
 That in case of robbery with violence or
intimidation on persons, the qualifying
circumstances are present, only one of these is
127 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

sufficient to qualify the penalty. The law here uses that it is committed by 4 armed men is only an
the conjunction OR not AND. aggravating circumstance. Under Art. 296, if a
band committed robbery, it is only an aggravating
Q: A went to the house of B. A told B “this is a hold up and circumstance.
bring out the valuables”. Instead of bringing the valuables
to A, B panicked and shouted. A therefore shot B. B died. A Art. 306. Brigandage.
also panicked and left the place without bringing his loot. Under Article 306, it is committed by at least 4 armed men
What is/are the crime/s committed? for the purposes of -
A: The crime committed by A is attempted robbery 1. committing robbery in the highway;
with homicide. This is also a special complex crime. 2. kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion
Here robbery was attempted because he was unable to or ransom
take any of the property. The fact that A was able to 3. for any other purpose to be attained by means of
announce hold-up and bring the valuables to him force and violence.
means that the original design is to commit robbery. It
was attempted because he was unable to take the Art. 296 Art. 306
property, and in the course of thereof, he killed the Both require at least 4 armed persons
owner. It is required that the 4 The crime is already
armed men must actually consummated by the mere
 In order to amount to special complex crime, it is take part in the commission fact that 4 armed men
necessary that both the robbery and homicide of the robbery formed a band of robbers.
must be consummated. It is not required that they
actually commit the
 What if in the course of robbery, the said owner was shot enumerated purposes.
but was able to survive. What crime is committed?
The crime committed is robbery with physical PD 532 (THE ANTI-HIGHWAY ROBBERY LAW OF
injuries depending on the injuries sustained by the 1974)
victim. In order to amount to robbery with
homicide, it is necessary that both crimes must be In PD 532, brigandage is defined as the seizure of any
present and there is no such thing as robbery person for ransom, extortion, or other unlawful purposes,
with frustrated homicide or attempted or the taking away of property of another by means of
homicide, for it is the law which provides for the violence against or intimidation of persons of force upon
crime which must be complexed, and the law does things or other unlawful means, committed by any person
not provide that frustrated homicide or attempted on any Philippine highway.
homicide must be complexed with robbery.
Art 306 vs. PD 532, or the Anti-Highway Robbery
In the instant case, since the killing took place at Law of 1974
the spur of the moment, then it is robbery with
homicide. Art. 306 PD 532
Requires that there must be No requisite as to the # of
Chapter Two at least 4 armed men perpetrators of the crime
BRIGANDAGE Even a single person can
commit the crime of
What if robbery was committed by 4 armed men? brigandage
The mere formation of the There must be an actual
Art. 296. Definition of a band and penalty band of robbers for any of commission of the crime or
incurred by the members thereof. the purposes mentioned no crime will arise
 A was walking, suddenly there are 4 men with knives and will bring about the crime
took A’s bag which is full of money. A put up a fight. And There is a predetermined or There is no preconceived
so these armed men killed A. What crime is committed? preconceived victim victim. It is committed
Is the crime committed robbery in band with homicide? indiscriminately on any
There is no such crime as robbery by a band with person passing on the
homicide. The said use of band is only an highway as long as it is
aggravating circumstance. The proper designation committed in a Philippine
of the crime is robbery with homicide. The fact highway.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 128 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Chapter Three
THEFT
Art. 308. Who are liable for theft. — Theft is
committed by any person who, with intent to gain
but without violence against or intimidation of
persons nor force upon things, shall take personal
property of another without the latter's consent.
Theft is likewise committed by:
1. Any person who, having found lost
property, shall fail to deliver the same to
the local authorities or to its owner;
2. Any person who, after having maliciously
damaged the property of another, shall
remove or make use of the fruits or object
of the damage caused by him; and
3. Any person who shall enter an inclosed
estate or a field where trespass is forbidden
or which belongs to another and without
the consent of its owner, shall hunt or fish
upon the same or shall gather cereals, or
other forest or farm products.
The definition is almost the same as robbery. The difference
lies in the case of robbery where there is violence or
intimidation of persons and use of force upon things, while
in theft, there is no violence, intimidation against persons
or force upon things.
Example:
1. A person who found a lost personal property of
another but did not give it to the police, there is
theft.
2. A damaged the property of B, he make use of that
damage.
3. There is a vacant lot guarded by X. A person
entered the vacant lot and took the fruits.
Valenzuela v. People
There is no frustrated theft. In this case, the offender
took boxes of tide from SM North Edsa and placed it in
the taxi. Before they were able to left the premises of
SM, they were apprehended. The offenders were
charged of consummated theft. They did not deny that
they committed theft but their defense is that they
committed frustrated theft.
The SC En Banc in 2007 ruled that there is no crime as
frustrated theft. In case of theft, unlawful taking is
deemed complete the moment the offender gain
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
possession of the property of another, theft is
consummated.
Art. 309. Penalties
Q: When is theft qualified?
A:
Art. 310. Qualified Theft
Theft is qualified in the following instances:
1. If theft is committed by a domestic servant
2. If committed with grave abuse of confidence
3. If the property stolen is a (a) motor vehicle, (b)
mail matter, or (c) large cattle
4. If the property stolen consists of coconuts taken
from the premises of the plantation
5. If the property stolen is taken from a fishpond or
fishery
6. If property taken on the occasion of fire,
earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any
other calamity, vehicular accident or civil
disturbance.
Q: A is a domestic servant. When his master was out of the
house, A went to the masters’ bedroom and took the
jewelries. In the information cited that he was a domestic
servant but the information did not state that A took the
jewelries with grave abuse of confidence. Is A liable for
qualified theft?
A: Yes, according to the Supreme Court, the law uses
the conjunction OR. The fact that the accused is a
domestic servant, it will suffice. The law does not
require that abuse of confidence to be established. It
will suffice that the accused is a domestic servant.
Q: A was a security guard. The owner of the house left his
key to the security guard. However, the security guard used
the key to open the house of the owner and took the
valuables. What crime is committed?
A: The Security Guard is liable for qualified theft
because of grave abuse of confidence.
RA 6539 (ANTI-CARNAPPING ACT)
Carnapping- is the taking with intent to gain, of motor
vehicle belonging to another without the consent of the
latter, or by means of violence against or intimidation of
persons, or by use of force upon things.
Elements:
1. Actual taking of motor vehicle
2. The vehicle belongs to another
129 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
3. There is intent to gain in the taking of the vehicle
of another
4. Said taking is taking without the consent of the
owner or by means of violence or intimidation or
by means of force upon things.
Q: A was driving his car and suddenly felt the need to
answer the call of nature so he parked his vehicle.
Suddenly, there was X and saw A was out of the car, and the
door of the car was open and the key was left inside the car.
X drove away with the car. What is the crime committed?
A: The crime committed is carnapping. Even if there is
no violence or intimidation against person or force
upon things, so long as said taking is without the
consent of the owner, it will amount to carnapping.
Under Sec. 14, the penalty if there no violence or
intimidation against persons or use of force on things,
the penalty is 14 years and 8 months to 17 years and 4
months.
Q: In the given situation, what if A saw X and there was a
fight that ensued between them. X shot A, and X was able
to take the vehicle. A however survived due to immediate
medical treatment. What is/are the crimes committed by
X?
A: The crime committed by X is only carnapping. The
fact that X shot A, where there is frustrated homicide,
it falls under violence or intimidation which was used
by the offender in committing the crime. Since there is
violence, the penalty is 17 years and 4 months to 30
years.
Q: If again, in the same problem, A tried to stop X and X
shot A. A died. What is the crime committed?
A: The fact that the owner is killed or raped as a
consequence, the penalty is reclusion perpetua to
death. It will bring about a higher penalty, but
not as a special complex crime because it is a
Special Penal Law. Though it is akin to a special
complex crime, the killing is absorbed. The crime is
carnapping. It is also not a bailable offense.
PD 533 (ANTI-CATTLE RUSTLING LAW)
Cattle Rustling - defined as the taking away by any
means, method or scheme, without the consent of the
owner/raiser, of any large cattle whether or not for profit or
for gain, or whether committed with or without violence
against or intimidation of persons or force upon things. It
includes the killing of a large cattle or taking it as a meat or
hide without the consent of the owner/raiser.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Large Cattle- shall include cow, carabao, horse, mule,
ass, or other domesticated member of the bovine family.
Goats are not large cattle. (sabi nung isang justice sa SC na
prof naming dati, si Lawyer daw pag kinidnap cattle
rustling daw tawag dun. Ang evil nya!)
Q: A’s carabao was tied on the mango tree. X saw the
carabao alone. So what X did was he untied the carabao and
took the carabao away. A saw X with his carabao so A tried
to catch up with X. As A was able to catch up with X, a fight
ensued. X took his bolo and hacked A to death. What is the
crime committed by X?
A: The crime committed by X is only cattle rustling.
The fact that the owner was killed is within the
meaning of violence or intimidation against persons. It
will not bring about a separate and distinct crime of
murder. The Anti-Cattle Rustling Law, although a
special law, is not malum prohibitum but a malum in
se. Under Sec. 10 of the law, it is expressly provided
that this law amends Art. 309 and 310 of the RPC.
Since it is an amendment, the SC it is a malum in se
and not a malum prohibitum.
Art. 311. Theft of the property of the National
Library and National Museum.
 The value of the property is immaterial because
the law prescribed the penalty of arresto mayor or
fine or both.
Chapter Four
USURPATION
Art. 312. Occupation of real property or
usurpation of real rights in property.
2 acts punished under Art 312:
1) Occupation of real property which is committed by
any person who by means of violence against or
intimidation shall occupy the real property of
another
2) Usurpation of real rights in property committed by
any person who by means of violence against or
intimidation shall usurp any real rights in
property of another person
Q: There was a vacant lot. Here comes A and B and his
family. The said land or property was being guarded by X. A
and B went inside the vacant lot and tried to build a nipa
house because they do not have any house. And so the
guard told them that A and B has no right to build a nipa
house because the lot is owned by Y. However, A and B told
the guard that they do not have any house. In the course of
130 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

the argument, A and B killed the guard. What is/are the

crimes committed?
A: The crime committed is only occupation of real
property. The killing is only a means to occupy the real
property. It falls under violence against or intimidation
of persons in occupying the real property.

Q: In the same problem A and B put up their house in the

vacant property. The owner learned this and went to A and
B’s house. However, A and B killed the owner.
A: In this case, two crimes are committed. The killing
took place after occupying the place. This time, the
crimes committed are occupation and homicide or
murder as the case maybe.

Art. 313. Altering boundaries or landmarks. — Any

person who shall alter the boundary marks or monuments
of towns, provinces, or estates, or any other marks intended
to designate the boundaries of the same, shall be punished
by arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 100 pesos, or both.

Chapter Five
CULPABLE INSOLVENCY

Art. 314. Fraudulent insolvency. — Any person who

shall abscond with his property to the prejudice of his
creditors, shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor, if he be
a merchant and the penalty of prision correccional in its
maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period, if
he be not a merchant.

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 131 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
CHAPTER SIX – SWINDLING AND OTHER
DECEITS
ART 315 – SWINDLING/ESTAFA
THREE KINDS OF ESTAFA:
I. ESTAFA WITH UNFAITHFULNESS OR ABUSE OF
AUTHORITY – ART 315 (1)
II. ESTAFA BY MEANS OF FALSE PRETENSES OR
FRAUDULENT ACTS EXECUTED PRIOR TO OR
SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE COMMISSION OF
THE CRIME – ART 315 (2)
III. ESTAFA THROUGH FRAUDULENT MEANS – ART
315 (3)
ELEMENTS:
(whatever be the crime of estafa, there are always
two general/common elements):
1. The offender defrauded another by reason of abuse of
confidence or by means of deceit.
 It does not necessarily mean that there must
always be deceit. In lieu of deceit, estafa can
be committed by means of abuse of
confidence.
2. Damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation
is caused to the offended party or to a third person.
 It is necessary that there must be damage or
prejudice caused to the offended party or to a
third person.
 The law requires that this damage or
prejudice must be capable of pecuniary
estimation because the penalty in estafa is
dependent on the damage caused to the
offended party. Hence, it is necessary that the
said damage or prejudice must be capable of
pecuniary estimation. You can estimate its
value because the penalty is dependent on the
value of the damage caused.
 Whatever be the kind of estafa, there must always
be the presence of these two elements.
I. ESTAFA WITH UNFAITHFULNESS OR ABUSE
OF CONFIDENCE
THREE PUNISHABLE ACTS:
a) By altering the substance, quantity, or
quality or anything of value which the
offender shall deliver by virtue of an
obligation to do so, even though such
obligation be based on an immoral or
illegal consideration.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 It can either be based on legal or illegal
consideration. The law does not take into
consideration that it must always be
legal. Even if the consideration is
immoral or illegal, still, estafa is
committed if there is an alteration or
substitution.
Q: A and B entered into an agreement, A has to deliver to B
premium quality of marijuana. B paid. A delivered two
boxes of marijuana to B. When B reviewed the said boxes of
marijuana, B discovered that on the uppermost portion,
they were premium quality marijuana but on the lower
portion, they were of poor quality marijuana. Can B file a
case of estafa against A?
A: Yes, B can file a case of estafa with
unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence against
A. This is because the law says that even if it is based
on an illegal or immoral consideration, there must be a
substitution of the quality or quantity, in this case, of
the said dangerous drugs which have been delivered by
A to B.
b) By misappropriating or converting, to the
prejudice of another, money, goods, or any
other personal property received by the
offender in trust or on commission, or for
administration, or under any other
obligation involving the duty to make
delivery of or to return the same, even
though such obligation be totally or
partially guaranteed by a bond; or by
denying having received such money,
goods, or other property.
 VERY POPULAR KIND OF ESTAFA
 It is necessary that the offender received
from the offended party money, goods or
other personal property. When the said
offender receives such thing from the
offended party money, goods or personal
property, what has been transferred to
the offender was JURIDICAL
POSSESSION of the said property.
 If only material possession has been
transferred to the offender, and the
offender misappropriated or converted
the same, the crime committed is only
theft or qualified theft but not estafa. So
in order for the crime of estafa to arise, it
is necessary that the offender has
juridical possession of the money, goods
or personal property.
132 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Juridical Possession – is a possession
in the concept of an owner; it is a real
right over the property during the time
that the property is in his possession, he
has better right even than that of the
owner of the said property.
Q: What if A rented a bicycle from B. A will use the bicycle
for three hours and shall pay B 500 pesos for the use of the
said bicycle. Upon payment, A is now using the bicycle.
Three hours had lapsed, A failed to deliver the bicycle to B.
B demanded the return of the bicycle. A did not return the
bicycle. Can B file a case of estafa against A?
A: B can file a case of estafa against A. Estafa is
the crime committed by A because when B gave the
bicycle to A, it was based on a contract of lease (a
contract of rent), hence, juridical possession had been
transferred from B to A. A, during the three-hour
period has juridical possession over the said bicycle
and during this period, A has better right to the
property than B, the owner thereof. When A failed to
return the said bicycle to B after three hours, then he
committed estafa.
Q: What if A told B to obtain a loan in his favor in a bank
and then he gave B his diamond ring as collateral for the
said loan. However, B, instead of using the ring as collateral
for the loan, B sold the ring and misappropriated the
proceeds of sale. What case, if any, may A file against B? Is
B liable for estafa?
A: B is not liable for Estafa. When A gave the ring
to B, what has been transferred to B is only material
possession of the ring. It is not juridical possession
because B is merely an agent of A so that B will be the
one to use the said ring as collateral in order to obtain
a loan in favor of A. Juridical possession remains with
the owner, A, hence the crime committed is only
qualified theft.
Q: What if A is a regular customer in the bank. A went to
the bank, went to the teller who usually deposits his money
and he gave the teller 1 million in cash plus the passbook. A
told the teller, “Here is my passbook and 1 million in cash.
Please deposit it to my account. I am in a hurry to go to
work and be back in the afternoon.” A left the passbook to
the teller and went to the office. In the afternoon, before
going home, A went back to the bank, however the teller
was not there so A asked for his passbook. The bank gave
him the passbook but when A looked at the passbook, the 1
million was not deposited to his account. What
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
crime/crimes if any may A file against the teller on whom
he gave the said money to deposit in his bank account?
A: The crime committed by the teller is only
Qualified Theft. It is not estafa because when A gave
the money to the teller to deposit to his bank account,
what has been transferred was only material
possession of the said money. It is not the juridical
possession taking into consideration that the
participation of the said teller is as that of the bank, the
teller being a mere employee of the said bank. In fact,
in case of deposits in bank, the said client will not be
able to get back the very same money that he has
deposited. Hence, the crime committed by the teller is
only qualified theft but not estafa.
Q: What if A is an employee in a company, XYZ
corporation. He was a field worker and whenever he goes to
the field to work, he has this cash advance given by the
company. One time, he went to work with a cash advance,
however, upon returning to work, he failed to liquidate the
cash advance. A, despite notices by the company, failed to
liquidate the cash advance. So the corporation filed a case
against A. Will the case prosper?
A: The case will not prosper. The Supreme Court
said that a cash advance is equivalent to a loan,
therefore when the company gave cash advance to the
employee, there is not only transfer of the said money
to the employee but transfer of ownership of the said
money. The employee is now the owner of the said
money. When you say liquidate, it means that he is
paying his indebtedness to the company, therefore
their relationship as employer and employee, insofar
as the cash advance is concerned, is that of a creditor-
debtor and not that of entrustor-entrustee. Hence,
there is no estafa committed, there is no theft
committed. The liability of the employee is only civil in
nature. The company can only file a case of sum of
money against the employee for failing to pay his
indebtedness in the form of cash advance to the
company.
c) By taking undue advantage of the signature
of the offended party in blank, and by
writing any document above such signature
in blank, to the prejudice of the offended
party or of any third person.
Q: The manager of a company has a blank document which
contains only the signature. The manager gave it to the
secretary and told the secretary to use the document for
emergency purposes. When the manager left, the secretary
133 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
wrote in the document stating that the manager will
shoulder or pay his entire loan in a lending firm. What
crime is committed by the said secretary? Is the said
secretary liable for estafa or estafa through falsification of a
private document or falsification of a private document.
Which of the three crimes is committed by the secretary?
A: The crime committed is Estafa. This is because
the manager entrusted to the secretary the document
in blank which contains his signature and the secretary
wrote therein above the signature to the prejudice of
the manager because the manager now assumes an
obligation. SO the crime committed by the secretary is
estafa.
Q: What if in the same problem, the secretary placed the
blank document on top of his table. Here comes B, a
customer of the said company. B while talking to the
secretary saw the document with the signature of the
manager and so he surreptitiously took one of those
documents, brought it home and wrote in the document
above the signature that the manager shall be the one to
pay all his indebtedness in a lending firm. What crime is
committed by the said customer? Is the customer liable for
estafa or estafa through falsification of a private document.
A: The customer is liable for Falsification of a
Private Document under Art 172. This is because he
caused that the manager participated in an act or
proceeding when he did not so participate, one of the
acts of falsification punished in Article 171 and 172.
 Why not estafa through falsification of a
private document?
 Because there is no such crime as estafa
through falsification of a private
document. You cannot complex estafa
with falsification of a private document
because both estafa and falsification of a
private document HAVE DAMAGE AS
ELEMENT, and one and the same
damage cannot give rise to two crimes
therefore you can never complex estafa
and falsification of a private document. It
is either estafa or falsification of a private
document.
 When is it estafa?
 If estafa can be committed without
falsifying the private document but the
falsification of a private document merely
facilitated the commission of the crime,
then the appropriate charge is estafa
because the falsification of a private
document is merely incidental.
 If estafa cannot be committed without
falsifying the private document, the
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
crime committed is falsification of a
private document because estafa is a
mere consequence.
 So you only have to choose between
estafa and falsification of a private
document but you can never complex the
two. There is no such crime as estafa
through falsification of a private
document.
 But there is such a thing as estafa
through falsification of a public
document because in falsification of a
public document, damage is not an
element. So in a deed of absolute sale was
falsified in order to deceive another in
the crime of estafa, it will give rise to the
complex crime of estafa through
falsification of a public document, estafa
through falsification of an official
document, estafa through falsification of
a commercial document. Because in
these kinds of falsification, damage is not
an element.
II. ESTAFA BY MEANS OF FALSE PRETENSES OR
FRAUDULENT ACTS EXECUTED PRIOR TO
OR SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE
COMMISSION OF THE FRAUD
FIVE PUNISHABLE ACTS:
a) By using fictitious name, or falsely
pretending to possess power, influence,
qualifications, property, credit, agency,
business or imaginary transactions, or by
means of other similar deceits.
Q: What of there were four licensed nurses who all want to
work in Canada. Here comes X. X learned that A, B, C and
D passed the board so he went to their house and told them
that X has a placement agency that has all the qualifications
to help them find work in Canada. A, B, C and D believed X,
and X demanded that they give X 100k for processing fees.
They gave the money to X. A, B, C and Dnever saw X again.
Later X was arrested. What are the crimes committed by X?
A: A, B, C and D can file two cases against X.
Estafa under article 315 (2)(a) and Illegal
Recruitment in Large Scale under the Labor
Code. These two cases are cumulative and not
exclusive each other, hence, the offender can be
charged of these two crimes at the same time.
134 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Estafa under 315 (2) (a) is committed because X
misrepresented to them that he has the qualification
and the agency to bring them to work in another
country when in fact, he does not have such
qualification and agency. Where it not for the said
misrepresentation by X, the offended parties A, B, C
and D would not have parted with the said 100
Thousand pesos in cash.
The other crime committed by X is Illegal
Recruitment in Large Scale. In Labor Code, if
Illegal Recruitment is committed against three or more
persons, individually or as a whole, it is considered as
Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale. On the other
hand, if it is committed by five or more persons, it is
considered as Syndicated Illegal Recruitment.
Both crimes are considered crimes involving economic
sabotage under the Labor Code and is the reason why
it is a non-bailable offense.
 So if the only charge is estafa under 315 (2)
(a) is the only charge, the offender can post
bail but if there is also a charge of Illegal
Recruitment in Large Scale, then he shall be
behind bars while the case is ongoing
b) By altering the quality, fitness, or weight of
anything pertaining to his art or business.
Q: In the market, you bought a kilo of apples. The vendor
put on the scale one apple which is already one kilo. What
crime if any is committed by the vendor?
A: The crime committed estafa by altering the
quality, fitness or weight of anything
pertaining to his art or business. He alters the
weight of the apple which pertains to his business and
therefore he can be held liable for estafa under 315
(2)(b).
c) By pretending to have bribed a A: B can only file a case of violation of BP 22
Government employee
d) By postdating a check or issuing a check in
payment of an obligation when the
offender had no funds in the bank OR his
funds deposited therein were not sufficient
to cover the amount of the check.
 Also a very popular form of estafa –
estafa by postdating a check.
 For this kind of estafa to arise, it is
necessary that the issuance of the check
must be in concomitance with the
defraudation (act of defrauding) because
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
note that Art 315 says that estafa by
means of false pretenses or fraudulent
acts exerted prior to or simultaneously
with the commission of fraud. Therefore,
it is necessary that the issuance of the
check is in concomitance with the
defraudation, that is, the offender would
not have parted with his property would
it not for the promise that the check
would be funded.
 The offender is given a period of three
days to make good of the check. If the
offender failed to make good the check, it
is said to be prima facie evidence of
deceit constituting the fraudulent act or
false pretenses.
Q: A was constructing his vacation house. He was suddenly
run out of materials so A went to B. A told B that he is in
need of the construction materials. B said, “okay, you can
get your construction materials.” A said “I don’t have
money at the moment. I will pay next week.” So B gave the
needed construction materials, boarded them in A’s truck
and A went. A week after, B went to A, asking for the
payment of the construction materials. A said “B, I have no
money at the moment. B, I am issuing to you a check, post-
dated, on the thirtieth day of the month. B, I guarantee you,
on the thirtieth day of the month, this check will be funded.
I will have money deposited in here because it is my
payday.” B received the check. On the thirtieth day of the
month, the date stated on the check, B deposited the check,
however the check was dishonored due to insufficiency of
funds. B sent a notice of dishonor to A. However, A, despite
receipt of the said notice of dishonor failed to make good of
the check or make arrangement with the bank in order to
cover the amount of the check. What case, if any, can B file
against A? May B file a case of estafa under Art 315 (2)(d)
against A or can B file a case of violation of BP 22 against
A?
against A. B cannot file a case of estafa under
Art 315 (2) (d) because B has already boarded the
construction materials and A has already taken the
construction materials. A week later, B went to A
asking for the payment and it was only at the time that
A gave the check that bounced. Therefore the issuance
of the check was in payment of an obligation which
already exists at the time. Estafa under 315 (2)(d)
cannot be committed if the check was issued in
payment of a pre-existing obligation because for estafa
under Art 315 (2)(d) to arise, it is necessary that the
issuance of the check is in concomitance with the
defraudation.
135 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Q: A is in need of construction materials, he went to B. A
said he needed construction materials. B said he can get it if
he had money. A said he didn’t have any money at the
moment but was issuing a postdated check instead dated on
the thirtieth day of the month. He guaranteed B that the
check will be funded on the thirtieth day of the month. B
received the check and boarded the construction materials
needed by A inside the truck of A. On the thirtieth day of
the month, B deposited the check but the check was
dishonored by the bank for insufficiency of funds. Notice of
dishonor was sent to A. However, despite of lapse of three
days, A failed to make good of the check or at least made
III.
arrangement with the bank in order to cover the full
amount of check. May B file a case of estafa under Art 315
(2) (d) against A? May B file a case of violation of BP 22
against A?
A: B can file both Estafa under Art 315 (2) (d)
and violation of BP 22 against A. Estafa was
committed by A because the check was issued, it was
only received by B at the time of the construction of
materials was delivered. The check was received by B
upon guarantee given by A that on the thirtieth day of
the month, the check will be funded. Therefore, the
issuance of the check was in concomitance with the
defraudation. Estafa under Art 315(2)(d) is committed.
Likewise, violation against BP 22 is committed because
violation of BP 22 will arise whenever a check had been
issued and the said check was dishonored upon
presentment to the drawee bank. There immediately
arises violation of BP 22. (The essence of the crime of
BP 22 is the issuance of a worthless check)
A can be prosecuted for two crimes – Estafa under
Article 315 (2)(d) and violation of BP 22 – at the same
time. These remedies are committed not exclusively of
each other therefore A can be prosecuted at the same
time of both cases.
e) By obtaining any food, refreshment or
accommodation at a hotel, inn, restaurant,
boarding house, lodging house, or
apartment house and the like without
paying therefor, with intent to defraud the
proprietor or manager thereof, OR by
obtaining credit at a hotel, inn, restaurant,
boarding house, lodging house, or
apartment house by the use of any false
pretense, OR by abandoning or
surreptitiously removing any part of his
baggage from a hotel, inn, restaurant,
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
boarding house, lodging house or
apartment house after obtaining credit,
food, refreshment or accommodation
therein without paying for his food,
refreshment or accommodation.
 The offender went to a hotel or inn to
obtain food, refreshment or
accommodation, he did not pay. Or he
obtain credit, he did not pay. Or his
goods are inside the hotel, he abandons
his goods, he abandons his valuables, he
surreptitiously removes parts of his
baggage therein.
ESTAFA THROUGH FRAUDULENT MEANS
THREE PUNISHABLE ACTS:
a) By inducing another, by means of deceit, to
sign any document
 CASE: Intestate Estate Of Manolita
Gonzales Vda. De Carungcong v.
People
In this case, the Japanese son-in-law asks
the mother-in-law to sign a document.
He induced her to sign a document
saying that it was about taxes but in truth
and in fact, it is a SPA for the sale of the
property in Tagaytay and by reason
thereof, the mother-in-law, who was
already blind, signs the document
therefore Sato, the Japanese son-in-law,
was able to sell the said property. This is
the kind of Estafa by inducing another by
means of deceit to sign a document.
b) By resorting to some fraudulent practice to
insure success in a gambling game
 In the book of Reyes, there was a
cockfight. The offender removed the
thing on the feet of rooster and so, by
reason thereof, he won the game. So the
offender resorted to some fraudulent
practice to insure success in the gambling
game.
c) By removing, concealing, or destroying, in
whole or in part, any court record, office
files, document, or any other papers
BOUNCING CHECKS LAW (B.P. 22)
[relate to Art 315 (2) (d)]
SECTION 1 – CHECKS WITHOUT SUFFICIENT
FUNDS
ACTS PUNISHABLE:
136 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
I. Making or drawing and issuance of a check
knowing at the time of issue that the offender
does not have sufficient funds in the bank.
 The drawer of the check knew that at the time of
the issuing of the check, he has no funds in the
bank
II. The failing to give sufficient funds or credit
with the drawee bank such that when the check
presented within the period of 90 days from
the date appearing on the check, it was
dishonored by the drawee bank.
 At the time of the issuance of the check, the
drawer has funds in the bank, however, the crime
will arise because he failed to make good the check
or he failed to keep funds to the said drawee bank
within the period of 90 days such that when the
check was deposited within 90 days, it was
dishonored by the drawee bank.
SECTION 2 – PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF
KNOWLEDGE OF INSUFFICIENCY OF FUNDS
The making, drawing and issuance of a check payment of
which is refused by the drawee because of insufficient funds
in or credit with such bank, when presented within ninety
(90) days from the date of the check shall constitute prima
facie knowledge of insufficiency of funds.
 This prima facie knowledge of insufficiency of
funds, however, will not arise if the drawer of
the check deposited the amount necessary to
cover the check within five (5) banking days
from the date of receipt of notice thereof.
 Therefore, for the prima facie of knowledge of
insufficiency of funds to arise, the following
are the elements or the requisites:
1. The check must be deposited within 90
days from the date appearing on the check.
2. That the drawer of the check received a
notice of dishonor either from the bank or
from the payee or holder of the check
3. The drawer of the check failed to make
good of the check within 5 banking days.
No prima facie knowledge of insufficiency of funds
 The drawer of the check received a notice of
dishonor within five days, he deposited the
amount in the bank to cover the check, there will
arise no prima facie evidence of knowledge of
insufficiency of funds.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 Within 5 banking days, he went to the bank and
made arrangement for the amount necessary to
cover the check.
 Five banking days is important
Q: What if A issued a check to B in favor of an obligation, B
was however a businessman who was too busy so he was
able to deposit the check 120 days from the date appearing
on the check (beyond the 90-day period). The check
presented was dishonored. Notice of dishonor was sent to A
and A failed to make good the check within 5 banking days.
Can B still file a case for violation of BP 22 against A?
A: Yes, B can file a case for violation of BP 22
against A. This is because for as long as a check is not
yet a stale check, if the check was deposited and it was
dishonored, violation of BP 22 is committed. Here, the
check was deposited 120 days from the date appearing
on the check. The fact that it was deposited beyond the
90-day period would only mean that there is no longer
prima facie presumption of knowledge of insufficiency
of funds. However, such prima facie presumption
knowledge of insufficiency of funds can be proven
through other evidence, so still, violation of BP 22 is
committed.
 When is BP 22 not committed?
 Wong v. Ca
In this case, the check was deposited 157 days after
the date appearing on the check.
The SC said that it is not yet a stale check. A check
becomes stale when it is deposited after six
months or after 180 days.
Q: B was so busy, he deposited the check on the 181st day
from the date appearing on the check. The check was
dishonored. Can he file a case of violation of BP 22 against
A?
A: No, B cannot file a case of violation of BP 22
against A. This is because the check has no more
value since it is already a stale check under the
Negotiable Instruments Law. It is no longer the fault of
the drawer that he has no funds in the bank. It is the
fault of the holder or the payee of the check that he
failed to deliver or deposited the check within the
period required by law.
SECTION 1 – PENALTY
Under Section 1 of BP 22, the penalty for violation of BP 22
is imprisonment of 30 days to 1 year or a fine not less than
but not more than double the value of the check or in no
case to exceed 200, 000 pesos, or both fine and
imprisonment at the discretion of the court
137 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 Are these still the penalties or have they been
amended by the SC by SC-A.C. No. 12-2000 and
SC-A.C. No. 13-2001?
 The penalty of 30 days to 1 year and the fine
are still the penalty prescribed by law. Even if
the SC issued these two circulars, the SC
cannot amend the law. The SC does not have
that power; only congress has that power.
SC-A.C. No. 12-2000
It is stated in SC-A.C. No. 12-2000 that in lieu of
imprisonment, the penalty to be imposed in violation
of BP 22 should only be fine, that is, if based on the
facts and circumstances of the offense and the
offender, the check was issued in good faith or under
mere mistake of fact without any taint of negligence.
SC said that the appropriate penalty should be fine in
lieu of imprisonment.
Because of this SC-AC No. 12-2000, many MTC
judges imprisonment is no longer a penalty for
violation of BP 22. They thought that now, the penalty
for violation of BP 22 is only fine. And because of this
misunderstanding on the part of MTC judges, the SC
has to issue another administrative circular, the SC-
A.C. No. 13-2001 in order to clarify SC-A.C. No. 12-
2000.
SC-A.C. No. 13-2001
The SC made the following clarifications:
1. The SC-A.C. No. 12-2000 does not remove
imprisonment as an alternative penalty for violation of
BP 22. Therefore, imprisonment is still a penalty for
violation of BP 22.
2. What SC-A.C. No. 12-2000 only establishes is a rule
of preference on the imposition of the penalty such
that if the offender acted in good faith or under mere
mistake of fact without any taint of negligence, the
appropriate penalty is fine in lieu of imprisonment.
3. The SC said if the penalty imposed by the court is
fine only, and the said offender or drawer of the check
is insolvent to pay the fine, then there is no legal
obstacle for the imposition of subsidiary imprisonment
under Art. 39 of Book I of RPC.
ART. 316 – OTHER FORMS OF SWINDLING
OTHER FORMS OF SWINDLING CAN BE
COMMITTED BY THE FOLLOWING:
1. Any person who, pretending to be owner of any
real property, shall convey, sell, encumber or
mortgage the same.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
2. Any person, who, knowing that real property is
encumbered, shall dispose of the same, although
such encumbrance be not recorded.
3. The owner of any personal property who shall
wrongfully take it from its lawful possessor, to the
prejudice of the latter or any third person.
4. Any person who, to the prejudice of another, shall
execute any fictitious contract.
5. Any person who shall accept any compensation
given him under the belief that it was in payment
of services rendered or labor performed by him,
when in fact he did not actually perform such
services or labor.
6. Any person who, while being a surety in a bond
given in a criminal or civil action, without express
authority from the court or before the cancellation
of his bond or before being relieved from the
obligation contracted by him, shall sell, mortgage,
or, in any other manner, encumber the real
property or properties with which he guaranteed
the fulfillment of such obligation.
Q: What if A is a debtor, in order to defraud his creditor, A
as the debtor, has an obligation which is due and
demandable. He has only 1 property – a property in Quezon
City – which can be attached by his creditor. Now, in order
to defraud his creditor, he executed a fictitious contract
selling the said property to B with the intention to defraud
his creditor. What is the crime committed by A? Is A liable
for Fraudulent Insolvency under Art. 314 or is A liable of
other forms of swindling under Art. 316?
A: A is liable of other forms of swindling under
Art. 316. Because the contract that he executed in
favor of B is only a fictitious contract. It is not a real
contract of sale conveying his property to B.
Q: What if A is a debtor, in order to defraud his creditor, A
as the debtor, has an obligation which is due and
demandable. He has only 1 property – a property in Quezon
City – which can be attached by his creditor. To defraud his
creditor what he did was, he sold the said property to B via
a deed of absolute sale, his intention to defraud his creditor.
What crime if any is committed by A?
A: A committed Fraudulent Insolvency. The
contract is a real transfer of property from A to B. It is
not a fictitious contract.
If it is a fictitious contract – the crime committed is
other forms of swindling under Art. 316
If it is not - the crime committed is Fraudulent
Insolvency
Art. 317 – SWINDLING A MINOR
 Who is liable?
138 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 Any person who taking advantage of the
inexperience or emotions or feelings of a
minor, to his detriment, shall induce him to
assume any obligation or to give any release
or execute a transfer of any property right in
consideration of some loan of money, credit
or other personal property, whether the loan
clearly appears in the document or is shown
in any other form.
Art. 318 – OTHER DECEITS
 Who is liable?
 Any person who, for profit or gain, shall
interpret dreams, make forecasts, tell
fortunes, or take advantage of the credulity of
the public in any other similar manner.
 If the offender commits any act of swindling, any act of
deprivati0n not punishable under Art. 315, 316 and
317, it is punishable under Art. 318 – Other Deceits.
 So any other form of deprivation would be under Art.
318 – Other Deceits.
Q: What about Madam Auring? She tells fortune. What if a
person went to Madam Auring asking for his fortune and
what is in his future, and based on the readings of the card,
Madam Auring said “You will get sick on this particular
day. You will die upon this particular day.” Because of this,
the person could no longer sleep. He has been thinking
about his sickness and his death. Can he file a case against
Madam Auring for Other Deceits under Art. 318?
A: Yes, he can file a case of Other Deceits
against Madam Auring. Because obviously for
profit or for gain, Madam Auring tells his fortune,
which is obviously an erroneous one. How can
someone predict the death of a person? How can
someone predict when a person will be ill or sick?
Obviously it is done in order to defraud this person and
this person had been damaged because this person
could no longer sleep and can think only of his sickness
and death.
CHAPTER SEVEN – CHATTEL MORTGAGE
Art. 319 – REMOVAL, SALE OR PLEDGE OF
MORTGAGED PROPERTY
ACTS PUNISHABLE
I. Any person who shall knowingly remove any personal
property mortgaged under the Chattel Mortgage Law
to any province or city other than the one in which it
was located at the time of the execution of the
mortgage, without the written consent of the
mortgagee, or his executors, administrators or assigns.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
II. Any mortgagor who shall sell or pledge personal
property already pledged, or any part thereof, under
the terms of the Chattel Mortgage Law, without the
consent of the mortgagee written on the back of the
mortgage and noted on the record hereof in the office
of the Register of Deeds of the province where such
property is located.
CHAPTER EIGHT – ARSON AND OTHER CRIMES
INVOLVING DESTRUCTIONS
ARTICLES 320 – 326 speak about Arson. These had
already been repealed by PD 1613 – THE LAW ON
ARSON. However, although Articles 320 – 326 had
been repealed by PD 1613, Article 320 has been brought
back into life by RA 7659.
 That is why, insofar Article 320, the crime is
Destructive Arson. And we have PD 1613 which
punishes Simple Arson or Other Cases of Arson.
 Do not consider Section 2 of PD 1613 which
punishes Destructive Arson because Destructive
Arson is under Article 320 of the RPC as it has
been brought back by RA 7659.
Q: What if there was this maid, the want to go to the
province, let’s say it was Christmas time. He asked
permission from the master of the house, the master of the
house did not allow the maid to go to her province. So the
maid got mad. To make revenge, she burned the house at
night and left the house. However, the master of the house
together with his family were not awakened by the said
burning and so they all died by reason of the said fire. Not
only that, the sad burning of the house of the master also
affected 5 nearby houses. All in all, 5 houses were burned
by the said fire and also the master and said members of
the family all died in the course of the said fire. What crime
is/are committed by the said helper?
A: The helper is liable only for the crime of
Simple Arson Other Cases of Arson under PD
1613 – Sec. 3. The fact that the master died would
only qualify the penalty imposable of her. But, it will
not bring about the crime of Arson with Homicide.
There is no such crime as Arson with Homicide or
Arson with Multiple Homicide.
 Why is it that the crime committed is only
Simple Arson or Other Cases of Arson?
 The crime committed is Simple Arson or
Other Cases of Arson because the fact that
what the maid burned is an inhabited house
or dwelling, the crime is only Simple Arson or
Other Cases of Arson.
139 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Destructive Arson is found under Art 320 of the
RPC while Simple Arson and other arson is
repealed by PD 1613 repealing Article 320 to 326 B
of the RPC. Even though there are five deaths, the
deaths will be absorbed in the crime of arson and
will only qualify the penalty to death. The maid is
only liable for simple arson, because what has
been burned is an inhabited dwelling. For as long
as the thing burned is an inhabited house or
dwelling, the crime committed is simple arson. If
in the course of burning the dwelling, homicide
results, the crime committed is still arson.
If the intention is to kill the offended
party, and the means employed is through burning
the house, the crime committed is MURDER. If
however, the intention of the offender is to destroy
the property of the offended party by fire, and the
offender did not know that someone is inside and
death results, the crime is still simple arson. It will
only qualify the penalty to RP to death.
Q: A killed B while sleeping. The crime committed is
murder. In order to conceal the crime, A burned the house.
A: This time, there are two crimes committed. A is
liable for Murder for killing B and Arson, in
order to hide the crime committed. The arson
committed is destructive arson, as it is defined by the
law.
 So what is Arson?
 Arson is the malicious destruction of the property
by means of fire.
2 KINDS OF ARSON:
1. DESTRUCTIVE ARSON – punished under Art.
320 of the RPC
2. SIMPLE ARSON – punished under PD 1613
particular Section 3
ART. 320 – DESTRUCTIVE ARSON
HOW IS DESTRUCTIVE ARSON COMMITTED?
1. One or more buildings or edifices, consequent to
one single act of burning, or as a result of
simultaneous burnings or committed on several or
different occasions;
2. Any building of public or private ownership,
devoted to public in general, or where people
usually gather or congregate for a definite purpose
such as but not limited to official government
function or business, private transaction,
commerce, trade workshop, meetings,
conferences, or merely incidental to or for a
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
definite purpose such as but not limited to motels,
transient dwellings, public conveyances or stops,
or terminals, regardless of whether the offender
had knowledge that there are persons in said
building or edifice at the time set on fire and
regardless also of whether the building is actually
inhabited or not.
3. Any train, locomotive, ship or vessel, airship or
airplane, devoted to transportation or conveyance,
or for public use, entertainment and leisure;
4. Any building, factory, warehouse installation and
any other appurtenances thereto, which are
devoted to the service of public utilities;
5. Any building the burning of which is for the
purpose of concealing or destroying the evidence
of another violation of law, or for the purpose of
concealing bankruptcy or defrauding creditors or
to collect from insurance.
There is also destructive arson in the following
instances:
1. When the arson is committed by 2 or more
persons, regardless of whether their purpose is
merely to burn or destroy the building or the
burning merely constitutes an overt act in the
commission of another violation of the law;
2. When any person shall burn:
a. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or
military power or fireworks factory,
ordinance, storehouse, archives or
general museum of the Government; or
b. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or
factory of inflammable or explosive
materials.
Q: What if in the course of the commission of Destructive
Arson, someone died. The airplane was burned. The
purpose was to burn the said airplane. Unknown to the
offender, someone was inside the said airplane and the said
person died. What crime is committed by the offender?
A: The offender is liable for Destructive
Arson under Article 320. The fact that
someone died will not give rise to a complex
crime. The crime committed is only Arson.
After the last paragraph of Article 320, it is stated
that – if as a consequence of the commission of any of the
acts constituting Arson, death results, then, the mandatory
penalty of death shall be imposed. So here, the fact that
someone died in the course of the commission of
Destructive Arson would mean that the penalty to be
imposed of the said offender would be death. But, the crime
committed is only Arson. There is no such thing as
Arson with Homicide.
140 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
ANTI-ARSON LAW (P.D. 1613)
SIMPLE ARSON OR OTHER CASES OF ARSON IS
COMMITTED IF WHAT HAS BEEN BURNED IS:
1. Any building used as offices of the government or
any of its agencies;
2. Any inhabited house or dwelling;
3. Any industrial establishment, shipyard, oil well or
mine shaft, platform or tunnel;
4. Any plantation, farm, pasture land, growing crop,
grain field, orchard, bamboo grove or forest;
5. Any rice mill, sugarmill, cane mill, or mill central;
6. Any railway or bus station, airport, wharf, or
warehouse.
Q: A plantation was burned. While the plantation was
burning, the field worker was sleeping and the field worker
died as a result of the said burning of the plantation. What
crime is committed by the offender?
A: The crime committed by the offender is only
Simple Arson or Other Cases of Arson under
PD 1613.
 What about the fact the someone died?
 Under Section 5 of PD 1613, if by
reason or on occasion of the said arson,
death results, the penalty shall be
reclusion perpetua to
death.Therefore, the crime
committed is only Arson. You do not
complex it with Homicide. But the fact
that someone died, the penalty is
qualified. The penalty is increased to
reclusion perpetua to death.
PENALTY FOR DESTRUCTIVE ARSON: RECLUSION
PERPETUA TO DEATH
 If as a result of the commission of any acts of
destructive arson, death results, the penalty
should be death.
PENALTY FOR SIMPLE ARSON: RECLUSION
TEMPORAL TO RECLUSION PERPETUA
 Under Section 5 of PD 1613, if by reason or on
the occasion of simple arson, death results, the
penalty is reclusion perpetua to death.
 Therefore, whatever may be the crime may be, if
by reason of said arson, death results, it will
aggravate the crime of arson and the homicide
will be absorbed in the arson.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Q: What if a person wants to kill B. So in order to kill B, B
was sleeping inside his nipa hut, A burned the said nipa hut
and so, B died while sleeping. What crime is committed by
A?
A: A committed the crime of murder. His
intention is to kill B by burning.
Q: If A went inside the house of B and then he saw B and
stabbed B several times. B died. Thereafter, to conceal the
killing of B, a burned the house of B. it was a total burn.
A: This time, A committed two crimes. Murder
for killing B treacherously and Arson, because he
burned the house of B in order to conceal the
commission of the said act of killing. The arson
committed is simple arson.
Q: What if A wanted to get revenge at B so he decided to
burn the property of B. in the course thereof, a servant was
sleeping inside. What crime is committed by A?
A: A is liable only for Arson. The fact that someone
is killed in the course of the said Arson, the crime
committed is only arson. And the fact that the said
servant died while the said burning took place, you
only qualify the penalty, the crime committed is Arson
and the penalty is qualified to reclusion perpetua to
death.
Q: What if A wanted to burn the property of B. So what he
did was he poured gas on the said walls of the property.
However, before he could set the property on fire. Someone
saw him and so, he was arrested. What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is Attempted Arson.
Q: What if A placed rags near the property of B. His
intention is to burn the property of B. and then he placed
gasoline on the said rags and set fire on the said rags. The
rags were burning. However, before said fire could have
burned any of the structure of the house, A was already
arrested. What crime is committed?
A: Some legal luminaries say, the crime committed is
frustrated arson. Other legal luminaries say there is no
such crime as frustrated arson.
Pros. Garcia is on the second luminary. She believes
that there is no such crime as frustrated arson because
arson is the burning of the property of another by
means of fire. The moment any part of the said
structure or building is burned, arson is already
consummated. If no part of the said structure or
building is burning, it is only Attempted Arson. There
cannot be a circumstance of frustrated arson.
Because how did a crime frustrate a felony? A
frustrated felony is committed when the offender
141 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
has performed all the acts of execution that would
produce the felony but nevertheless the felony was not
produced by reason of the causes independent of the
will of the perpetrator. The offender has performed all
the acts of execution in the crime f arson, for the
offender to be said that he had performed all the acts of
execution, it is necessary that the building or the
property has already been burned, otherwise, it cannot
be said that he has performed all the acts of execution.
So by the definition of a frustrated felony, she is with
the other legal luminaries who say that there is no such
thing as frustrated arson. Because the moment any
part of the property has been burned, it is
already considered as consummated arson.
Art. 327 – MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
 Who are liable for malicious mischief?
 Any person who shall deliberately cause the
property of another any damage not falling
within the terms of the next preceding
chapter shall be guilty of malicious mischief.
Malicious Mischief – is the willful damaging of another’s
property for the sake of causing damage due to hate,
revenge or other evil motive.
If the intention of the offender is to cause damage in the
property of another, by any means outside arson, is
malicious mischief.
It is a crime which can only be committed by means of
intent. There must be deliberate intent to cause damage to
the property of another, because if there is no intent to
cause damage in the property, the liability will be damages
only; civil liability and not criminal liability.
In order for a crime to be considered as malicious mischief,
it is necessary that there must be DELIBERATE INTENT to
cause damage to the property of another. Absent that
deliberate intent to damage, to injure the property of
another, it cannot be considered as malicious mischief. The
said offender will only be liable for damages for causing
damage to the property of another; civil liability and not
criminal liability. Or, if there was negligence, imprudence
on his part, it would be reckless imprudence or simple
negligence causing damage to property. But for malicious
mischief to arise, it is necessary that there must be
deliberate intent to damage the property of another, only
for the purpose of damaging it or for the purpose of
invoking revenge.
Q: A and B were fighting, and in the course of their fight, A
fell on the floor and the floor was damaged.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
A: The liability will only be a civil action for
damages.
ART. 328 – SPECIAL CASES OF MALICIOUS
MISCHIEF/QUALIFIED MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
(Penalty is qualified)
1. Causing damage to obstruct the performance of
public functions;
2. Using poisonous or corrosive substances
3. Spreading any infection or contagion among cattle
4. Causing damage to the property of the National
Library or to any archive or registry, waterworks,
road, promenade, or any other thing used in
common by public
ART. 329 – OTHER MISCHIEFS
 Other damage would constitute ordinary malicious
mischief.
 The mischiefs not included in the next preceding
article.
ART. 330 – DAMAGE AND OBSTRUCTION TO
MEANS OF COMMUNICATION
 What is punished is the damage and obstruction to
means of communication.
 Who is liable?
 The penalty of prision correccional in its medium
and maximum periods shall be imposed upon any
person who shall damage any railway,
telegraph or telephone lines.
 If the damage shall result in any derailment of
cars, collision or other accident, the penalty is
qualified to prision mayor, without prejudice to
the criminal liability of the offender for the other
consequences of his criminal act.
 For the purpose of the provisions of the article, the
electric wires, traction cables, signal
system and other things pertaining to
railways, shall be deemed to constitute an
integral part of a railway system.
ART. 331 – DESTROYING OR DAMAGING
STATUES, PUBLIC MONUMENTS OR PAINTINGS
 Who is liable?
 Any person who shall destroy or damage statues
or any other useful or ornamental public
monument. (penalty of arresto mayor in its
medium period to prision correccional in its
minimum period)
142 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

 If what has been damaged are only private
monuments or private paintings, it is only
ordinary malicious mischief.
 Any person who shall destroy or damage any
useful or ornamental painting of a public nature
shall suffer the penalty of arresto menor or a fine
not exceeding 200 pesos, or both such fine and
imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.
CHAPTER TEN – EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL
LIABILITY IN CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
Art. 332 — PERSONS EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL
LIABILITY.
 No criminal, but only civil liability, shall result from
the commission of the crime of THEFT,
SWINDLING (or estafa) or MALICIOUS
MISCHIEF committed or caused mutually by the
following persons:
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives
by affinity in the same line.
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the property
which belonged to the deceased spouse before the
same shall have passed into the possession of
another; and
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and
sisters-in-law, if living together.
 The exemption established by this article shall not be
applicable to strangers participating in the
commission of the crime. This exempting circumstance
will not apply to strangers. If the strangers connived
with any the persons mentioned in Article 332, so in
that case, the stranger is liable, only the enumerated
persons is not criminally liable.
in-law can be held criminally liable. So this
apply only to simple cases of theft, swindling (or
estafa) and malicious mischief.
The son in law a Japanese National , by means of
deceit made his mother in law sign a SPA, said
SPA was used to sell the property of Tagaytay. The
mother died without receiving the proceeds of the
sale. The daughter of the mother wanted to file a
case against the son-in law. Note that the wife of
the Japanese national is already deceased. Does
article apply in this case where the crime
committed is estafa even if the wife of the
Japanese National is already dead?
The relationship by affinity is still existing. The
purpose is to ensure harmony within the family.
Article 332 will still apply. The son-in-law may
be prosecuted. The crime is estafa through
falsification of public document. The crime
committed is the complex crime of estafa
through falsification of public document. Article
332 will not apply though there is a relationship
because the crime is already complexed.
Based on jurisprudence:
The word SPOUSES include paramours and
mistresses, and other wives.
The word ASCENDANTS include step-father and
step mother.
The word DESCENDANTS include step children,
adopted children and natural children.
 The reason is that the exempting circumstance, the
absolutory cause under Article 332 is made in order to
insure HARMONY within the family.

Intestate Estate of Manolita Gonzales Vda. De

Carungcong v. People:
 The Supreme Court said, this absolutory cause or
exempting circumstance under Article 332 applies
exclusively to simple crimes of theft, swindling (or
estafa) and malicious mischief. The exemption
under Article 332 will not arise, it will not absorb
the offender if the crime committed is already a
complex crime.
 In this case, the son-in-law of a Japanese National
committed estafa through falsification of a
public document. Because the special power of
attorney was falsified. Since the crime committed
was estafa through falsification of a public
document, the Supreme Court said, the said son-

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 143 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

TITLE ELEVEN o It is a matter of defense only on the lover

to say that “I do not know that she is
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
married.
(Articles 333 – 346) o So, there are cases wherein only one is
convicted and the other one is acquitted.

CHAPTER ONE – ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE Q: A, the wife had sexual intercourse with B, the lover. H,
the husband can file a case for adultery against the both of
ART. 333 – WHO ARE GUILTY OF ADULTERY them. During trial of the merits, B was able to prove beyond
Adultery is committed by any married woman who shall reasonable doubt that A represented herself to be single
have sexual intercourse with a man not her husband and by and that B believed that she was indeed single.
the man who has carnal knowledge of her knowing her to A: The wife can be convicted for adultery and the lover
be married, even if the marriage be subsequently declared has his defense that he did not know that the woman is
void. married. It is a matter of defense.
Adultery shall be punished by prision correcional in its  Both shall still be prosecuted. Otherwise, the case will
medium and maximum periods. not prosper under Art. 344
If the person guilty of adultery committed this offense while
being abandoned without justification by the offended  If wife is abandoned by her husband without
spouse, the penalty next lower in degree than that provided justification, mitigated
in the next preceding paragraph shall be imposed.  Adultery is a crime of consequence, so there is
no attempted or frustrated stage.
 The penalty shall be mitigated; therefore it is akin
o It is always in the consummated stage.
to a mitigating circumstance.
o It is an instantaneous crime –
consummated upon the carnal union of
the wife with the lover of the wife.
Offender Legally Married Woman  Adultery may be proven by circumstantial
evidence.
Offended party Husband
The husband was working in Saudi for 10 years, and upon
To whom shall the case be reaching home, he sees his wife pregnant for 9 months,
Wife and Lover obviously, if the wife is not a victim of rape, the wife
filed
committed adultery.
Only by the Offended
Who shall file
Husband
ART. 334 – CONCUBINAGE
ELEMENTS: Any husband who shall keep a mistress in the conjugal
1. That the woman is married dwelling, or shall have sexual intercourse, under
2. She has sexual intercourse with a man who is not scandalous circumstances, with a woman who is not his
her husband wife, or shall cohabit with her in any other place, shall be
3. As regards the man whom she has sexual punished by prision correccional in its minimum and
intercourse, he must know her to be married medium periods.
The concubine shall suffer the penalty of destierro.

Adultery is a private crime. ELEMENTS:

 It can only be prosecuted by the offended 1. The man must be married

spouse. 2. That he committed any of the following acts:
 Without the complaint filed by the offended a. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal
spouse, no crime. dwelling;
o Therefore, the state cannot, on its own, b. Having sexual intercourse under
file a case of adultery against the wife. scandalous circumstances;
 If the lover does not know that the woman is c. Cohabiting with her in any other place
married, still the husband should file the case 3. The woman must know that the man must be
on both of them. married

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 144 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

 Cohabitation means that the husband and the

Legally Married
Offender concubine were living together as if they were
Husband
husband and wife without the benefit of marriage.
Offended party Wife
CHAPTER TWO – RAPE AND ACTS OF
To whom shall the case
Husband and Concubine LASCIVIOUSNESS
be filed
 Art. 335 - RAPE IS ALREADY REPEALED. Rape is no
Only by the Offended longer a private crime. It is already a public crime and
Who shall file
Wife located under title 8, crimes against persons.

Just like adultery, Concubinage is a private crime. TWO KINDS OF ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS:

 The wife must initiate the filing of the complaint 1. Acts of Lasciviousness under circumstances of rape
because it is a private crime. under Art. 336
 Without the complaint, the state cannot, on its 2. Acts of Lasciviousness under circumstances of
own, file the case of concubinage seduction under Art. 339
 The wife must file the case against both the  When the offended party consented to the
husband and the concubine and is married. acts of lasciviousness

Q: What if the concubine does not know that the husband ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS – refers to acts which is
is married? prompted by lust or lewd design.

A: It is a matter of defense on the part of the

concubine that she was also deceived. She did ART. 336. ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
not know that the man is married. But she also must
Any person who shall commit any act of lasciviousness
be prosecuted.
upon other persons of either sex, under any of the
circumstances mentioned in the preceding article, shall be
FIRST ACT: KEEPING A MISTRESS IN THE punished by prision correcional.
CONJUGAL DWELLING ELEMENTS:
 The conjugal dwelling refers the house of the 1. That the offender commits any act of
husband and the wife lasciviousness or lewdness;
 Husband brought her to the house 2. That the act of lasciviousness is committed against
a person of either sex;
SECOND ACT: HAVING SEXUAL INTERCOURSE 3. That it is done under any of the following
UNDER SCANDALOUS CIRCUMSTANCES circumstances:
a. Using force or intimidation
 The best witnesses are the neighbors of the husband. b. When the offended party is deprived of
It must be in such a manner that the neighbors are reason or otherwise unconscious
shocked. c. By means of fraudulent machination or
Q: What if a married man who had sexual intercourse with grave abuse of authority
a woman inside a motel. Is the man liable for concubinage? d. When the offended party is under 12
years of age or demented
A: NO, because it was done in secrecy. In order
 It is committed with unchaste design and done under
for the husband to be liable for concubinage by circumstances of rape.
having sexual intercourse with a woman who is not
his wife, it is necessary that the sexual intercourse Offender – any person
was committed under scandalous circumstances. Offended party – any person
Their sexual congress must set a bad example,
misconduct among the people in the neighborhood.
THIRD ACT: COHABITING WITH A WOMAN IN Q: Offender is the woman while the offended party is a
ANY OTHER PLACE man. The man was being held by 2 other men when the

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 145 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
woman undressed the man, touched the private parts of the
man. What crime is committed?
A: Acts of Lasciviousness under
circumstances of rape under Art. 336. Under
Art. 336, the offender and the offended party may be
any person. The man was held by other two men and
the act of the woman was prompted by lust or lewd
design. Therefore it is acts of lasciviousness under
circumstances of rape.
Q: In a school, the woman after unbuttoning the pants of
the said man, the woman forcibly entered the penis of the
man inside her mouth. Is the crime committed rape by
sexual assault?
A: No, but it is acts of lasciviousness. If you
look at rape by sexual assault, it is committed by “the
man inserting his penis into another persons’ mouth
or orifice.” It is the offender who must insert his
penis into the mouth or orifice. In the problem, it is
not the man who inserted his penis. It was the
woman who forcibly inserts the penis of the man
inside her mouth. Therefore, crime committed is only
acts of lasciviousness, because in rape by sexual
assault, it is the offender who has the penis and
inserted it forcibly to another.
CHAPTER THREE – SEDUCTION, CORRUPTION
OF MINORS AND
WHITE SLAVE TRADE
TWO KINDS OF SEDUCTION:
1. Qualified Seduction
2. Simple Seduction
ART. 337 – QUALIFIED SEDUCTION
The seduction of a virgin over twelve years and under
eighteen years of age, committed by any person in public
authority, priest, home-servant, domestic, guardian,
teacher, or any person who, in any capacity, shall be
entrusted with the education or custody of the woman
seduced, shall be punished by prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods.
The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon
any person who shall seduce his sister or descendant,
whether or not she be a virgin or over eighteen years of age.
Under the provisions of this Chapter, seduction is
committed when the offender has carnal knowledge of any
of the persons and under the circumstances described
herein.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
TWO KINDS OF QUALIFIED SEDUCTION:
1. Seduction of a virgin over 12 years of age and under
18 years of age by persons who abuse their authority or
confidence reposed in them
ELEMENTS:
1. The offended party must be a virgin
2. She must be over 12 and under 18 years of age
3. The offender is a person in public authority, priest,
house servant, domestic, teacher, guardian or any
person, in any manner, shall be entrusted with the
education or custody of the woman seduced
4. The offender had sexual intercourse with of the
said offended party
5. There is abuse of authority, confidence or
relationship on the part of the offender
Offended party must be:
o Virgin
o over 12 under 18 years of age
 If the victim is under 12 years of age, even if there
was consent, it is statutory rape.
Offender must be:
o Person in public authority
o priest
o house servant
o domestic
o teacher
o guardian
o any person who has custody of the seduced
woman
 VIRGINITY does not refer to physical virginity.
 It would suffice that the woman is not married, she is
single and living a chaste life.
 The law presumes that she is a virgin.
 sexual intercourse is an element of any kind of
seduction. It is committed with the abuse of
authority, confidence or relationship.
2. Seduction of a sister by her brother or descendant
by her ascendant, regardless of her age and reputation.
Offended party must be:
o Sister or Descendant
Offender must be:
o Brother or Ascendant
146 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
 The brother or ascendant had sexual intercourse with
the sister or descendant, which is committed with
abuse of relationship.
 Age does not matter. Even if the sister is 18 and
above, still, seduction can still be committed.
 Status in life is not an element. Even if she is a
married woman, still, there can be seduction.
(Virginity does not matter)
ART. 338 – SIMPLE SEDUCTION
The seduction of a woman who is single or a widow of good
reputation, over twelve but under eighteen years of age,
committed by means of deceit, shall be punished by arresto
mayor.
ELEMENTS:
1. Offended party is over 12 and under 18 years of
age
2. She must be of good reputation, single or widow
3. Offender has sexual intercourse with her
4. It is committed by means of deceit.
In case of simple seduction, the offended party must be a
WOMAN who is single or widow of good reputation, over
12 but must be under 18 years of age.
Offender – any person
 who had sexual intercourse with her by means of
deceit.
DECEIT- the offended party gave herself to the man
because of the latter’s promise.
 It may come in the form of inducement, a false
promise.
Q: In order to have sexual congress with the woman, the
man promised to marry the woman. The woman who
believed the promise gave herself to the man. What crime is
committed if any by the said man?
A: Simple seduction. In order to induce the woman
to give up her virginity was due to the deceit employed.
Q: The woman committed sexual congress with a married
man because the man promised that he will marry the
woman.
A: The SC said that there is no seduction. The fact
that the woman knows that the man is married, the
man cannot marry her. There is no deceit.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
ART. 339 – ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS WITH THE
CONSENT OF THE OFFENDED PARTY
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed to punish
any other acts of lasciviousness committed by the same
persons and the same circumstances as those provided in
Articles 337 and 338.
 This is done with the consent of the offended party
 This is under circumstances of seduction.
Offender: Man
Offended Party: Woman
 In seduction, the offended party is always the woman
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender commits acts of lasciviousness or
lewdness
2. Acts were committed upon a woman who is a
virgin, or single or widow of good reputation,
under 18 years of age but over 12 years, or a sister
or descendant regardless of her reputation or age
3. Offender accomplishes the acts by :
a. Abuse of authority
b. Abuse of confidence
c. Abuse of relationship
d. Means of deceit
ART. 340 – CORRUPTION OF MINORS
Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution
or corruption of persons underage to satisfy the lust of
another, shall be punished by prision mayor, and if the
culprit is a pubic officer or employee, including those in
government-owned or controlled corporations, he shall also
suffer the penalty of temporary absolute disqualification.
(As amended by Batas Pambansa Blg. 92).
Corruption is committed by persons who: Promote
or facilitate the prostitution or the corruptions of minors in
order to satisfy the lust of another
o It is committed by pimps, or more commonly
known as “Bugaw”
Q: If the offender is a public officer or employee, including
those in the government owned-controlled corporations?
A: there is an additional temporary absolute
disqualification
ART. 341 – WHITE SLAVE TRADE
The penalty of prision mayor in its medium and maximum
period shall be imposed upon any person who, in any
manner, or under any pretext, shall engage in the business
147 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
or shall profit by prostitution or shall enlist the services of
any other for the purpose of prostitution (As amended by
Batas Pambansa Blg. 186.)
PUNISHABLE ACTS:
I. Engaging in the Business of Prostitution
II. Shall Profit by Prostitution
III. Enlist the services of any woman for the purpose of
prostitution
Chapter Four – ABDUCTION
TWO KINDS OF ABDUCTION:
1. Forcible Abduction
2. Consented Abduction
ART. 342 – FORCIBLE ABDUCTION
The abduction of any woman against her will and with lewd
designs shall be punished by reclusion temporal.
The same penalty shall be imposed in every case, if the
female abducted be under twelve years of age.
Forcible Abduction- abduction, taking away, or carrying
away of a woman against her will and with lewd design.
 Woman can be any person.
 Regardless of age, virginity, civil status. They are not
material.
 For as long as the taking away is done with lewd
design and against her will.
 Sexual intercourse is NOT an element.
 If by reason of or on the occasion of forcible
abduction, the man had sexual intercourse with the
woman, it may result in a COMPLEX CRIME OF
RAPE WITH FORCIBLE ABDUCTION.
Q: Nena was waiting near the gate of her house, while
waiting for her father. Suddenly here comes Pedro. Pedro
abducted her. Forcibly took her away from her house and
brought her inside his house. The said taking was done with
lewd design. So Pedro held Nena inside her house for 7
days. Pedro said, “Marry Me”, Nena said, “I will never
marry you”. By reason thereof, Pedro rape Nena, and
during the 7 days when Nena was held in captivity inside
the house of Pedro, Pedro rape her one time a day. There
were 7 acts of rape. What crime/s is/are committed by
Pedro?
A: The crimes committed by X are 7 crimes.
Pedro shall be charged by 7 information. 1 crime
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
forcible abduction with rape and 6 crimes of distinct
and separate charges of rape. One act of sexual
intercourse constitute equals one charge. Here, only 1
rape can be complexed with forcible abduction. It is a
complexity of crimes under Art. 48, Book I of the
Revised Penal Code. It is not a special complex crime,
but merely a complex crime.
 only one forcible abduction is necessary to commit
the crime of rape and only 1 rape is necessary to
bring about complex crime of forcible abduction
with rape.
Q: In the same case, the Nena was inside the house of the
Pedro. Pedro tried to rape Nena, he attempted to rape,
however, Nena was able to put up a fight and Nena kicked
Pedro, as a result, she ran outside the house. What crime/s
is/are committed by Pedro?
A: 2 crimes are committed, Forcible Abduction and
Attempted Rape. BUT one charge can be filed which
is FORCIBLE ABDUCTION. The attempt to rape
Nena is only the manifestation of the lewd design
which is an element of forcible abduction. Therefore,
he can only be charged of Forcible abduction.
o Attempted rape was absorbed in the element of
lewd design.
o No such thing as Forcible Abduction with
Attempted Rape.
ART. 343 – CONSENTED ABDUCTION
The abduction of a virgin over twelve years and under
eighteen years of age, carried out with her consent and with
lewd designs, shall be punished by the penalty of prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods.
ELEMENTS:
1. The woman must be a virgin
2. She must be over 12 years but under 18 years of
age
3. The taking away must be with her consent, after
solicitation or cajolery from the offender
4. The taking away must be with lewd designs.
Offended party :
1. She must be a virgin
2. Over 12 and under 18 years of Age
Offender: Any Person
Taking away of the woman must be WITH HER CONSENT.
 It was with her consent because it was made after
solicitation or cajolery from the offender
148 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
NOTE: the age (12-18) is what makes the crime of
abduction.
Q: A and B were girlfriend and boyfriend. A was a virgin
who was 16 years old, the man is 25 years old. The parents
did not like the man. So with the inducement from the said
man, with the solicitation, A and B decided to elope. So the
man carried away the said woman with her consent and
with lewd design and put the woman inside his house. That
night while they were sleeping, the said man tried to have
sexual congress with the virgin girl. However, the girl
refused. Nevertheless, the man by use of force, was able to
have sexual congress with her. What crime/s is/are
committed by B, the boyfriend?
A: Consented Abduction, There was taking away
of the woman with lewd design and with her consent.
In the course thereof, the man raped the girl, because
force was used in the sexual intercourse, therefore
there is another crime of rape. You have a
COMPLEX CRIME OF CONSENTED
ABDUCTION WITH RAPE. Abduction was a
necessary means in order to commit rape.
Q: The girl was 15 and the boyfriend was 25. The said
boyfriend was able to take away the girl with her consent.
The parents of the girl filed a case. Per Ma’am, she was able
to handle a similar case where the girl was 16 and the man
was above 18. The parents of the girl do not like the man so
the lovers eloped and lived in the house of the man. The
mother filed a case of consented abduction. During the P.I.,
the said girl loved the man and even if the mother will take
her away from the man, she will always return to the man.
Also, the woman has keys of the house of the man. Per
ma’am the man was not at fault because it was always the
woman who would go to the man’s house. So she dismissed
the case.
In qualified seduction and consented abduction, acts of
lasciviousness in circumstances of seduction: INSTANCES
WHERE VIRGINITY IS AN ELEMENT
Note: In consented abduction, sexual intercourse is not an
element, so if after the woman ran away with the man, yet
she does not want to have sexual intercourse but the man
forced her and was able to succeed in having sexual
intercourse, the crime committed is consented
abduction with rape.
CHAPTER FIVE - PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO THE
PRECEDING CHAPTERS OF TITLE ELEVEN
ART. 344 – PROSECUTION OF THE CRIMES OF
ADULTERY, CONCUBINAGE, SEDUCTION,
ABDUCTION, RAPE AND ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 The crimes of adultery and concubinage shall not
be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the
offended spouse.
 The offended party cannot institute criminal
prosecution without including both the guilty
parties, if they are both alive, nor, in any case, if he
shall have consented or pardoned the offenders.
 The offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or acts
of lasciviousness, shall not be prosecuted except
upon a complaint filed by the offended party or
her parents, grandparents, or guardian, nor, in
any case, if the offender has been expressly
pardoned by the above named persons, as the case
may be.
 In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of
lasciviousness and rape, the marriage of the
offender with the offended party shall extinguish
the criminal action or remit the penalty already
imposed upon him. The provisions of this
paragraph shall also be applicable to the co-
principals, accomplices and accessories after the
fact of the above-mentioned crimes.
WHO MAY
CRIME FILED AGAINST
FILE
Adultery Husband Wife and the Lover
Husband and the
Concubinage Wife
Concubine
 These are private crimes which can be prosecuted
upon the complaint filed by the private proper party.
Seduction, Abduction, Acts of Lasciviousness
 These are private crimes which can be prosecuted
upon the complaint by:
a. Offended party
b. Parents
c. Grandparents
d. Guardians in the order named above
 In Seduction, Abduction and even public crime of
Rape, the subsequent marriage of the offended party
and the offender shall extinguish the liability and
shall remove the penalty already imposed by the
court
ART. 345 – CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS
GUILTY OF CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY Person
guilty of rape, seduction or abduction, shall also be
sentenced:
149 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

1. To indemnify the offended woman. Sexual Harassment in work, education and training-related
2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law environment is committed by:
should prevent him from so doing.
1. employer
3. In every case to support the offspring.
2. employee
The adulterer and the concubine in the case provided for in 3. manager
Articles 333 and 334 may also be sentenced, in the same 4. supervisor
proceeding or in a separate civil proceeding, to indemnify 5. agent of employer
for damages caused to the offended spouse. 6. teacher
7. instructor
8. professor
Civil Liability of Persons guilty of Rape, Seduction, 9. coach
or Abduction: 10. trainor
1. To indemnify the offended woman. 11. any person who having authority, influence or
moral ascendancy over another person
2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law
should prevent him from so doing. - shall demand, request or otherwise requires sexual
3. In every case to support the offspring. favor from the other, regardless if whether the sexual
favor is accepted by the offended party.
IN WORK RELATED OR EMPLOYMENT
Q: What if it is a gang rape, so let us say that 5 men raped
ENVIRONMENT, SEXUAL HARASSMENT IS
the said woman, how can there be acknowledgement
COMMITTED WHEN:
because the woman suddenly became pregnant and all of
them are convicted. All of them shall indemnify the 1. Sexual favor is made as a condition in the hiring,
offended party. How about the acknowledgement? or in the employment of said individual, or in
granting said individual favorable compensation,
A: It can be easily determined from the DNA testing.
terms, conditions, promotions, or privileges; or
the refusal to grant the sexual favor results in
limiting, segregating, or classifying the employee
ART. 346 – LIABILITY OF ASCENDANTS,
which in any way would discriminate, deprive or
GUARDIANS, TEACHERS, OR OTHER PERSONS
diminish employment opportunities or otherwise
ENTRUSTED WITH THE CUSTODY OF THE
OFFENDED PARTY adversely affect said employee;
2. The above acts would impair the employer’s
 The ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers and rights or privileges under existing labor laws; or
any person who, by abuse of authority or 3. The above acts would result in an intimidating,
confidential relationships, shall cooperate as hostile or offensive environment for the
accomplices in the perpetration of the crimes employee.
embraced in chapters, second, third and fourth, of
IN AN EDUCATION OR TRAINING
this title, shall be punished as principals.
ENVIRONMENT, SEXUAL HARASSMENT IS
 Teachers or other persons in any other capacity
COMMITTED:
entrusted with the education and guidance of
youth, shall also suffer the penalty of temporary 1. Against one who is under the care, custody or
special disqualification in its maximum period to supervision of the offender
perpetual special disqualification. 2. Against one whose education, training,
 Any person falling within the terms of this article, apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted with the
and any other person guilty of corruption of offender
minors for the benefit of another, shall be 3. When the sexual favor is made a condition to the
punished by special disqualification from filling giving of a passing grade, or the granting of
the office of guardian. honors and scholarships, or the payment of a
stipend, allowance or other benefits, privilege or
consideration or;
ANTI-SEXUAL HARRASMENT ACT OF 1995 4. When the sexual advances result in the
(R.A. 7877) intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment
for the student trainee or practice.
Sexual Harassment is about power. It is the use of sex as
an instrument or means of domination or supremacy.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 150 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Q: A is the victim of sexual harassment. What are the
remedies on the part of A? What is/are cases may A file
against the offender B?
A: A has 3 Remedies under the Law.
1. She can file a case for violation of R.A. 7877 and
the penalty is imprisonment of 1 month to 6
months or a fine of P10,000 to P20,000 or both
fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the
court
2. She can file a civil action for damages or any other
affirmative defense
3. She can also file an administrative case against the
said offender. If he is a doctor, she can file a case I.
at the head of the hospital; if he professor, she can
file a case at the head of the school.
 These remedies are CUMULATIVE. They are not
exclusive of each other
o The offended party may, therefore, file all 3
cases at the same time.
o A criminal case, civil case, and administrative
case for the expulsion or suspension of the said
offender.
People v. Jacutin
There was this nursing graduate who wanted to apply
for work and so she applied for work at the City Health
II.
Office. She was interviewed, but before the interview
end, the City Health Officer told her to meet him in a
certain place. And so, the City Health Officer went to
the said place and picked up the girl and inside the car
III.
he asked the girl to lower down her pants to see if there
are varicose veins. He said it was part of the Physical
Examination to lower her pants. However, the moment
IV.
that the City Health Officer inserted his hands inside
the genitalia of the girl, the said woman immediately
pull up her pants. Then, the said City Health Officer to
put up her shirt. The moment the girl put up her shirt,
she thought it was still part of the physical
examination. The City Health Officer fondled with her
breast, and that was the moment that the girl took her
bag and left out of the said car. And so, the girl wanted
to file a case of violation of R.A 7877 against the City
Health Officer. It was a hard struggle for the girl, the
police came to the girl giving her money for the girl not
to pursue the case. All the relatives of the girl
convinced her not to file a case against the City Health
Officer. So this is the fight of the girl alone. She won
The SandiganBayan convicted the Officer. After, an
appeal to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court
convicted the said Officer and impose upon him the
maximum penalty of 6 months imprisonment and a
fine of P20,000 plus moral damages in the amount of
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
P30,000 and exemplary damages in the amount of
P20,000.
 The Penalty for sexual harassment is so low
o Imagine only 1 to 6 months and a fine of
P10,000 to P20,ooo
o So if you become congressmen and senators,
you can amend the law, increase the penalty
ANTI PHOTO and VIDEO VOYEURISM ACT OF
2009 (R.A 9995)
ACTS PROHIBITED:
Taking photo or video coverage of a person or a group
of persons performing sexual act or any similar activity
or to capture an image of a private area of a person
such as the naked or undergarment clad genitals,
public area, buttocks, or female breasts without the
consent of the persons involved and under
circumstances in which the person/s has/have a
reasonable expectation of privacy
 It is necessary, for the crime to arise, that there
must be NO consent on the part of the said
offended party. And, it must be in place where he
or she has a reasonable expectancy of privacy.
To copy or reproduce, or to cause to be copied or
reproduced such photo or video or recording of sexual
act or any similar activity with or without
consideration
To sell or distribute or to cause to be sold or
distributed , such photo or video or recording of sexual
act, whether the original copy or reproduction thereof;
To publish or broadcast, or to cause to be published or
broadcast whether in print or broadcast media, or
show or exhibit the photo or video coverage or
recordings of such sexual act or any similar activity
through VCD/DVDV, internet, cellular phones and
other similar means or device.
Q: What if A and B are lovers, as lovers they often had
sexual congress. So A the man, told the girl can I videotape
our sexual congress, the girl said yes. So the girl consented.
So, while they engage in sexual congress, it was being
videotaped by the man. Is the man liable under R.A. 9995?
A: No, he is not liable, because there was a consent
given by the said girl.
Q: What if the man reproduced and distributed the said
tape. Is the said man liable?
A: Yes, he is liable.
PENALTY: imprisonment of not less than 3 years but not
more than 7 years AND fine of not less than 100k but not
151 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
more than 500k, or both the fine and imprisonment at the
discretion of the court.
Q: What if the woman went to the mall, there was a need to
answer the call of nature, she went to the rest room. In the
rest room, she saw a camera inserted near and in between
the wall of the said cubicle. The janitor placed it there. Is
the Janitor liable under R.A 9995?
A: Yes, he is liable for R.A. 9995.
Case of Hayden Kho and Katrina Halili
If their case took place after the effectivity of this act,
Hayden Kho should not be off the hook. It just so
happen that this act was not yet enforced at that time.
So the case filed against him is violation of R.A. 9262 –
Violence against woman and their children. Because
the reason why the RTC dismissed the case was that,
according to the said court, there was consent given by
Katrina Halili and so, according to the court, there was
no violence against women and their children. But had
R.A 9995 in effect at that time, even if consent was
allegedly, although not proven, given by Katrina Halili,
Hayden Kho can be held liable under the 2nd and the
3rd Act. He was so lucky that this law was not yet in
effect at that time.
TITLE TWELVE
CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF
PERSONS
(Articles 347 – 352)
CHAPTER ONE – SIMULATION OF BIRTHS AND
USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS
ART. 347 – SIMULATION OF BIRTHS,
SUBSTITUTION OF ONE CHILD FOR ANOTHER
AND CONCEALMENT OR ABANDONMENT OF A
LEGITIMATE CHILD
THREE ACTS PUNISHED UNDER ART. 347:
1. Simulation of birth
Simulation of birth- takes place when the woman
pretends to be pregnant when in fact she is not and on
the day of the delivery, takes the child of another as her
own.
 If the simulation is done in the birth certificate,
the crime committed is simulation of birth
 If the simulation is done in any other document
aside from birth certificate, the crime
committed is falsification of a public or private
document as the case may be.
Q: A was a pregnant. She told the midwife that she does not
want the baby. The midwife said that she knew a couple
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
who wanted a child. The couple arrived and the mother
gave the child to the couple. This couple took the baby and
registered the child as their own. What are the crimes
committed and who are criminally liable?
A: All of them are all liable for simulation of
birth. The mother, the midwife and the couple. The
said couple pretended that the child is their own child.
In that case, said child lost its original status.
2. Substitution of a child with another
In substitution of a child with another, the
classic example is MARA and CLARA.
 Mara was substituted as Clara and Clara was
substituted as Mara. As a result, Mara loses
her real civil status of being a daughter of a
rich family and assumes a new civil status of
being a daughter of a poor family. The same
happened to Clara, Clara assumes a civil
status of being a daughter of a rich family and
loses her real civil status of being a daughter
of a poor family. Crime committed is
Substitution of a child with another child
which tend the child to lose his or her real
civil status
3. Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child with
intent to cause such child to lose its civil status
The offender conceals or abandons the legitimate
child and the intention of the offender is to lose the
child’s civil status.
It is necessary that the child is legitimate, not illegitimate.
Q: A and B husband and wife had a child. the child was
born without legs. So A and B could not accept the fact that
their child has no legs. They brought the child in the forest
for the child to die, to a forest with no people. Thereafter,
left the child. What crime is committed by A and B?
A: If the child died, and the child was less than 3 days
old, the crime committed is infanticide. If not, the
crime committed is attempted infanticide if the
child was later on discovered and rescued.
If the child is above 3 days old, the crime committed
would be parricide, in case the child died when left in
the forest. Or, it not, attempted parricide.
Q: What if A and B, instead of going to the forest, went to
the mall. The mother went inside the restroom and placed
the said child in one of the cubicles in one of the restrooms
of the mall. What crime is committed by the mother and the
husband?
152 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
A: Abandoning the Minor under Art. 276. The
parents left her deliberately, consciously, and
permanently, without intent to kill. There was no
intent to kill because they could not kill the child. They
left it inside the restroom therefore obviously there was
no intent to kill.
Q: What if this husband and wife and the child that they
have happens to be their 13th child. They already had 12
children and these children are not going to school. So their
13th child was born and they wrapped the child in a nice
towel, placed it inside a basket and then placed it at the gate
of the house of a rich family. Then they rang the bell. What
crime is committed by the husband and the wife?
A: Violation of Art. 347 – Abandoning a
legitimate child with intent to lose its real civil
status. Obviously, the intent of the parents is for the
child, their 13th child to lose its real civil status of being
that of a poor family and assume a new civil status of
coming from a rich family because the child was left at
the gate and the parents rang the bell.
NOTE: It depends on the intent of the offender. It could be
any other crime, depending on the intent of the offender.
ART. 348 – USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS
The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any
person who shall usurp the civil status of another, should
he do so for the purpose of defrauding the offended part or
his heirs; otherwise, the penalty of prision correccional in
its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed.
 It shall be committed by any person who shall usurp
the civil status of another, who shall assumes the
filiation, or the paternal, or the marital rights of
another
 Intention of the offender is to enjoy the civil rights
arising from the civil status of the person whom he
impersonates.
 If the intention of the offender is to defraud the
offended party, or his heirs, the penalty is
QUALIFIED.
CHAPTER TWO – ILLEGAL MARRIAGES
ART. 349 – BIGAMY
The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any
person who shall contract a second or subsequent marriage
before the former marriage has been legally dissolved, or
before the absent spouse has been declared presumptively
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
dead by means of a judgment rendered in the proper
proceedings.
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender has been legally married
2. That the marriage has not been legally dissolved,
in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent
spouse could not yet be presumed dead
according to the Civil Code
3. That he contracts a second or subsequent
marriage
4. That the second or subsequent marriage has all
the essential requisites for validity.
 Bigamy shall be committed by any person who shall
contracts a second or subsequent marriage before the
former marriage has been legally dissolved, or who
shall contract a subsequent or second marriage
before the absent spouse has been declared
presumptively dead, meaning in a decision made in
an appropriate proceedings.
 The offender is a married person, but he contracted a
second or subsequent marriage, his previous
marriage has not yet been declared null and void by
the court, or her spouse is absent and he or she
contracts a second or subsequent marriage before the
court has declared that the said spouse is
presumptively dead
Old case in the Book:
The wife contracted a second marriage because she
inquired from the relatives of the husband and the relatives
of the husband said, “He is already dead” and because of
that, the wife contracted a second or subsequent marriage.
The first husband appeared, and filed a case of bigamy
against the said wife. Is the wife liable for bigamy?
 The court said that the woman is liable for
bigamy through reckless imprudence, because
according to the court, there was imprudence
because just by mere reliance on the statement
made by the parents of the husband, she
already contracted a second marriage
Is there such a crime of bigamy through reckless
imprudence?
 I do not believe in that decision. It is impossible
for this crime to have happened. because the
law says, without the first marriage being
legally dissolved, it means there must be a
court declaration of nullity of marriage, without
that the absent spouse being declared
153 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
presumptively dead in a decision made in an
appropriate proceeding, there must be a court
decision.
 Since there is a need of a court decision before
one could contract a second or subsequent
marriage, there cannot be an instance of
bigamy through reckless imprudence. The
moment the said married person contracted a
second or subsequent marriage, without any
court decision, the crime committed is
evidently BIGAMY. It cannot be done through
reckless imprudence or simple negligence.
Sample problem:
A and B are married. B, the husband fell in love with
another woman, and married the woman thereafter. It is
now a bigamous married. A bigamous marriage is an
otherwise valid marriage, except for the fact that there is a
subsisting marriage.
ART. 350 – MARRIAGE CONTRACTED AGAINST
PROVISIONS OF LAWS
The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods shall be imposed upon any person who,
without being included in the provisions of the next
proceeding article, shall have not been complied with or
that the marriage is in disregard of a legal impediment.
If either of the contracting parties shall obtain the consent
of the other by means of violence, intimidation or fraud, he
shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty
provided in the next preceding paragraph.
Illegal marriage – marriage contracted without the
requisites of the law.
 Committed by any person who shall contract a
marriage knowing that he was not able to comply
with the requisites of law or if there is a legal
impediment of the said marriage.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
 In the Family Code, before one can contract a
marriage, there is the so called essential and formal
requisites. All of these must be complied with. The
absence of any of these, the contracting parties knows
its absence, yet contracted the marriage, the liability
falls under Art. 350 f0r illegal marriage.
Q: What if the priest, or the minister who contracted or
solemnized the marriage, knows that there is a legal
impediment or knows that the parties failed to comply with
the requisites, What is the liability?
A: Liability is under Art. 352. Under Art. 352, there is a
liability of any priest, or minister of any denomination
or religious sect, or also civil authorities who shall
contract or solemnize any marriage which is not in
accordance with any requisites of the law.
ART. 351 – PREMATURE MARRIAGES
Person Liable:
1. A woman who married within 301 days from the
death of her husband, or before delivery of her
baby if she is pregnant at the time of his death
2. A woman whose marriage having been annulled or
dissolved, married before delivery or before
expiration of the period of 301 days after the date
of legal separation.
Q: Why is a woman prohibited from marrying for a period
of 301 days?
A: This is to en sure that there is no doubt as to the
paternity of the child to be delivered, in order for the
child to know who is his father. Otherwise, if he is not
the one who died, he is the new husband of the wife.
 The period of 301 days is only important if the
woman is not pregnant
 If the woman is pregnant at the time of the death or
at the time of the declaration of the nullity of
marriage, it is only at the time of the delivery of the
baby. After the baby is delivered, she can already
marry because there is no doubt as to the paternity of
the child.
 Nowadays, you can easily determine the paternity of
the child through DNA testing.
ART. 352 – PERFORMANCE OF ILLEGAL
MARRIAGE CEREMONY
Priests or ministers of any religious denomination or sect,
or civil authorities who shall perform or authorize any
illegal marriage ceremony shall be punished in accordance
with the provisions of the Marriage Law.
154 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

TITLE THIRTEEN
CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
(Articles 353 – 364)

CHAPTER ONE – LIBEL

Section One: Definitions, forms, and punishment
of this crime.
DEFAMATION – Kinds of Defamation:
1. Written defamation or Libel
2. Oral defamation or Slander
3. Slander by deed

ART. 353 – DEFINITION OF LIBEL

LIBEL – is public and malicious imputation of a crime, or
of a vice or defect, whether real or imaginary, or any act,
omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to
cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or
juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is
dead.
ELEMENTS:
1. There must be an imputation or allegation of a
crime, or a vice of defect, whether real or
imaginary, or any act or omission, condition,
status or circumstance which tend to dishonor or
discredit a natural or juridical person.
2. That there must be a publication of the said
defamatory statement or article
3. The identity of the person defamed must be
established or identified
4. The existence of malice

SECOND ELEMENT:
 Publication- satisfied the moment that a 3rd person
has heard or read the libelous statement, even if the
person pertained has not heard or read it.
o So the basis is that a 3rd person has heard or
read the libelous statement.

Q: What if A, in national television said, “ikaw B, isa kang

estafadora”. A accused B of the crime of estafa. Is the crime
committed libel or oral defamation (slander)?
A: The crime committed is LIBEL. According to
the Supreme Court, Television is within the phrase
any similar means.

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 155 |

 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Q: What if A, in the same incident, using a microphone,
using an amplifier sound system, called B “isa kang
estafadora”. Is the crime committed libel or is it oral
defamation?
A: The crime committed is Oral Defamation
or Slander. The use of the microphone or the
amplifier is not within the means provided for Art.
355.
THIRD ELEMENT:
 Identity of the person- must be identified, not
necessary that the person must be named or
described.
 It suffices that any reader or a person who heard
would know that he is the person being referred to.
 The moment a 3rd party has recognized or has known
that he is the one being referred to in the defamatory
statement, the identity of the offended party is
already present.
FOURTH ELEMENT in relation to Art. 354 –
Requirement for Publicity:
 As a rule, every defamatory statement is presumed to
be MALICIOUS, even if it is true.
 In defamatory statements, if the offender cannot state
any good intention or justifiable motive for stating
defamatory statements, the law presumes malice.
 MALICE IN LAW – Prosecution need not prove
malice. It is the defense who must prove that in
stating the defamatory statements, there was no
malice on the part of the offender because the law
presumes malice in law.
 There are certain statements wherein the law does
not presumes malice. In this kind of malice, it must
be proven by the prosecution. This is MALICE IN
FACT. It is available in privilege communication.
o It is the burden of the prosecution to prove the
existence of malice on the part of the offender
when he said the defamatory mark or
statement. Otherwise, if not proven. There will
be an acquittal.
ART. 354 – REQUIREMENT FOR PUBLICITY
Kinds of Privilege Communications (Exceptions)
1. A private communication made by any person to
another in the performance of any legal, moral or
social duty; and
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith,
without any comments or remarks, of any
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
judicial, legislative or other official proceedings
which are not of confidential nature, or of any
statement, report or speech delivered in said
proceedings, or of any other act performed by
public officers in the exercise of their functions.
 These are considered as privilege communications.
The said prosecution, the complainant must prove
malice, otherwise, there will be an acquittal of the
said offender or accused.
ART. 355 – LIBEL MEANS BY WRITINGS OR
SIMILAR MEANS
A libel committed by means of writing, printing,
lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph, painting,
theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or any
similar means, shall be punished by prision correccional in
its minimum and medium periods or a fine ranging from
200 to 6,000 pesos, or both, in addition to the civil action
which may be brought by the offended party.
 If the defamatory statement or article is published
through any of these means, then, the crime
committed is LIBEL.
ART. 356 – THREATENING TO PUBLISH AND
OFFER TO PRESENT SUCH PUBLICATION FOR A
COMPENSATION
The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to 2,000
pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any person who
threatens another to publish a libel concerning him or the
parents, spouse, child, or other members of the family of
the latter or upon anyone who shall offer to prevent the
publication of such libel for a compensation or money
consideration.
Art. 355 enumerates how libel can be committed:
1. Writing
2. Printing
3. Lithography
4. Engraving
5. Radio
6. Phonograph
7. Painting
8. Theatrical Exhibition
9. Cinematographic Exhibition
10. Any similar means
Q: What if A told B, if you will not give me P100,000, I will
inform your husband that you are having an affair with
another man. What crime is committed by A?
A: Crime committed is Light Threats. It is a
form of Blackmailing which constitutes light
threats.
156 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
Q: If you will not give me P100,000, I will publish on the
magazine, on the newspaper, your love letters to the said
man who is not your husband. What crime is committed?
A: Crime committed is Threatening to
Publish a Libel, also a form of Blackmailing.
BLACKMAILING – is an unlawful extortion of money
appearing [on the fears] of the offended party, can either be
light threats or threatening to publish libel
 It is light threats if the offender asks the money or
any other consideration in exchange for a doing of a
wrong which does not constitute a crime.
 Otherwise, if the thing to be published would involve
the morality of the person, then you are threatening
to publish a libel.
Where do you file a case of Libel?
 You file a case of Libel before the Regional Trial
Court (RTC). Although the penalty for libel is
prision correcional in its minimum and medium
period, it should be filed before the MTC under the
Rules of Court, yet Revised Penal Code (RPC)
itself, a substantive law, states that all libel cases
must be filed before the RTC.
 Rules of Court is only a procedural law. Therefore
the substantive law, the Revised Penal Code,
should be followed.
Where shall be these cases of libel be filed?
 It depends. Generally, it should be filed before the
RTC where the article was printed or first published
or the RTC where the offended party is residing at
the time of the commission of the crime.
 If the offended party is a public officer and is working
in City of Manila, it must be filed before RTC of
Manila or the RTC where the article was printed and
first published.
 If the public officer is not working in Manila, it shall
be filed in the RTC of the province or city where he is
working at the time of the commission of the offense
or where the libelous article was printed or was first
published.
 If libelous article refers to a private individual who is
the offended party, it can be filed before the RTC of
the place where the private individual resides at the
time of the actual commission of the offense or where
the libelous material was printed or first published.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
ART. 357 – PROHIBITED PUBLICATION OF ACTS
REFERRED TO IN THE COURSE OF OFFICIAL
PROCEEDINGS
The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine of from 20 to 2,000
pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any reporter, editor
or manager or a newspaper, daily or magazine, who shall
publish facts connected with the private life of another and
offensive to the honor, virtue and reputation of said person,
even though said publication be made in connection with or
under the pretext that it is necessary in the narration of any
judicial or administrative proceedings wherein such facts
have been mentioned.
ART. 358 – SLANDER
Oral defamation shall be punished by arresto mayor in its
maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum
period if it is of a serious and insulting nature; otherwise
the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine not exceeding
200 pesos.
ORAL DEFAMATION/SLANDER
1. Grave Slander- when serious and insulting in
nature.
2. Simple Slander
Factors to consider whether serious or insulting in
nature:
- there are no concrete parameters in order to determine
whether the said defamatory statement is serious or
insulting in nature. You have to take into consideration
not only the grammar and meaning sense of the
statement, but also the:
a. Personal relations of the accused and the
offended party
b. Facts and Circumstances surrounding the
case
c. Social standing and position of the
offended party.
 All of which must be considered in order to
determine whether it would constitute Grave Slander
or Simple Slander
Q: Calling a public officer a magnanakaw without any
evidence.
A: It would constitute criminal case of Slander
Q: What about the phrase of Putang ina mo? Is it
considered as a slanderous remark?
157 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
A: In the case of Pader vs. People, PUTANG INA MO
is not a slanderous remark. It is merely an expression
of the Filipino People. When a Filipino is sad, happy,
angry or surprised, he says this word.
Pader v. People
There was a drunk man who passed by the house of a
political candidate. Their families are enemies. A told
to the family of B, “putang ina mo B, magnanakaw ka
sa bayan”. So because of this, B filed a case of oral
defamation or slander.
The Supreme Court said that phrase is not considered
as a defamatory statement. It is a mere expression on
the part of the Filipino People. The crime committed
by the offender is only SIMPLE ORAL
DEFAMATION or SIMPLE SLANDER, not grave.
Although the offended party is running for a political
position. The Court has taken into consideration the
antecedent facts of the case, their families are enemies
of each other.
ART. 359 – SLANDER BY DEED
The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to
prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine
ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon
any person who shall perform any act not included and
punished in this title, which shall cast dishonor, discredit or
contempt upon another person. If said act is not of a
serious nature, the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine
not exceeding 200 pesos.
SLANDER BY DEED refers to the commission of acts, it
does not refer to the use of words, with the intent to
blemish the credit and reputation of another person.
It can also be
a. serious, grave slander by deed – serious and
insulting
b. simple slander by deed.
 The Supreme Court said that there are no concrete
parameters when you should consider it grave
slander by deed or simple slander by deed. It depends
on the sound discretion of the court.
Q: What if A, intending to defame or slander a priest,
slapped the priest in front of his ___
A: Crime committed is SERIOUS SLANDER
BY DEED because of the reputation, the status in
life of the said person.
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
Buatis v. People
An open letter was addressed to the Atty. Pieraz which
contained Libelous statements such as Satan, senile,
stupid and according to the offender, the offended
party uses carabao English and ended the letter in
Satan’s name. This letter was read by the wife of the
offended party. It came to the knowledge of not only
the wife but also the children.
Issue: would you consider the wife as a 3rd person, a
public, in so far as libel is concerned?
SC: The wife is still considered as a third person.
For an imputation to be libelous, the following
requisites must concur:
1. It must be defamatory
2. it must be malicious
3. It must be given publicly
4. The victim must be identifiable
DEFAMATORY – The latter contained libelous remarks
such us satan, senile, stupid, and English carabao
MALICIOUS – every defamatory imputation is presumed
to be malicious, even if it be true, if NO GOOD
INTENTIOON or JUSTIFIABLE MOTIVE for making it is
shown
PUBLICLY – publication means the making the
defamatory matter, after it is written, known to someone
other than the person against whom it has been written. It
is enough that the author of the libel has communicated it
to a third person.
- In addition, the open letter was found in a mailbox,
open to the public.
IDENTIFIABLE – The libelous letter was addressed to
the respondent himself.
Section two: General Provisions
[not discussed]
ART. 360 – PERSONS RESPONSIBLE.
Any person who shall publish, exhibit, or cause the
publication or exhibition of any defamation in writing or
by similar means, shall be responsible for the same.
The author or editor of a book or pamphlet, or the editor
or business manager of a daily newspaper, magazine or
serial publication, shall be responsible for the defamations
158 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

contained therein to the same extent as if he were the matter charged as libelous is true, and, moreover, that it
author thereof. was published with good motives and for justifiable ends,
the defendants shall be acquitted.
Proof of the truth of an imputation of an act or omission
The criminal and civil action for damages in cases of
not constituting a crime shall not be admitted, unless the
written defamations as provided for in this chapter, shall
imputation shall have been made against Government
be filed simultaneously or separately with the court of first
employees with respect to facts related to the discharge of
instance of the province or city where the libelous article is
their official duties.
printed and first published or where any of the offended
parties actually resides at the time of the commission of In such cases if the defendant proves the truth of the
the offense: Provided, however, That where one of the imputation made by him, he shall be acquitted.
offended parties is a public officer whose office is in the
City of Manila at the time of the commission of the offense,
the action shall be filed in the Court of First Instance of the ART. 362 – LIBELOUS REMARKS.
City of Manila, or of the city or province where the libelous Libelous remarks or comments connected with the matter
article is printed and first published, and in case such privileged under the provisions of Article 354, if made with
public officer does not hold office in the City of Manila, the malice, shall not exempt the author thereof nor the editor
action shall be filed in the Court of First Instance of the or managing editor of a newspaper from criminal
province or city where he held office at the time of the liability.
commission of the offense or where the libelous article is
printed and first published and in case one of the offended
parties is a private individual, the action shall be filed in CHAPTER TWO – INCRIMINATORY
the Court of First Instance of the province or city where he MACHINATIONS
actually resides at the time of the commission of the
ART. 363 – INCRIMINATING INNOCENT PERSON
offense or where the libelous matter is printed and first
published: Any person who, by any act not constituting perjury, shall
directly incriminate or impute to an innocent person the
Provided, further, That the civil action shall be filed in the
commission of a crime, shall be punished by arresto
same court where the criminal action is filed and vice
menor.
versa: Provided, furthermore, That the court where the
criminal action or civil action for damages is first filed,
shall acquire jurisdiction to the exclusion of other courts:
 Act commited by any person, directly incriminating
And, provided, finally, That this amendment shall not
or imputes to an innocent person the commission of
apply to cases of written defamations, the civil and/or the crime outside perjury
criminal actions which have been filed in court at the time
 It is necessary that it must not be made on an
of the effectivity of this law.
affidavit, because if it is through an affidavit, it will be
perjury.
 EXCEPTIONS:
Preliminary investigation of criminal action for written
o perjury (sworn affidavit), or
defamations as provided for in the chapter shall be
o sec 29 of RA 9165 (Planting of evidence)
conducted by the provincial or city fiscal of the province or
city, or by the municipal court of the city or capital of the
province where such action may be instituted in
Q: A in his counter-affidavit, in his sworn statement,
accordance with the provisions of this article.
imputed upon A the commission of the crime of theft, what
No criminal action for defamation which consists in the crime is committed?
imputation of a crime which cannot be prosecuted de
A: PERJURY. It is a sworn statement under oath
oficio shall be brought except at the instance of and upon before a public officer.
complaint expressly filed by the offended party. (As
amended by R.A. 1289, approved June 15, 1955, R.A. 4363,
approved June 19, 1965). Q: What if a Magic ballpen was lost in a party. A took the
magic ballpen of B, and then surreptitiously entered it
inside the bag of C. And so when everybody was looking for
ART. 361 – PROOF OF THE TRUTH
it, it was found in the bag of C. However, someone saw A
In every criminal prosecution for libel, the truth may be did the act. What crime if any is committed by A?
given in evidence to the court and if it appears that the
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 159 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty
A: A IS LIABLE FOR INCRIMINATING
INNOCENT PERSONS. Incriminating innocent
persons is about PLANTING OF EVIDENCE in order
to impute, incriminate another person the
commission of the crime.
Q: A and B are neighbors, A is mad at B, and deliberately
bumped B and in course thereof, he inserted a plastic
sachet of shabu in the pocket of B and then he told the
police that B has a shabu inside his pocket. What crime if
any is committed by A?
A: Crime committed is Sec. 29 of R.A. 9165,
planting of evidence. If what has been planted is
any dangerous drugs, the crime committed is
particular, Sec. 29 of R.A. 9165, because the special
penal law specifically punishes the planting of
dangerous drugs. If it is any other thing, a necklace was
lost and A planted it inside the bag of B, the crime
committed is incriminating innocent persons.
Q: What if a police officer was mad at X, and so what he did
was, while X was sitting, he deliberately planted an
unlicensed firearm inside the bag of X and thereafter
arrested X, what crime is committed by the said police
officer?
A: He committed unlawful arrest. He arrested X
without any justifiable reason thereof. He incriminates
upon the innocent person the commission of the crime
which is illegal possession of unlicensed firearm. So
here, unlawful arrest was committed by incriminating
innocent persons. UNLAWFUL ARREST
THROUGH INCRIMINATING INNOCENT
PERSONS. It is a complex crime under Art. 48 of
Book I because the incriminating of innocent persons
is a necessary means to commit unlawful arrest.
ART. 364. INTRIGUING AGAINST HONOR
The penalty of arresto menor or fine not exceeding 200
pesos shall be imposed for any intrigue which has for its
principal purpose to blemish the honor or reputation of a
person.
 This refers to any intrigue which has for its purpose
to cause blemish or dishonor on the reputation of any
person
 It refers to any scheme or plot which is designed to
blemish or dishonor the reputation of any person
Common Example:
“Isang chismis na hindi alam kung saan nagsimula”
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013)
o It is an intrigue which spread a negative rumor,
you don’t even know where it started. It is a plot, a
scheme in order to detain or blemish the
reputation of another person
Crime committed is INTRIGUING AGAINST HONOR.
TITLE FOURTEEN
QUASI-OFFENSES
Sole Chapter – CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
Art. 365 – IMPRUDENCE AND NEGLIGENCE
Any person who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit
any act which, had it been intentional, would constitute a
grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its
maximum period to prision correccional in its medium
period; if it would have constituted a less grave felony, the
penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum and medium
periods shall be imposed; if it would have constituted a
light felony, the penalty of arresto menor in its maximum
period shall be imposed.
Any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence,
shall commit an act which would otherwise constitute a
grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its
medium and maximum periods; if it would have
constituted a less serious felony, the penalty of arresto
mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed.
When the execution of the act covered by this article shall
have only resulted in damage to the property of another,
the offender shall be punished by a fine ranging from an
amount equal to the value of said damages to three times
such value, but which shall in no case be less than twenty-
five pesos.
A fine not exceeding two hundred pesos and censure shall
be imposed upon any person who, by simple imprudence or
negligence, shall cause some wrong which, if done
maliciously, would have constituted a light felony.
In the imposition of these penalties, the court shall exercise
their sound discretion, without regard to the rules
prescribed in Article sixty-four.
The provisions contained in this article shall not be
applicable:
1. When the penalty provided for the offense is
equal to or lower than those provided in the first
two paragraphs of this article, in which case the
court shall impose the penalty next lower in degree
160 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

than that which should be imposed in the period negligence, one can no longer be prosecuted or convicted
which they may deem proper to apply. after he has already been convicted and prosecuted of the
same offense. Reckless imprudence and simple negligence
2. When, by imprudence or negligence and with
are crimes by themselves. THEY ARE QUASI-OFFENSES.
violation of the Automobile Law, to death of a
Therefore, to prosecute a person after he has been
person shall be caused, in which case the defendant
convicted of simple negligence, will result to double
shall be punished by prision correccional in its
jeopardy.
medium and maximum periods.
Reckless imprudence consists in voluntary, but without
malice, doing or falling to do an act from which material Take note of the case of Ivler v. Hon Modesto.
damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaution
Reckless imprudence or negligence is the crime itself.
on the part of the person performing of failing to perform
Hence, once committed or acquitted of a specific act of
such act, taking into consideration his employment or
reckless imprudence, the accused may not be prosecuted
occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition and
again for that same act. For the essence of the quasi offense
other circumstances regarding persons, time and place.
of criminal negligence under Art 365 of the RPC lies in the
Simple imprudence consists in the lack of precaution execution of an imprudent or negligent act that if
displayed in those cases in which the damage impending to intentionally done, would be punishable as a felony. The
be caused is not immediate nor the danger clearly manifest. law penalizes thus the negligent or careless act, not the
result thereof. The gravity of the consequence is only taken
The penalty next higher in degree to those provided for in
into account to determine the penalty; it does not qualify
this article shall be imposed upon the offender who fails to
the substance of the offense. And, as the careless act is
lend on the spot to the injured parties such help as may be
single, whether the injurious result should affect one
in this hand to give. (As amended by R.A. 1790, approved
person or several persons, the offense (criminal negligence)
June 21, 1957).
remains one and the same, and cannot be split into
different crimes and prosecutions.
Ivler v. Hon Modesto 1st case: reckless imprudence resulting to slight physical
There was this vehicular accident and the husband, Ponce, injuries
died. The wife suffered only slight physical injuries. Two 2nd case: reckless imprudence resulting to homicide and
charges were filed in the court: Reckless Imprudence damage to property
Resulting to Slight Physical Injuries and Reckless
 One quasi-offense cannot give rise to another
Imprudence Resulting to Homicide and Damage to
quasi-offense.
Property. In the case of Reckless Imprudence Resulting to
 Note simple negligence is not a means to commit a
Slight Physical, Jason Ivler immediately pleaded guilty to
crime. They are crimes by themselves.
the crime charged. The judgment became final and
executory. During the arraignment of Reckless Imprudence
Resulting to Homicide and Damage to Property, the council Q: What if A was driving his car and he collided with
of Jason Ivler filed a motion to quash claiming that he can another car. As a result thereof, let’s say that a person died
no longer be prosecuted for Reckless Imprudence Resulting and 4 persons suffered serious physical injuries, they have
to Homicide and Damage to Property because he has wounds but they survived. And 1 person suffered slight
already been convicted of Reckless Imprudence Resulting physical injuries. What is/are the crime committed by A?
to Slight Physical Injuries. He cannot be prosecuted based
A: The offender is liable for RECKLESS
on the same offense otherwise; the accused will be placed in
IMPRUDENCE RESULTING TO HOMICIDE
double jeopardy. This was denied so it went up to the SC by
AND MULTIPLE PHYSICAL INJURIES BUT NOT
a petition for certiorari. The SC said, Jason Ivler and his
SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURY. There should be
counsel are correct. A person can no longer be prosecuted
another charge for RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE
for Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide and
RESULTING TO SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES.
Damage to Property after he is convicted of Reckless
You cannot complex slight physical injury in the
Imprudence Resulting to Slight Physical Injuries. SC said,
first crime because it is only a light felony. And its
what is being punished is the reckless imprudence. Since
complexity is prohibited under Art.48. But in
what is punished is reckless imprudence the damage to
reality, you no longer file a case of reckless
property and slight physical injuries or homicide are only
imprudence resulting to slight physical injury
resulting felonies. Since they are only resulting felonies,
because the moment the offender is convicted,
since the crime being punished is the imprudence or
patay na yung first case. Because there will
DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 161 |
 CRIMINAL LAW BOOK II 2017
Updated by: Dinty

already be double jeopardy. In reckless

imprudence and simple negligence what is being
punished is the imprudence and negligence that’s
why the appropriate name is reckless imprudence
resulting to homicide, simple negligence causing
damage to property, simple negligence resulting to
homicide not homicide through reckless
imprudence because what is being punished is the
imprudence and negligence. Homicide and
damage to property are merely results of the said Joshua 1:9
imprudence or negligence.
 Remember also that under Art 265 that if the result of Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous.
imprudence or negligence is only damage to property Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged, for the LORD
the penalty shall only be fine. There is no penalty of your God will be with you wherever you go.”
imprisonment.
GOD BLESS!

DIZON | MANALO | NAVAREZ | SHYU | TUBIO (1-B 2012-2013) 162 |